Referees/Officials

  • Thread starter Thread starter blueinsa
  • Start date Start date
It's all airbrushed watching motd this morning, there was nothing shown ti suggest Mason had anything other than a good game, the only thing shown was the arm on Bravo and with it being a goal they had no choice.

Met a mate last night who said Bravo was at fault for the goal, I said from 110 I couldn't tell and as he hasn't seen the game how did he know? Talkragshite said so, he's a close friend but should know better.
 
blueinsa said:
He had someone watching a tv today in the ground, in his ear, without a shadow of a doubt.

They might claim no video technology is being used but it is and his constant pauses before decisions and his hand on his ear proved it today for me.
Click to expand...

Which just proves that video technology will answer fuck all.
 
bluetev said:
No you don't, because you don't offer any rebuttals or counter arguments.

I suspect you (along with Sinatra, if you are not the same person anyway) post here for the attention / trolling.
Click to expand...

Well put. I was just going to tell the gobshite to shut the fuck up but yours is much more articulate.
 
Referees are the easiest way for the Premier League to influence results and the "story" such as Leicester winning the league, Dippers making a miraculous comeback even though Slippy G and Bodger blew it, GPC winning a 20th, and let's not forget where did that 7 minutes extra come from in the 4-3 derby?

Premier League is Corrupt.
 
Lee Mason on tunnel cam after the match, and after getting tons of abuse as he walked into the new players tunnel.

image.jpg
 
BurnCK said:
Typical paranoid statement...am getting used to them on this forum. If you really think that referees and officials go out to blatantly 'help' United, whilst blatantly 'picking on' City, then I would suggest you're the one who's thick as fuck.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough the Sheikh paid someone a lot of money to prove just that. So he's presumably thick as fuck then?
 
bluetev said:
No you don't, because you don't offer any rebuttals or counter arguments.

I suspect you (along with Sinatra, if you are not the same person anyway) post here for the attention / trolling.
Click to expand...

What counter argument is there? I simply don't believe everyone is out to get us. Yes we've had some bad decisions against us, but we've also had some lucky decisions. Just as the rags are now getting favourable decisions, at the beginning of the season they had quite a few bad ones too. I post my opinion, yet on this forum if you get against the majorities opinion you just get called 'rag' or the insults start to fly. Apparently because I don't buy into the conspiracy and just think the ref had a bad game I'm 'thick as fuck' and a 'sanctimonious prick'...but hey yeah it's ME that's the troll. Funny.
 
Last edited:
bluetev said:
I can't recall the last time I saw a ref refuse to play advantage for an opponent when they had a good goalscoring opportunity, that too after a significant time lag following the foul,

I can't recall the last time I saw a ref not only miss a bad foul but shamelessly turn on the fouled player as he did with Silva.

Not all decisions are clear cut (even the ferna foul would be awarded just a yellow 3 times out-of 10) and refs make mistakes.

What is contentious is when every 50:50 (and even some clearcut ones) go against City (and vice versa United)
Click to expand...

See this is the sort of language that proves my point. Rather than the ref just having a bad game he REFUSED to play advantage and then TURNED on Silva. If he didn't think it was a foul then he's not going to entertain Silva rolling around on the floor as to him it'll just look like time wasting.
I've seen plenty of occasions where a ref has stopped play to the disapproval of the crowd who believed he should have played on...and the incident we're referring too was hardly a goal scoring opportunity.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Funnily enough the Sheikh paid someone a lot of money to prove just that. So he's presumably thick as fuck then?
Click to expand...

Never suggested he was. My reply was in response to a poster who called me thick as fuck for daring to suggest there's no conspiracy and the ref just had a bad game.
The rags had quite a few decisions go against them at the beginning of the season. Bravo's first game springs to mind. I guess the referees didn't read the 'help Utd, pick on City' memo that day otherwise Bravo would have been sent off and the rags would have had a penalty.
 
BurnCK said:
Never suggested he was. My reply was in response to a poster who called me thick as fuck for daring to suggest there's no conspiracy and the ref just had a bad game.
The rags had quite a few decisions go against them at the beginning of the season. Bravo's first game springs to mind. I guess the referees didn't read the 'help Utd, pick on City' memo that day otherwise Bravo would have been sent off and the rags would have had a penalty.
Click to expand...

Maybe you can explain why Walton was dismissed/moved on mid-season and Mason was stopped from refereeing two of our games at the end of the 11/12 season after a report produced by City?
 
Re the Silva incident, is because he's Spanish? Surely refs watch football, build up a familiarity of which players are known to fake injury, roll around as if shot, and those who are honest?
There's only Otomendi at City who can sometimes be an embarrassment with his theatrics, Silva is routinely hacked down due to his size and swift movement, he does not dive, I've never seen him dive, this reminds me of the game against Chelsea where Ballo scored, and Silva was blatantly hacked down in the box, such a nailed on penalty, yet Clattenberg just waved it away, (we went on to lose 2-1 )
 
BurnCK said:
Never suggested he was. My reply was in response to a poster who called me thick as fuck for daring to suggest there's no conspiracy and the ref just had a bad game.
The rags had quite a few decisions go against them at the beginning of the season. Bravo's first game springs to mind. I guess the referees didn't read the 'help Utd, pick on City' memo that day otherwise Bravo would have been sent off and the rags would have had a penalty.
Click to expand...
Penalty for what exactly? he may well have made a hash of the situation but he commited no foul.Rags,of course,state different.

What are these other decisions that went against the arrogant,self entitled twats?
 
FantasyIreland said:
Penalty for what exactly? he may well have made a hash of the situation but he commited no foul.Rags,of course,state different.

What are these other decisions that went against the arrogant,self entitled twats?
Click to expand...

For Bravo's challenge on Rooney. Whether we think it's a pen or not, surely the pro-Utd agenda would have meant it was awarded?
Prob should have had a pen against Watford. David Luis escaped a red when they played Chelsea. Valencia denied a pen vs Arsenal.
I'm not saying I'm not gleeful when things go against the rags, just pointing out that if there's a pro-Utd agenda by the Prem League / Refs, as constantly suggested on here, then surely some of the decisions would have gone in their favour. Teams get decisions go for them and against them, that's just the way it is.
 
BurnCK said:
For Bravo's challenge on Rooney. Whether we think it's a pen or not, surely the pro-Utd agenda would have meant it was awarded?
Prob should have had a pen against Watford. David Luis escaped a red when they played Chelsea. Valencia denied a pen vs Arsenal.
I'm not saying I'm not gleeful when things go against the rags, just pointing out that if there's a pro-Utd agenda by the Prem League / Refs, as constantly suggested on here, then surely some of the decisions would have gone in their favour. Teams get decisions go for them and against them, that's just the way it is.
Click to expand...

Ive already stated there was no foul on Rooney so how could it have been awarded as a penalty?

I dont recall any of those other incidents being anywehere near as clearcut,or pivotal,as the decisions that have gone against us in recent games,in particular the Chelsea game.
 
BurnCK said:
What counter argument is there? I simply don't believe everyone is out to get us. Yes we've had some bad decisions against us, but we've also had some lucky decisions. Just as the rags are now getting favourable decisions, at the beginning of the season they had quite a few bad ones too. I post my opinion, yet on this forum if you get against the majorities opinion you just get called 'rag' or the insults start to fly. Apparently because I don't buy into the conspiracy and just think the ref had a bad game I'm 'thick as fuck' and a 'sanctimonious prick'...but hey yeah it's ME that's the troll. Funny.
Click to expand...
Which is the equivalent of saying that sometimes cops in America pull over black people, but they pull over white people too, and sometimes they don't pull over black people.

Hence it's paranoia / conspiracy theories to believe that cops may be biased against black people there, even if you present evidence that on average a black person is much more likely to suffer a stop and search.

Does that make sense?
 
BurnCK said:
For Bravo's challenge on Rooney. Whether we think it's a pen or not, surely the pro-Utd agenda would have meant it was awarded?
Prob should have had a pen against Watford. David Luis escaped a red when they played Chelsea. Valencia denied a pen vs Arsenal.
I'm not saying I'm not gleeful when things go against the rags, just pointing out that if there's a pro-Utd agenda by the Prem League / Refs, as constantly suggested on here, then surely some of the decisions would have gone in their favour. Teams get decisions go for them and against them, that's just the way it is.
Click to expand...
Ie there can be an agenda only if EVERY single decision goes against the manures.
 
FantasyIreland said:
Ive already stated there was no foul on Rooney so how could it have been awarded as a penalty?

I dont recall any of those other incidents being anywehere near as clearcut,or pivotal,as the decisions that have gone against us in recent games,in particular the Chelsea game.
Click to expand...

Is that not debatable / open to interpretation? I've seen plenty state it was a foul too (not just rags). My point was that if there's a pro-Utd / anti-City agenda, surely it would have been given?
 
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