Everybody hates us/ABU etc

[Zed 101]

I think the FA are too anal to be biased, I do however think they are fecking clueless, I think they make rules and regulations without thinking beyond what the immediate impact will be, they then dig their feet it and make ludicrous decision in order to defend those rules and regulations and woe betide you if you challenge them, I mean just the idea that they threaten extending bans by way of dissuading challenges is ridiculous, the match referees report being sacrosanct irrespective of cut and dry evidence to the contrary, it is hard to have any faith in the ability of the organisation, I will await the collapse of their shoddily constructed case against city.

The media clearly do have a bias or rather certain sections of the media do, especially pundits, but like somebody said Utd is click bait so hardly a surprise. One of my favourite things is when you watch a match, then you watch MOTD and they edit the match to a different perspective.

There is definitely a fan element of ABU but then it is hardly surprising given our dominance under SAF, even I got fed up with it at times

 

[lonelyred]

Of course fans of other clubs - paranoid and delusional and biased as they are - believe everyone is against them.

We are objective. Everyone does hate and envy us.

 

[justsomebloke]

Biases are just part of human nature, no matter how powerful or professional you are.

Why do you think referees aren't allowed to do certain games?

If you think that means an FA executive who grew up a Liverpool fan will quite simply act like a Liverpool fan in a professional capacity, you can't know a lot of professionals. They'd be the sort of people who take care to be extra scrupulous to stick to objective standards in such cases, because they know that if any of their colleagues got the impression they are influenced by personal club affiliation, their credibility would be dead, and so would their career prospects. Which unsurprisingly matters a LOT more to them than whether something good happens to Liverpool or something bad happens to Man Utd. FA executives might be fans, but they'd be right stupid to act like ones on the job.

 

[WeePat]

It's almost like all football fans are sort of the same regardless of the club they support

Well except Ajax, they're all cnuts.

When I see Liverpool, Chelsea, United, Arsenal and City fans all simultaneously claim the FA and the press have an agenda against them and them only, I just roll my eyes.

 

[11101]

If you think that means an FA executive who grew up a Liverpool fan will quite simply act like a Liverpool fan in a professional capacity, you can't know a lot of professionals. They'd be the sort of people who take care to be extra scrupulous to stick to objective standards in such cases, because they know that if any of their colleagues got the impression they are influenced by personal club affiliation, their credibility would be dead, and so would their career prospects. Which unsurprisingly matters a LOT more to them than whether something good happens to Liverpool or something bad happens to Man Utd. FA executives might be fans, but they'd be right stupid to act like ones on the job.

If you've ever negotiated with anybody in any kind of position of power you know these biases creep in. And yes, the FA execs who had years of stick from Ferguson will view us differently to other clubs. They will do everything they can to be impartial but its human nature and it cannot be avoided.

 

[cyberman]

If you've ever negotiated with anybody in any kind of position of power you know these biases creep in. And yes, the FA execs who had years of stick from Ferguson will view us differently to other clubs. They will do everything they can to be impartial but its human nature and it cannot be avoided.

I don’t like Jose but how he was treated compared to everyone else was a joke during his last stint here. Nobody can tell me the FA didn’t go after him

 

[sect2k]

How many clubs have had their players banned from PL games for red cards in summer friendly tournament? While there is not a conspiracy against, there is clear bias in many decisions involving United.

 

[justsomebloke]

If you've ever negotiated with anybody in any kind of position of power you know these biases creep in. And yes, the FA execs who had years of stick from Ferguson will view us differently to other clubs. They will do everything they can to be impartial but its human nature and it cannot be avoided.

That's as crude and inaccurate as it's convenient and lazy.

 

[NicolaSacco]

The big thing that pisses me off about opposition fans and some media is they'll find one incident in a game where we got a decision from the ref and go mad about how the refs give everything in our favour, but completely ignore the decisions that go against us

Have you even read the match day forums on Redcafe?! It’s literally full of exactly this, except usually referencing a Liverpool decision from 6 months ago to argue why Utd have been badly treated. So whilst you’re right that opposition fans do it, Utd fans do it too. Everyone does it.

 

[Maticmaker]

'ABU' is a term that for a lot of the late 90's and early OO's was regularly used, for all the reasons set out in other posts. It's died down a bit since then because we were not winning anything and there was nothing (only for reds themselves) to get upset about. However now we are making a comeback (we hope) and ETH looks like he can make a go of it, then the term is resurrected. I don't think it particularly applies to the authorities, although in some cases you have to wonder, but for rival fans its absolutely true, they will support anybody but United, even when their team is not playing.

For a club that is a self confessed 'Glory hunting club', ("Glory, Glory Man United" etc.) providing entertainment, excitement, at times breath-taking football and picking up lots of silverware, we should be basking in this reverse praise.

 

[11101]

That's as crude and inaccurate as it's convenient and lazy.

So you've no argument, then.

Plenty of examples given in this thread. Find me an equal punishment for equivalent offences:

Rios drug test
Cantona (we already have like for like there)
Rooney on camera
Red card ban for a friendly

I'll be waiting...

 

[justsomebloke]

So you've no argument, then.

Plenty of examples given in this thread. Find me an equal punishment for equivalent offences:

Rios drug test
Cantona (we already have like for like there)
Rooney on camera
Red card ban for a friendly

I'll be waiting...

Sure. Just as soon as you've carried out, and posted, a thorough review of all disciplinary action for all Premier League teams over the past 30 seasons, showing clearly how this documents a consistent tendency to punish one club (us) disproportionately. Which is what you'd need to make your conclusion even worth seriously discussing, unlike picking four cases you can immediately think of and which you're pissed about.

"Plenty of examples in this thread", right. I'm pretty sure Liverpool fans or Brighton fans would have come up with a few "examples" too in similar threads for their clubs. All that shows is that shit happens in football that fans generally feel hard done by about.

My argument is this: Neither you or anyone else in this thread has an actual, valid basis for arguing United is unjustly treated. Thinking of one or five or ten cases where you feel they have isn't that. All you've got is a feeling that's how it is, and a laughable conjectural psychological argument you think shows that this is how it necessarily has to be, given human nature. Meanwhile, you ignore that it is practically universal among fans of all clubs to believe that their club is treated uniquely and unfairly, the implications of which should be obvious.

 

[11101]

Sure. Just as soon as you've carried out, and posted, a thorough review of all disciplinary action for all Premier League teams over the past 30 seasons, showing clearly how this documents a consistent tendency to punish one club (us) disproportionately. Which is what you'd need to make your conclusion even worth seriously discussing, unlike picking four cases you can immediately think of and which you're pissed about.

"Plenty of examples in this thread", right. I'm pretty sure Liverpool fans or Brighton fans would have come up with a few "examples" too in similar threads for their clubs. All that shows is that shit happens in football that fans generally feel hard done by about.

My argument is this: Neither you or anyone else in this thread has an actual, valid basis for arguing United is unjustly treated. Thinking of one or five or ten cases where you feel they have isn't that. All you've got is a feeling that's how it is, and a laughable conjectural psychological argument you think shows that this is how it necessarily has to be, given human nature. Meanwhile, you ignore that it is practically universal among fans of all clubs to believe that their club is treated uniquely and unfairly, the implications of which should be obvious.

We've got an examples where our players have committed similar offences and been punished more harshly than players from other clubs. We also have comments from former officials that they allowed biases into their jobs and tried to do what they thought other people wanted them to do. It's as simple as that.

 

[justsomebloke]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-football-club-if-only-we-were-that-competent

 

[SalfordRed18]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-football-club-if-only-we-were-that-competent

Mark Rushden reads the caf confirmed.

 

[Stadjer]

I do believe that the most succesful club in the country is usually the most disliked. Succes attracts fans for the succesfull club but also makes the succesfull club disliked by fans of other clubs. That is mostly because of jealousy and a way to cope with another club being better than your club. I dont think succes of a club influences FA boardmembers, referees or the more professional media to seriously group up against the succesfull team.

Personally i think the ABU thing on Redcaf is a bit weird at times. Saw a post where someone said that the FA would have already have removed Manchester United from the league if Manchester United was accused of what Manchester City is accused of. Manchester United is way more valuable to the FA and English football in general than Manchester City and the FA would likely rather remove City over United if they had to pick. So i found it a bit of a weird claim but it was funny to read.

The ABU stuff is funny to read at times, but i do think its made up by fans to have some kind of siege mentality amongst the fans. Could be to feel part of a group that is ''us against them''. A bit tribal but tribal is an excellent way to describe football fans. That kind of mentality also makes winning even better. Winning despite the fact that everyone is against your club.

Like people before mentioned, every fan of every club thinks the FA, media and referees are against them and all fans of all clubs can name examples where their club was punished or was unlucky with a decision against them as evidence that 'everyone is against them'.

Have you even read the match day forums on Redcafe?! It’s literally full of exactly this, except usually referencing a Liverpool decision from 6 months ago to argue why Utd have been badly treated. So whilst you’re right that opposition fans do it, Utd fans do it too. Everyone does it.

Agree with this, its not only limited to match day threads though. What you will see every match day thread is the claim that playing Manchester United is the opponent their equivalent of playing a cup final. Game raising cnuts is the often used term.

 

[M15 Red.]

The ABU media thing is pure myth. Sly Sports go out of their way to blow smoke up our arses every chance they get.

Anyone saying otherwise is being fooled by digital effects. Have you not seen Avatar?

 

[Cascarino]

Yeah it's bs, every supporter thinks it's the case when it comes to their club. Every ref secretly hates them, they get the worst treatment by the FA etc. Other than just the usual bias, I notice it often comes from supporters who tend to only watch their side play, so when they see a bad decision on or off the pitch they assume it's some unique miscarriage of justice and not just an average Saturday.

At least you're supporters who make that claim can point to the size of the United, it's hilarious when a fellow nondescript club supporter goes on about a conspiracy against them, and you have to wonder why the feck would that be the case.

 

[tjb]

Yeah it's bs, every supporter thinks it's the case when it comes to their club. Every ref secretly hates them, they get the worst treatment by the FA etc. Other than just the usual bias, I notice it often comes from supporters who tend to only watch their side play, so when they see a bad decision on or off the pitch they assume it's some unique miscarriage of justice and not just an average Saturday.

At least you're supporters who make that claim can point to the size of the United, it's hilarious when a fellow nondescript club supporter goes on about a conspiracy against them, and you have to wonder why the feck would that be the case.

I don't think the ABU thing has to do with the FA mostly. It's the press.
It's the overweighing on decisions that go for us, yet being hush about the decisions that don't go our way.
It's the support of the underdog, whilst not really talking about our football.

These are things that come with being the biggest club with the most fans and should be expected somewhat. However, this doesn't mean it shouldn't be called out either.

 

[Cascarino]

I don't think the ABU thing has to do with the FA mostly. It's the press.
It's the overweighing on decisions that go for us, yet being hush about the decisions that don't go our way.
It's the support of the underdog, whilst not really talking about our football.

These are things that come with being the biggest club with the most fans and should be expected somewhat. However, this doesn't mean it shouldn't be called out either.

It works both ways. When you support a small club and a decision goes against you, it will get much less discourse than the same thing happening to a big club, just by virtue of less time being dedicated in the press to discussing clubs outside of the elite ones. So while there'll be occasions it works against you, there'll also be occasions it works for you

 

[BarryWinks]

Was it last season we were awarded a pen against Brighton after the whistle had gone and on the RAWK thread they were convinced we were 'back to having the refs in our pockets' and that the 'FA couldn't wait to make united a force again'.

I've definitely read similar being projected at the dippers from our fans here as well. Point is, fans always think the media, FA, press has it in for them, but the reality is those fans choose the most extreme examples of what they perceive as bias against their club and use that as the sole yardstick on making that conclusion.

I've read on Pool and Chelsea forums how Tyler is a secret united fan, yet I've seen many posts here on the CAF saying how Tyler is never excited when we score a goal. Almost like you need to be crazy to be a football fan.

 

[AFC NimbleThumb]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-football-club-if-only-we-were-that-competent

From the closet Spurs fan; laughable he’s still pulling off his local club stuff.

 

[Tyrion]

Yeah, it's totally ridiculous but very predictable. Classic fan bias, every team thinks the world is against them. Does seem to be particularly prevalent among United fans, though.

Agreed. Every fanbase thinks the FA'S are against them, the media's against them and all the other clubs are against them. It's pretty stupid.

 

[RedNome]

Lots of 'I am very reasonable and balanced in my views' posts in this thread.

Congrats.

Hated, adored but never ignored.

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

So you've no argument, then.

Plenty of examples given in this thread. Find me an equal punishment for equivalent offences:

Rios drug test
Cantona (we already have like for like there)
Rooney on camera
Red card ban for a friendly

I'll be waiting...

Also, remember when Evra got a 4 game ban for 'attacking' a Chelsea groundsman who racially abused him

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I can remember a time when VAR was first a thing. Suddenly we were being awarded many penalties due to our attacking play. Quite legitimate ones, even. Often to the embarrassment of the on field official .

Then some twat opposition manager or another said "United get too many penalties" or something and the penalties dried up.

 

[Swordsman]

success attract jealousy..

 

[fallengt]

Yeah it's bs, every supporter thinks it's the case when it comes to their club. Every ref secretly hates them, they get the worst treatment by the FA etc. Other than just the usual bias, I notice it often comes from supporters who tend to only watch their side play, so when they see a bad decision on or off the pitch they assume it's some unique miscarriage of justice and not just an average Saturday.

At least you're supporters who make that claim can point to the size of the United, it's hilarious when a fellow nondescript club supporter goes on about a conspiracy against them, and you have to wonder why the feck would that be the case.

You mind posting some examples that a non english speaking player get punished by FA for chatting with his fan on social media?
Because that happened with Cavani.

 

[SalfordRed18]

You mind posting some examples that a non english speaking player get punished by FA for chatting with his fan on social media?
Because that happened with Cavani.

That's such a specific demographic when you know damn well, the FA have been handing out bans for English speaking and non english speaking players over their social media posts for years.

 

[Cascarino]

You mind posting some examples that a non english speaking player get punished by FA for chatting with his fan on social media?
Because that happened with Cavani.

That was a bad decision, but the process behind it was pretty transparent. They'd publicly spoken about doing more in that area, and this led to them implementing legislation at the start of that season which included new punishment guidelines and policies specifically designed on widening their scope to incidents outside of the pitch or in a private setting. After his post was reported, the FA employed an independent commission to investigate the case and deal with sentencing. Cavani decided to not contest the charges, because (in his own words) "of respect for the FA and the fight against racism in football". The minimum punishment for this violation is a three game ban, so that was the resulting sentence.

Rather than it being a concerted effort to hamstring you guys, reading how it all went down it seems much more likely it was a mix of incompetence from the FA and the independent commission, overzealousness in implementing new rules after years of dragging their feet when it came to racial discrimination, and the rigidity of the legislation.

Personally I don't think pointing to a bad decision proves anything anyway. Talking about Cavani he was sent off back when he played for PSG for his old sniper celebration, despite doing it all the time with no problem prior to that incident.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

It works both ways. When you support a small club and a decision goes against you, it will get much less discourse than the same thing happening to a big club, just by virtue of less time being dedicated in the press to discussing clubs outside of the elite ones. So while there'll be occasions it works against you, there'll also be occasions it works for you

That's only half true.

Obviously, yes, there's much less time dedicated in the press to smaller teams / the lower leagues, so both decisions that go for you and against you will get much less discourse. That, as you say, is consistent, applies to many teams, and works both in your favour and against you and so largely evens itself out.

And when decisions go in favour of United, and the press and social media have a field day full of outrage and playing the 'big club / Old Trafford / Fergie Time' cards - then you could argue that's just because we're a bigger club, there's more discourse about decisions in our games, etc.

However, the outlier in all of the above is the almost deafening silence in the media and social media when decisions go against us - except from United fans of course. If it was just about there being more discourse about our games because we're a huge club, then decisions that go against us should get talked about in the media every bit, and with as much passion and anger, as decisions that go for us. That really doesn't happen. Decisions that go against us get largely ignored or downplayed. Especially in contrast to the amount of time decisions that go for us are debated / referred to for ages after, etc.

The media / social media attention really doesn't 'work both ways to level itself out' with United. There is, without any shadow of a doubt, far more time and anger dedicated by pundits and 'neutrals' to highlighting and complaining about decisions that go for us than there is for those that go against us.

 

[Bestie07]

That's only half true.

Obviously, yes, there's much less time dedicated in the press to smaller teams / the lower leagues, so both decisions that go for you and against you will get much less discourse. That, as you say, is consistent, applies to many teams, and works both in your favour and against you and so largely evens itself out.

And when decisions go in favour of United, and the press and social media have a field day full of outrage and playing the 'big club / Old Trafford / Fergie Time' cards - then you could argue that's just because we're a bigger club, there's more discourse about decisions in our games, etc.

However, the outlier in all of the above is the almost deafening silence in the media and social media when decisions go against us - except from United fans of course. If it was just about there being more discourse about our games because we're a huge club, then decisions that go against us should get talked about in the media every bit, and with as much passion and anger, as decisions that go for us. That really doesn't happen. Decisions that go against us get largely ignored or downplayed. Especially in contrast to the amount of time decisions that go for us are debated / referred to for ages after, etc.

The media / social media attention really doesn't 'work both ways to level itself out' with United. There is, without any shadow of a doubt, far more time and anger dedicated by pundits and 'neutrals' to highlighting and complaining about decisions that go for us than there is for those that go against us.

And this is when we haven't been relevant in terms of competing for top honors for nearly a decade now.

 

[Amar__]

Even as a neutral, ignoring the United games, Chelsea and Liverpool get far many more decisions their way in comparision with Manchester City. Watching their title fights in last few years, comparing decisions Liverpool get, it's not even close comparable to Manchester City. You can clearly say that the FA/refs/whoever wanted Liverpool to get their trophies before Manchester City, that much is clear.

 

[Cascarino]

That's only half true.

Obviously, yes, there's much less time dedicated in the press to smaller teams / the lower leagues, so both decisions that go for you and against you will get much less discourse. That, as you say, is consistent, applies to many teams, and works both in your favour and against you and so largely evens itself out.

And when decisions go in favour of United, and the press and social media have a field day full of outrage and playing the 'big club / Old Trafford / Fergie Time' cards - then you could argue that's just because we're a bigger club, there's more discourse about decisions in our games, etc.

However, the outlier in all of the above is the almost deafening silence in the media and social media when decisions go against us - except from United fans of course. If it was just about there being more discourse about our games because we're a huge club, then decisions that go against us should get talked about in the media every bit, and with as much passion and anger, as decisions that go for us. That really doesn't happen. Decisions that go against us get largely ignored or downplayed. Especially in contrast to the amount of time decisions that go for us are debated / referred to for ages after, etc.

The media / social media attention really doesn't 'work both ways to level itself out' with United. There is, without any shadow of a doubt, far more time and anger dedicated by pundits and 'neutrals' to highlighting and complaining about decisions that go for us than there is for those that go against us.

Just a couple weeks ago you had the penalty on McTominay which wasn't given against Palace, that was given a lot of exposure in the media. It was fairly ubiquitous amongst all the sites that cover football, in a way that is absolutely unique to clubs of your size. You might argue that it doesn't work out in your favour ultimately, but I disagree that there's deafening silence when decisions go against you, any contentious decision involving your club is going to get discussed. And it makes sense, you're the most well supported club in football, with many ex players as pundits. It's a similar scenario to Liverpool, where their supporters argue everyone hates them and they get treated unfairly, but they still have a massive fanbase and a lot of representation in the media.

 

[Harry190]

Who needs enemies when you have friends like the match day thread?

 

[Amar__]

If you think that means an FA executive who grew up a Liverpool fan will quite simply act like a Liverpool fan in a professional capacity, you can't know a lot of professionals. They'd be the sort of people who take care to be extra scrupulous to stick to objective standards in such cases, because they know that if any of their colleagues got the impression they are influenced by personal club affiliation, their credibility would be dead, and so would their career prospects. Which unsurprisingly matters a LOT more to them than whether something good happens to Liverpool or something bad happens to Man Utd. FA executives might be fans, but they'd be right stupid to act like ones on the job.

You mean professionals like this:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/42219327

 

[Fully Fledged]

Where of course they'd just continue to act like they were fans, paying no heed to professionalism whatsoever. Because obviously that matters more to them than their professional reputation etc.

There's not hit to professional reputation in being disproportionate with punishments for Utd though. The tv and papers lap it up.

 

[Fully Fledged]

I can remember a time when VAR was first a thing. Suddenly we were being awarded many penalties due to our attacking play. Quite legitimate ones, even. Often to the embarrassment of the on field official .

Then some twat opposition manager or another said "United get too many penalties" or something and the penalties dried up.

Then a ref turned to Shaw and said I can't give you that they'd crucify me.

 

[eire-red]

I would find it very hard to believe that we aren't the most disliked team amongst 'neutrals' in the country. The same applying to the likes of Rangers and / or Celtic in Scotland, Real Madrid in Spain, Bayern Munich in Germany, Juventus in Italy, PSG (currently) in France, etc.

Success breeds both the most support and the most hatred. Very few people will actually be 'neutral' towards the biggest and most successful clubs, and they'll often be the team others dislike most after their particular teams rivals.

That hatred / dislike also seems reflected in the coverage of United in the media, as many journalists, pundits, ex-players who have no allegiance to United will often dislike us and enjoy seeing us struggle rather than succeed. Especially those who were playing against United during the Fergie era of dominance.

I don't think there's any kind of ongoing active bias against United from any particular authority. If there was, we wouldn't have some spells of getting a good amount of (deserves) penalties, good cup draws, etc.

However I am sure there is an ongoing and active bias against United in terms of how the media and public react whenever decisions go against or in favour of us. Decisions that go for us get highlighted and discussed ad nauseum as 'controversial'. Decisions that go against us get silently brushed under the carpet. And that biased and hysterical reporting can seemingly lead to points where there is either a conscious or unconscious tendency for referees to award more against us rather than for us for spells.

I agree there's definitely a media bias, but it's probably more an unconscious thing in reality. Like the Rashford 'offside' was discussed to death, but decisions against us, like the blatant pen vs Palace away, don't really get mentioned.

I guess the size of the club just whips up a media frenzy when something happens, because we get the most clicks and the most reactions. It comes with the territory of being the biggest club in England. For example, the whole romanticism and fanboyism of the great rivalry between Pep and Klopp, Liverpool vs Man City, how good they've been, etc etc...

I still think the failure, mismanagement and underachievement of United over the past decade has gotten more coverage than any of that. And now the rejuvenation under ETH is the topic on everyone's tongue. We're loved by the media, but they love us for how much papers we sell and clicks we generate, and that is true whether they're good or bad articles.

 

[Xaviesta]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-football-club-if-only-we-were-that-competent

That was a good article.