Ref Watch City Games - 2023/24

I haven’t watched the game back and won’t do as it pisses me off

What I would say is that my view from the game was -

3 mins h1 and 4 mins half 2 injury time was woefully inadequate. H2 there were var reviews, plenty of subs and amazing amounts of chelsea time wasting. Arsenal or Liverpool would have got 5 or 6 mins h1 and 8 to 10 mins h2. It’s clear, like Newcastle away, we don’t get injury time like they do. It’s bent

Chelsea should have had 2 pens v Liverpool and Brentford 1, neither got any and Chelsea’s first was at 0 0. Bent

We should have had 2 pens yesterday - both at my end of the ground, both neither Madley or Banks were ever going to give us, both would have been given to the dippers

We are being deliberately and systematically fucked over by refs and the red clubs are favoured. PL heads have admitted what’s best for the brand, and it ain’t us

united winning the prem year after year is apparently good for the product, as is Chelsea winning the WSL every year. Us winning it is not

The only big club to get financially scrutinised and fucked over is us. Rags fail it and get fuck all punishment, Liverpool fail it and get fuck all punishment, Liverpool illegally hack and get fuck all punishment? Liverpool have 75% asthmatics and nothing is said

Football is bent as fuck
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
It won’t and can’t be exactly the same. The games aren’t played in a vacuum.
Click to expand...
Yes thats true. But they can be managed in a like fashion. In the everton and chelsea games he reffed us, they were similar. Lots of man handling, constant fouls and breaks in play with no yellows. No major decisions made (ie he left to var).
so with us he seems to have a style. I just ask that it be universal. Or does he ref different teams differently, not out of corruption just out of nuance? Which in itself is wrong.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
There have been more cards for dissent this season than last, so far.

I didn’t think the ref had a great game yesterday, but there have been far worse than him.

No.

The crowd got their keeper booked and probably Caicedo too.
Click to expand...
The cards for dissent were all towards the start of the season, there have been comparatively few in the last few months, probably going back to the same sort of levels as we have seen for the seasons preceding this one, that's why I think that using the United fans tweet as proof of the partisan nature of football fans isn't a good example because yellows for dissent have all but stopped for all teams now.

I see that you don't think the referee had a great game but that isn't what I asked, do you think he applied the laws of the game fairly and equally to both teams?

I disagree that the crowd got yellow cards for Caicedo and their keeper, their own actions did. If the home crowd had affected the referees decisions then City would have had 3 penalties and they would have been down 10, or possibly 9 men depending on if the keeper carried on time-wasting, men before the end of the game. If you think that the crowd pressured the referee into giving those two cards out then aren't you essentially saying the crowd had to pressure the referee into making the correct decision? Or do you think the yellow cards given to Caicedo and their keeper were wrong decisions?
 
super_city_si said:
Yes thats true. But they can be managed in a like fashion. In the everton and chelsea games he reffed us, they were similar. Lots of man handling, constant fouls and breaks in play with no yellows. No major decisions made (ie he left to var).
so with us he seems to have a style. I just ask that it be universal. Or does he ref different teams differently, not out of corruption just out of nuance? Which in itself is wrong.
Click to expand...
To err is to be human. Unless robots take over, there will always be different decisions made on identical incidents in different games.
 
danielwood5 said:
The cards for dissent were all towards the start of the season, there have been comparatively few in the last few months, probably going back to the same sort of levels as we have seen for the seasons preceding this one, that's why I think that using the United fans tweet as proof of the partisan nature of football fans isn't a good example because yellows for dissent have all but stopped for all teams now.

I see that you don't think the referee had a great game but that isn't what I asked, do you think he applied the laws of the game fairly and equally to both teams?

I disagree that the crowd got yellow cards for Caicedo and their keeper, their own actions did. If the home crowd had affected the referees decisions then City would have had 3 penalties and they would have been down 10, or possibly 9 men depending on if the keeper carried on time-wasting, men before the end of the game. If you think that the crowd pressured the referee into giving those two cards out then aren't you essentially saying the crowd had to pressure the referee into making the correct decision? Or do you think the yellow cards given to Caicedo and their keeper were wrong decisions?
Click to expand...
Refereeing always goes in waves. Eg. Fouls on keepers. Once the Luton goal was given, we’ve had more goals given than normal. It’ll revert back to over protecting keepers at some point.

Same with penalties being overturned. The bar gets moved higher and higher until a blatant one is ignored. Then softer ones get given for a while.

Same with grappling at corners.

I don’t think the referee applied the laws of the game differently to the teams yesterday. You can try to debate that you believe he did, but that’s all that is.

Crowds can influence decisions. Look in lockdown when there were less home wins than usual. They can’t influence every decision though.

Referees are humans. They can be swayed by crowds. It doesn’t make them bent/corrupt criminals. It’s when they’re not 100% sure and that extra persuasion makes them make a decision.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
It was mine.
Click to expand...
If he gives Liverpool a penalty when one of their players dives, you'll say he didn't do it because he's biased, but he made a mistake and that it's fine because they are human.
I fundamentally disagree with your take, as do lots on here - if I didn't know better, I'd suspect that you are deliberately taking a contrary position!
 
homerdog said:
If he gives Liverpool a penalty when one of their players dives, you'll say he didn't do it because he's biased, but he made a mistake and that it's fine because they are human.
I fundamentally disagree with your take, as do lots on here - if I didn't know better, I'd suspect that you are deliberately taking a contrary position!
Click to expand...
Your suspicion is as wrong as your take then.
 
the-ecstacy-of-eight said:
Take any of our penalty appeals from yesterday and compare those to ANY of the penalties that Jota has won for the dippers over the last two seasons.
Click to expand...
I can understand that at corners, they don't give a lot of tussles, because it's almost impossible to break up who is holding who, and players will throw themselves to the floor when they realise they're not getting the ball.

But it's bizarre that Chilwell was allowed to hang on to Haaland while he moved yards, and still pull him down and it's no penalty.

Jota dives in an obvious manner, having made a couple of steps following a tackle, but VAR are desperate to find the slightest of touches to justify a penalty.

That's not even a City/Liverpool thing - it happens all the time. Wrestle each other at corners, but God forbid you breathe on a player at other times.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
If you’re asking me, rather than trying to rile people up more, it’s because they do a fucking hard job with 99% of people shouting that they are a ****, corrupt, bent or incompetent constantly, whilst players cheat and manipulate their way to getting decisions.

They get the vast majority of decisions right. Those that don’t go the way you want don’t tend to be 100% stonewall decisions, but the ones that are closer to 50/50.

They make mistakes, like we all do. Had Haaland not missed his 3 or 4 chances yesterday, this thread would be 10 pages shorter than it is.
Click to expand...
Yesterday's were not 50/50. Stoppage time and Walker penalties were at worst 75/25; Caicedo's stamp (and subsequent numerous fouls when on yellow) should have been stonewall. And 4 mins of stoppage time after 10 against Everton? You are clearly set on being a contrarion for the sake of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top