Man U Ref watch - how many points will they gain?

[Latics Fan SJK]

The bottom line for me is, if there was such an agenda in place to help United win the league, they would have done so. This whole 'we were too good for the cheaters' claim, IMO, is nonsense. People behind said organisation wouldn't bust their balls to ensure United were kept near/at the top all season to let that work fall flat on its face in the worst possible way by it being fucked up on the last minute of the last day of the season.

I'm putting this bit in bold to draw proper attention to the point that has been repeated over and over, within this thread and others, when it's missing the point of what most of us believe to be favourable treatment towards United, however that manifest itself.

The favouritism, or 'agenda', is NOT to ensure United win the league.

Of course it doesn't ensure they win the league, or they would always win the league. Any of us with half a brain cell recognise this (If you're arguing against those who don't, and you're older than 12, you should argue with someone your own age ;)).

The argument is that through preferential treatment, favouritism, bullying, however it's done, United get decisions that culminate in keeping them in the mix for the title continuously, regardless of how shit they're playing or how shit their midfield is. It's giving them an artificial advantage to make up the shortfall. There is an obvious element of extra attention given to beneficial United decisions, which amplifies it, for some people enough to think it's nothing more than a fuss over nothing, but plenty of us don't believe this to be the case. And frankly when you see that shit week in week out it can be hard to see why everyone else doesn't think the same.

Eh, wasn't it a United executive who said that they don't have to be winning the league, just challenging for it.

That'll give them a couple of years grace.

As for this 'They would've ensured United win the league' statement, how can you ensure that! How many people envisaged us coming back in the last few minutes?

Because they wouldn't have let it come down the final game, as has been said countless times if you cared to read. IF this 'agenda' is to keep United at the top, they wouldn't go through all that effort to keep them there to fuck it up on the last day. Why do all that and the leave it chance on City beating QPR at home when, in reality, pre-game that was a given?

The reason it was so momentus is because it was just that, so momentus. Any league in the world would take what we done, and lived on it for the next 10 years.

On a side note, this poster reeks of it. He may profess to be an Oldham fan but in my opinon he still reeks of a wannabe winner. How many lower league fans have a second team?

I don't have a 2nd team you complete moron. Are United supposed to be my 2nd team because I don't believe in the agenda or is it City because I like to discuss football on their most popular fans forum? Get a grip will you - my opinion differs from yours, deal with it. If you want to come out with bullshit like that last paragraph then go for it. More the fool you.

 

[fatbloke]

Oh I see - you've finally thought of a question to ask me,having completely ignored the twenty or so I asked you about just what form the 'agenda' took,what it's ultimate objective was,and exactly who was involved.
Ok,I at least will answer a straight question.
I believe that there has always been a slight bias/rub of the green/coming down on the side of,the 'big four' teams.
This manifested itself with Liverpool in the 80's,and to a lesser extent Chelski and the Arse later on,and also with manure.
I don't,however,remember talk of 'agendas' and 'conspiracies' when the dippers got the benefit,or either London club.
If,as we very much hope,we retain our position at football's Top Table,we will probably start to get the odd contentious decision in our favour.
And if you think we have a hard time with referees,then I suggest you talk to a mate of mine who has had a Wigan seasoncard for 30 years.
It has always been this way - no conspiracy,no agenda,no top-level corruption,and nothing to see here.
Now that is how you actually answer a question,for future reference.
Oh,and for the record,sjk 2008 is neither a rag nor a wanker - just a decent, reasonable bloke who is a football fan with an opinion which is as valid as your,mine of anyone else's.

So in your own words you say you believe the Top 4 benefit from a "bias/rub of the green/coming down on the side of" however big or small, why is it? Because the law of averages would suggest the "incorrect" decisions would be completely random and spread equally between teams over a period of time and we all know and you admit yourself this doesn't happen.

PS... I never called anyone a wanker so don't reply to one of my quotes with something completely unrelated to me.

Ok fair play - the 'wanker' quote was not yours,and I apologise.
I really don't know why historically the 'big four' have been given the benefit of the doubt so much,but even so I just don't think that referees tendency to favour them on occasion amounts to agenda/conspiracy/Illuminati or whatever going on,(and I know you don't necessarily support these views,although others may well do).
And maybe now were one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour.
Then everyone will start to hate us instead,if they don't already!

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

So in your own words you say you believe the Top 4 benefit from a "bias/rub of the green/coming down on the side of" however big or small, why is it? Because the law of averages would suggest the "incorrect" decisions would be completely random and spread equally between teams over a period of time and we all know and you admit yourself this doesn't happen.

PS... I never called anyone a wanker so don't reply to one of my quotes with something completely unrelated to me.

Ok fair play - the 'wanker' quote was not yours,and I apologise.
I really don't know why historically the 'big four' have been given the benefit of the doubt so much,but even so I just don't think that referees tendency to favour them on occasion amounts to agenda/conspiracy/Illuminati or whatever going on,(and I know you don't necessarily support these views,although others may well do).
And maybe now were one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour.
Then everyone will start to hate us instead,if they don't already!

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Ok fair play - the 'wanker' quote was not yours,and I apologise.
I really don't know why historically the 'big four' have been given the benefit of the doubt so much,but even so I just don't think that referees tendency to favour them on occasion amounts to agenda/conspiracy/Illuminati or whatever going on,(and I know you don't necessarily support these views,although others may well do).
And maybe now were one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour.
Then everyone will start to hate us instead,if they don't already!

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

And an opinion that is shared by myself.

I'm a wanker and a closet red though.

 

[The Future's Blue]

I'm putting this bit in bold to draw proper attention to the point that has been repeated over and over, within this thread and others, when it's missing the point of what most of us believe to be favourable treatment towards United, however that manifest itself.

The favouritism, or 'agenda', is NOT to ensure United win the league.

Of course it doesn't ensure they win the league, or they would always win the league. Any of us with half a brain cell recognise this (If you're arguing against those who don't, and you're older than 12, you should argue with someone your own age ;)).

The argument is that through preferential treatment, favouritism, bullying, however it's done, United get decisions that culminate in keeping them in the mix for the title continuously, regardless of how shit they're playing or how shit their midfield is. It's giving them an artificial advantage to make up the shortfall. There is an obvious element of extra attention given to beneficial United decisions, which amplifies it, for some people enough to think it's nothing more than a fuss over nothing, but plenty of us don't believe this to be the case. And frankly when you see that shit week in week out it can be hard to see why everyone else doesn't think the same.

Eh, wasn't it a United executive who said that they don't have to be winning the league, just challenging for it.

That'll give them a couple of years grace.

As for this 'They would've ensured United win the league' statement, how can you ensure that! How many people envisaged us coming back in the last few minutes?

Because they wouldn't have let it come down the final game, as has been said countless times if you cared to read. IF this 'agenda' is to keep United at the top, they wouldn't go through all that effort to keep them there to fuck it up on the last day. Why do all that and the leave it chance on City beating QPR at home when, in reality, pre-game that was a given?

The reason it was so momentus is because it was just that, so momentus. Any league in the world would take what we done, and lived on it for the next 10 years.

On a side note, this poster reeks of it. He may profess to be an Oldham fan but in my opinon he still reeks of a wannabe winner. How many lower league fans have a second team?

I don't have a 2nd team you complete moron. Are United supposed to be my 2nd team because I don't believe in the agenda or is it City because I like to discuss football on their most popular fans forum? Get a grip will you - my opinion differs from yours, deal with it. If you want to come out with bullshit like that last paragraph then go for it. More the fool you.

Oooow, check you out. 'Moron', 'Deal with it', 'Bullshit', well somebody's a bit precious this morning.

And what is this 'Agenda' that you keep pushing, were we not just talking about decisions going United's way, a sort of bias? You see, that one little word is the whole concept of certain peoples arguements. People are debating the bias that is shown to United (whether conscious or subconscious) which is then translated as 'An Agenda', before being decribed as 'A Conspiracy' and then onto 'Paranoia'.

It's just a word game in order to set the script by certain members. Interesting though, seeing as you have just snapped by me doing a similar thing.

Thanks for the heads up.

PS. If you had cared to read my post you'd realise that United do not have to win the league each year, just compete. Have a nice day.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

And an opinion that is shared by myself.

I'm a wanker and a closet red though.

Don't let it ruin your day mate.
I've had badly-spelled death threats suggesting I'm a rag and a twat,and I've had a City season ticket for 40 years,so you have no chance.
I can understand the twat bit,but the rag allegation is a tad harsh.
The key is to not really give a fuck.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Eh, wasn't it a United executive who said that they don't have to be winning the league, just challenging for it.

That'll give them a couple of years grace.

As for this 'They would've ensured United win the league' statement, how can you ensure that! How many people envisaged us coming back in the last few minutes?

Because they wouldn't have let it come down the final game, as has been said countless times if you cared to read. IF this 'agenda' is to keep United at the top, they wouldn't go through all that effort to keep them there to fuck it up on the last day. Why do all that and the leave it chance on City beating QPR at home when, in reality, pre-game that was a given?

The reason it was so momentus is because it was just that, so momentus. Any league in the world would take what we done, and lived on it for the next 10 years.

On a side note, this poster reeks of it. He may profess to be an Oldham fan but in my opinon he still reeks of a wannabe winner. How many lower league fans have a second team?

I don't have a 2nd team you complete moron. Are United supposed to be my 2nd team because I don't believe in the agenda or is it City because I like to discuss football on their most popular fans forum? Get a grip will you - my opinion differs from yours, deal with it. If you want to come out with bullshit like that last paragraph then go for it. More the fool you.

Oooow, check you out. 'Moron', 'Deal with it', 'Bullshit', well somebody's a bit precious this morning.

And what is this 'Agenda' that you keep pushing, were we not just talking about decisions going United's way, a sort of bias? You see, that one little word is the whole concept of certain peoples arguements. People are debating the bias that is shown to United (whether conscious or subconscious) which is then translated as 'An Agenda', before being decribed as 'A Conspiracy' and then onto 'Paranoia'.

It's just a word game in order to set the script by certain members. Interesting though, seeing as you have just snapped by me doing a similar thing.

Thanks for the heads up.

Certain members indeed.

Some are suggesting it's as simple as bias, to which I and others have replied to. Some are insisting it's an agenda to keep the cash cow at the top, to which I and others have also replied to.

I don't know whether you're too simple to realise that not everybody here is arguing the same reasoning behind United's 'good-fortune' re decisions or whether you're just looking to have a go at the neutral voice who is, like everybody else, just airing their opinion.

Either way, keep it up if it gets you through the day.

As for the 'moron', 'deal with it' and 'bullshit' comments, well, stop being a 'moron' and picking out my comments because I'm not a blue, 'deal' with my opinion whether you like it or not, just like I 'deal' with everyone else's without resorting to uncalled for insults and stop talking 'bullshit' which is what the 'wannabe winner' and '2nd club' jibes fall into.

That sounds fair to me, since this is a thread on a General Football Forum messageboard where, in all likeliness, opinions tend to differ.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

And an opinion that is shared by myself.

I'm a wanker and a closet red though.

Don't let it ruin your day mate.
I've had badly-spelled death threats suggesting I'm a rag and a twat,and I've had a City season ticket for 40 years,so you have no chance.
I can understand the twat bit,but the rag allegation is a tad harsh.
The key is to not really give a fuck.

I know. If I gave that much of a fuck, I wouldn't still be here.

The majority are fine though, regardless of me being an Oldham fan, they can still have a debate without resorting to the ever so tiring & predictable rag jibes.

Petty really.

 

[fatbloke]

Ok fair play - the 'wanker' quote was not yours,and I apologise.
I really don't know why historically the 'big four' have been given the benefit of the doubt so much,but even so I just don't think that referees tendency to favour them on occasion amounts to agenda/conspiracy/Illuminati or whatever going on,(and I know you don't necessarily support these views,although others may well do).
And maybe now were one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour.
Then everyone will start to hate us instead,if they don't already!

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

So the "big club bias" is down to an 'importance' of club in your own words? Importance to who exactly? Why does the 'importance' of a club affect potential refereeing decisions? That surely constitutes a fucking huge problem whatever word you prefer to use.<br /><br />-- Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:37 am --<br /><br />

You say "historically the big four have been given the benefit of the doubt so much" and also "now we're one of the 'big four' we may finally start to see the tide turn in our favour", doesn't that suggest to you that decisions aren't made with integrity? We can all accept genuine mistakes but as you admit this isn't happening and probably won't happen in the future.

I don't want to win the league knowing we've had a helping hand from the officials. I like many others just want a fair, honest, genuine officials and if we get beat by the better team on the night or over the course of a season then no one will ever complain.

Many of the decisions that folk on here say go in the rags favour are contentious and debatable,even after slow-mo video replays.
What I am saying is that,when a call can go either way,it often goes in favour of the 'big' team.
As I said earlier,this isn't just the rags,but there is a sliding scale going down in terms of size of club,for example Spurs may get a 50/50 call in their favour against Wigan,or Liverpool would get one against,say,QPR.
This has always been the case - there is a 'pecking order' in terms of size and/or 'importance' of the clubs,and you probably get it in the lower leagues to,so given that manure have been sadly top of the pile for 20 years or so it stands to reason that they would inevitably benefit the most from this.
But I don't think that this 'big club bias' amounts to endemic corruption,or fixing,or an 'agenda'.
And that is purely my opinion.

And an opinion that is shared by myself.

I'm a wanker and a closet red though.

Again please don't quote me because it wasn't me who called you a wanker, although I'm not saying whoever did say it was wrong necessarily, haha!!!

 

[bernabias home shirt]

Let it go fatty and go and have a lie down...