The last one wasn’t even a question mark, absolute stone-wall, the other id debate if it was against us.
Did anyone think the AWB one could have gone against us?
Did anyone think the AWB one could have gone against us?
Did we deserve a penalty in that game?
- Thread starter Moby
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Last one was 100% stonewall peno. If Noble had scored after us not getting that I’d raging all week
That blatant foul on Pogba at the very beginning when he didin't even stop the game, was a sign this match will be sabotaged.
Aye he was always a c*nt, but this game he didn't even try to hide the bias. At this point even neutral fans would be suspecting something.
Two clear, undeniable penalties. Absolute disgrace.
I'll just say three words:
Atkinson hates us !!!
Atkinson hates us !!!
The AWB wasn't looked at because it was offside - or so I have been told.
The change was supposed to be that the contact would have to be enough to actually result in the player going down the way they did, as opposed to last season where people were getting penalties after falling to the ground following minimal contact. They also specifically said they'd be looking to award more penalties where the player stays on their feet even though they're fouled.
In which case if they thought Ronaldo was going down before there was any contact to justify him going down then I'm wondering if that's enough for it not to be a penalty.
Awful refereeing. Literally got nothing from him.
How VAR didn’t come into play for some of those incidents is beyond comprehensive. I guess all I can think of is that there’s an agenda against Ronaldo…because it’s Ronaldo and he goes down easily…
How VAR didn’t come into play for some of those incidents is beyond comprehensive. I guess all I can think of is that there’s an agenda against Ronaldo…because it’s Ronaldo and he goes down easily…
I'm not sure, Soucek is kind of behind him. It would have been harsh.
I think it might have been pulled back for offside anyway.
The AWB one I felt was like the first one for us, I wasn't so much surprised by the decision but more how quickly they seemed to be dismissed. I'm not sure if the West Ham player was offside, they moved on from it with very few replays. The one on Ronaldo in added time is by far the most obvious mistake.
Not before the hand on the back he wasn't
Even by the dismissal standards set by the referee in that match, the rejection of that final penalty appeal was a shocker 
The zouma one is as clear a penalty as is possible to have
The hand on the back definitely wasn't enough to make him fall the way he did though, so that wouldn't be enough for a penalty.
It would have to have been the leg contact. I'm finding it hard to tell if he was going going down before the leg contact or if that's just the way his stride looks.
That 2nd one on Ronaldo was the most absurd thing I've ever seen. Atkinson shouldn't ref at this level. Should have cost us the game.
Seems like you're looking for reasons not to give it.
You said the hand on the back wasn't enough for him to go down and then say you can't even tell if he was going down before the leg contact.
You see how this is illogical?
2 of those were stonewall, shocking refereeing on show today.
A couple of penalties quite comfortably.
I still can't get over that Zouma challenge... I mean it really doesn't get more stonewall then that.
The fact that Atkinson gave a corner is equally hilarious, what exactly did he think happened?!
The fact that Atkinson gave a corner is equally hilarious, what exactly did he think happened?!
Is this a rhetorical question?
What do people mention as a 2nd one if they count 3 overall? When Ronaldo fell down after being held by the arm/shoulder? I doubt that there’s even one poster here who thinks that it’s a penalty.
Talk about seeing the same incident differently.
I agree with @Scholsey2004 , and am still baffled now. Like the commentators were.
Alan Smith was chuckling at the madness of it all.
I think we should have had one penalty yes. The last penalty shout for me was a clear penalty and I don't understand why it's not given. The first 2 are iffy, but in an live with them not being awarded, especially the second of the two. But yes we certainly should have gotten the third. It felt like we didn't because it was Ronaldo and because the referee decided thr previous 2 incidents didn't warrant a penalty. Although why doesn't he get a yellow in that case?
Could be the CR7 factor , but I think it has more to do with last season’s media campaign that we were getting too many.
I’m wondering if the VAR room has new directions to get rid of soft penalties. Walker got away with one similar yesterday because the opponent did not attempt enough to shoot. At least that’s what the pundits said.
He probly thought ‘the same thing that I awarded a freekick against Pogba for just now’, and then ‘but the new penalty rule … wasn’t that something like, don’t award a pen for something that merits a free kick? They change it all the time and all I know about football is that Ronaldo always dives and if a ref don’t know, he should just pretend to know and double down’
Last one was pretty clear. Ref probably thinks Ronaldo dives too much
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
We should have been awarded 3 penalties. Justice prevailed with the result.
You think the little tug on Ronaldo was a pen pal?
Objective view from an oppo fan.
The first one could be argued both ways, the second one definitely wasn’t a pen, the third was a stonewall penalty and I can not believe it wasn’t given.
The first one could be argued both ways, the second one definitely wasn’t a pen, the third was a stonewall penalty and I can not believe it wasn’t given.
Madness. Again VAR setting themselves up for a season of controversy
Yes. He was denied a scoring chance with his head.
Not really.
The contact is supposed to be enough for the player to go down in the way they did. I can clearly see the slap on the back and obviously that isn't going to make Ronaldo's legs go from under him like that, so it's irrelevant to the penalty call.
The only thing the penalty can be given for is the contact with the legs, because that's the only thing that happened that might have justified Ronaldo going down as he did. If he was just striding forward and Zouma tackled him, that's a penalty. However, if Ronaldo was already going to ground before there was any contact then obviously it becomes more difficult to argue the contact caused that reaction.
I'm just finding it hard to see whether he started going down before or after the contact with the legs.
My point is you're claiming the hand on the back didn't make him go down but you can't even tell if he started to go down before the tackle so clearly the hand on the back didn't make him go down but perhaps it knocked him off balance enough to cause whatever you think you're maybe seeing before he's tackled.
Either way, if you can't tell whether or not he was going down first then you give him the benefit of the doubt and it's a pen. It's fairly straightforward.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I almost couldn't celebrate the win as I was still angry about this
VAR = Bizarre as always.
Would've been insane had we lost.
Today was really biased.
Would've been insane had we lost.
Today was really biased.
Last one was a definite pen. The other one was tough to call. I don’t think it was a pen but could easily have been given.
Oh, that one. You’d maybe call that a foul in midfield but not in the penalty box. Never a penner.
Just a hunch, but my hunch is that Atkinson did not take kindly to Ronnie’s whining on that one and led to his refusal to call the other two that were nailed on.
Wrote this before I saw that tweet. Do you think it’s because he was already going down? If you look, he drags his right foot along the ground before the leg comes in. Ie if the challenge hadn’t come in he’d have fallen on the ground. That’s the only reason I can see why it wasn’t given.