How many penalties have we conceded this season vs the one we've been awarded?
VAR and Refs | General Discussion
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
I think there's a really interesting psych paper waiting to be written about how visceral and strong the reaction to injustice is, and how VAR brings out the very worst of that. We're all falling for it.
It drives engagement so it's going nowhere. Fans have no power here. I'd just try to avoid thinking about it at all if you can.
It drives engagement so it's going nowhere. Fans have no power here. I'd just try to avoid thinking about it at all if you can.
it was a smart positioning by City in that situation, they simply created a path for Rodri to run to by blocking our defenders (done by Stones & Gvardiol), Hojlund decided to chase Rodri and ended up holding him back and Rodri made the most of it, this happens a lot and it is not called, but when fecking var called it, it kinda forced the ref's hand to give
It is not about penalties for or against. It is the whole picture. From small freekicks to bigger decisions. We all know that we have been treated differently. It is so clear for everyone. Here are referees in our games until now for this year Premier League games.
S.Hooper 1 game, 1 win
Against Wolverhampton. Should have given us 2 penalties. Nothing. Didn't give Wolves a penalty and whole GreatBritain erupted like vulcano. Gave us 2 yellow cards.
A.Taylor 1 game, 1 lost
Against Arsenal when referees made sure we couldn't win. For example denying clear Garnacho goal just to allow Arsenal score after we should have had freekick. He gave us 3 yellow cards.
M.Oliver, 2 games, 1 win, 1 lost
Win against SheU where he gave them penalty for nothing. 1 yellow card for us.
Then we lost game against Tottenham. One of those where referees once again had some strange decisions against us. No penalty when Romero played goalkeeper when the score was 0-0. They tried some explanation they didn't even believe in them self. 4 yellow cards to us.
P.Tierney 1 game, 1 lost
Against ManCity when they won after scoring a ghost penalty goal. After that it is normal that confidence goes because you know where it was going. 4 yellow cards to us.
C.Cavanagh 1 game, 1 lost
Against Crystal Palace. He allowed their goal to stand despite that almost same happened for us against Burnley week before were Evans got his disallowed. Didn't gave us penalty we should have. Instead gave us 3 yellow cards.
A.Madley 1 game, 1 win.
Against Brentford. Nothing spectacular happened.
T.Harrington 1 game, 1 win
Against Burnely where they found some way to disallow Evans goal. They needed to twist and turn in every form to find something to disallow it with. 2 yellow cards.
J.Gillet 1 game, 1 lost
Against Brighton. Nothing spectacular happened. 2 yellow cards.
S.Atwell 1 game, 1 win
Against Nottingham. Nothing spectacular happened. 4 yellow cards.
I'm just disappointed in our club for not going out with any form of statement. Or manager for not going crazy in press conference. Same with players for that matter.
This fecking shite is what we are talking about when we talk media bias. These clowns actually only complain about the fact that they think Shitty should have had a second penalty. Feck off.
As I said, either he has been instructed by PRUnited that he needs tp keep his mouth shut or he has his own policy of not speaking about refs, which is horrible in English football, because if you don't talk, media wont and if media wont refs will continue to feck us.
Its been just as bad in the Champions League with the ridiculous penalty Copenhagen was given and nothing given against Bayern after Pellistri was shoved to the floor as he was about to tap the ball in to the net which should have been a penalty and a red card for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity.
Brighton should be pissed this week too.
Palhinha scores the equaliser but earlier got away with leading with his knee and a fore arm smash on Gross. Referee then gives Fulham a foul for nothing, not even a review or a yellow card for Palhinha.
Palhinha scores the equaliser but earlier got away with leading with his knee and a fore arm smash on Gross. Referee then gives Fulham a foul for nothing, not even a review or a yellow card for Palhinha.
https://x.com/skysportspl/status/1718977548946710854?s=46&t=ROmu_-lC8aQDfXAjJ05Fyw
Glad that Sky are covering the big talking point of the weekend. A yellow card incident that the referee dealt with by giving a yellow card.
Glad that Sky are covering the big talking point of the weekend. A yellow card incident that the referee dealt with by giving a yellow card.
Media keeps pushing this narrative and have done for many seasons. ABU at its finest.
I've said, not only do club, manager and players need to raise voices via official statements against how we are being treated onfield. We also need club to take drastic decisions by banning people from some media entering OldTrafford. It is like inviting bullies and those who dislike you to your dinner table. Club needs to take control over situation which it haven't been done for years and years.
Did they mention the pen at all?
TALKSPORT would have had a field day spouting conspiracies had that penalty been awarded to us
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It is technically a foul, though practically never given since it happens multiple times in every game. There would be a minimum of 2-3 penalties per game if refs enforced this.
However, it's a continuation of a clear trend that has been going on for a very long time: refs are as harsh on United as they possibly can be, doing everything within the rules (and occasionally without) to punish the players for any and every little thing. Meanwhile, it takes an on-pitch war crime before they'll give United anything. Only if the call is utterly undeniable will it be given in United's favour, but when it's a call against United, the slightest possibility of a foul is given every time without exception, and usually with harsh cards to follow.
It isn't hard to see why this happens. If a ref gives United anything, the decision is scrutinized by the media for days on end and called into question by all manner of pundits and so-called experts, and even if the decision is in fact correct according to the rules (such as last season's goal against City), people will still just choose to believe that it was the wrong call. Look how often commentators and pundits sit there spewing whatever absolutely insane crap allows them to spin any and every event into an anti-United angle. If we get anything, they'll say we shouldn't have, no matter how ludicrous it is to say so. If our opponents get something, they'll say it was correct, no matter how demonstrably wrong it may have been. Every time. Without exception.
Refs don't want to be scrutinized and have their work called into question, so the safest thing for them is to give United as little as possible and be as generous as they can to our opponents. Only then are their careers not threatened by the rabid ABU mob. We see the exact opposite with Liverpool where refs are pressured to help them because they know that there'll be a fecking inquisition if they don't. Any remotely questionable decision that goes against Liverpool is followed by uproar and investigations, and refs literally risk losing their place on the PL officials roster as a consequence. So they go out of their way to avoid that.
However, it's a continuation of a clear trend that has been going on for a very long time: refs are as harsh on United as they possibly can be, doing everything within the rules (and occasionally without) to punish the players for any and every little thing. Meanwhile, it takes an on-pitch war crime before they'll give United anything. Only if the call is utterly undeniable will it be given in United's favour, but when it's a call against United, the slightest possibility of a foul is given every time without exception, and usually with harsh cards to follow.
It isn't hard to see why this happens. If a ref gives United anything, the decision is scrutinized by the media for days on end and called into question by all manner of pundits and so-called experts, and even if the decision is in fact correct according to the rules (such as last season's goal against City), people will still just choose to believe that it was the wrong call. Look how often commentators and pundits sit there spewing whatever absolutely insane crap allows them to spin any and every event into an anti-United angle. If we get anything, they'll say we shouldn't have, no matter how ludicrous it is to say so. If our opponents get something, they'll say it was correct, no matter how demonstrably wrong it may have been. Every time. Without exception.
Refs don't want to be scrutinized and have their work called into question, so the safest thing for them is to give United as little as possible and be as generous as they can to our opponents. Only then are their careers not threatened by the rabid ABU mob. We see the exact opposite with Liverpool where refs are pressured to help them because they know that there'll be a fecking inquisition if they don't. Any remotely questionable decision that goes against Liverpool is followed by uproar and investigations, and refs literally risk losing their place on the PL officials roster as a consequence. So they go out of their way to avoid that.
That should be a red though. Can't just go around booting players with no intention of playing the ball.
Sure it should
Well that's certainly true in any game I've seen Oliver ref with United involved.
How a professional referee can see that on a TV screen multiple times, see that as a normal way to challenge for a ball on the ground, and not think “no foul” is a clear and obvious mistake is just utterly, mind-bogglingly inexplicable.
That’s Ben Thatcher levels of assault minus the “running full pelt into the situation” bit, and literally the definition of endangering the safety of an opponent. But like I’ve said multiple times this season, smashing someone in the head does not become safe just because a referee’s head seems to be empty. The head and brain is quite an important part of the body for normal people and someone should start telling refs that.
It happened in Italy a few years ago when four minutes had played and one side had scored which then allowed for a match pause. Ref went to replay and reversed the previous four minutes, erased the goal, and awarded a penalty to the other team who would convert. Madness.
So the upshot from ref watch is that United are once again being made an example of.
I fully expect 3-4 penalties in every game in the next round of fixtures
I fully expect 3-4 penalties in every game in the next round of fixtures
Are the saying Antony should have been sent off?
It's a clear red, but saying so weakens the conspiracy theorists argument when they bleat about the Hojlund foul.
I'm more interested in why we're so awful at professional football.
It cannot be stated enough that Michael Oliver is a Newcastle fan who would have been about 11 years old when he watched us rip the title away from them after being 12 points adrift.
He should have never been allowed near a Manchester United game, and it's evident nearly every time he's involved in one that he hates us.
He should have never been allowed near a Manchester United game, and it's evident nearly every time he's involved in one that he hates us.
It's quite simple really. You can't have PL refs freelancing in countries that owns a team in the PL. You just can't. How was this even allowed in the first place? It's not like UAE and the Saudis are doing that because they believe the best refs come from England... It doesn't even have to be corrupion to have an effect. Buying services legally works the same way.
For the penalty incident VAR should never intervene in something like that, in my opinion. Sure, it is a foul (even though helped by theatrics) but with no other options than a penalty it should not be given, especially not by VAR. The rules are lacking something in between. Start off by giving yellow cards in spots like that and move on. The alternative is 10 penalties every game/making football a non-contact sport.
For the penalty incident VAR should never intervene in something like that, in my opinion. Sure, it is a foul (even though helped by theatrics) but with no other options than a penalty it should not be given, especially not by VAR. The rules are lacking something in between. Start off by giving yellow cards in spots like that and move on. The alternative is 10 penalties every game/making football a non-contact sport.
Last edited:
He's just bad at his job. No need to look for a super villain origin story.
He's good enough to be cherry-picked for random games in UAE though. I'm not on the corruption-train but it will probably have an effect that's close to the same thing. A dog won't bite the hands that feed him.
Game was already lost by then. They said he was lucky to stay on
It's shocking, but you won't hear too much about it.
I don't think we can moan too much about yesterday's var decision, let's be honest it all even itself out, it was only last season in the same fixture we got great fortune with that first goal that was offside
This is what they want you to think and say. One decisions for. 55 against. Just like Wolves game. We don’t get 2 penalties. Wolves don’t get one. And there is uproar why didn’t Wolves get penalty.
Don’t fall into that trap. It is fairy tales for kids.
Probably more, that 115 is as of 2020 or something like that if i’m not mistaken.
The thing about that decision is that it’s one single decision that’s stayed in the collective consciousness as this great injustice (that referees felt needed to be made up for and was made up for with multiple shocking decisions in the following months) despite being legally correct (albeit with the law being an absolute arse) due to the media pressure that ensued.
It’s literally the same as this season. Onana clashes with an attacker. It’s an incident that never gets given and didn’t get given on that day, and a decision which hasn’t been given since despite much more serious incidents happening (Sanchez on Jesus, Verbruggen concussing Soucek), but the media uproar about that Onana incident (and not the others because the issue wasn’t that important after all) led to a collective belief that we need to be punished by getting loads of bollocks decisions against us, decisions which are still happening ten games into the season despite that incident happening in the first game.
Indeed. We need to see more fire not just in our players but from the entire club. They should be enraged by the calls and make more noise!
Yeah but he's consistently really bad when reffing United games.
The fact he’s in UAE 2 days prior doing work for people with a direct connection to city’s owners should not be allowed full stop. Even if nothing happens it’s a huge conflict of interest.
Just to write it off as someone bad at their job while football all over the world corruption is being exposed which has been happening for years is exactly what they would want.
It would be a massive surprise to me now if it’s not exposed over time the premier league is completely corrupt. It’s hardly anything new just look at Rio’s drug ban compared to others been going on forever.
Last edited:
Sure, his freelancing in UAE is suspicious. But I didn't talk about implausibility of corruption.
The person I was responding to suggested that Oliver watching us beat Newcastle to the title when he was a kid could also have something to do with it. That seems a bit farfetched.
You responded to me, and I don't think it's farfetched at all.
Just openly being a Newcastle fan should already be an obvious conflict of interest for most, if not all PL matches. The fact that they were (briefly) direct title rivals with Manchester United and are now in competition with us for CL spots should mean he's never involved in our matches.
The fact he's also being paid daft sums to freelance in the same country that own City just compounds it.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/67265837
I find it quite bizzare to release a statement like that, and it was one of the things I noticed when they released some of the audios earlier in the season.
The communication is completely chaotic and there were so many different voices, but the notion that "no we can't have refs minced up so fans can hear because it's too chaotic" is absurd.
The thing here is how do we get the decisions and communication to the referee from VAR to NOT be chaotic, so that decisions and clear, concise and understandable for the viewing audience.
It also doesn't shed a good light on the process, when things are likely already so chaotic on the field with big decisions, and calls into question how referees are able to make decisions with a clear thought process when it also seems so messy on the other side.
I find it quite bizzare to release a statement like that, and it was one of the things I noticed when they released some of the audios earlier in the season.
The communication is completely chaotic and there were so many different voices, but the notion that "no we can't have refs minced up so fans can hear because it's too chaotic" is absurd.
The thing here is how do we get the decisions and communication to the referee from VAR to NOT be chaotic, so that decisions and clear, concise and understandable for the viewing audience.
It also doesn't shed a good light on the process, when things are likely already so chaotic on the field with big decisions, and calls into question how referees are able to make decisions with a clear thought process when it also seems so messy on the other side.