Mike Dean

Not normally one for blaming the ref. I do and have in the pasted but have to agree that if City had taken they chances the bent ref wouldnt have mattered in most games.

However Dean was clearly trying to influence the game in favour of villa. Dean had a massive effect on the game and you could see the effect it had on the City players.
He would bring play back and give villa a free kick time after time.
Surprised he didnt give villa that penalty to be honest. Which is odd to say as he was giving villa 90% of every 50/50 or tackle.
This needs investigating something wasnt right last night, perhaps dean was trying for a knighthood in front of prince William.
I think Dean brought back play (belatedly) because Watkins had been taken out so Villa’s attack dissolved. He hadn’t really given advantage so brought play back.That said, he penalised Fern (late)in the 2nd half and I wasn’t sure if that was was a foul.

I usually like to slate the refs and the Prem’s tend to be shite but I though it was swings and roundabouts with Dean. We committed 4 or 5 fouls in the first half that broke up villa’s attempts to get out of defence and likewise Villa committed their share of spoiling fouls too.

I think Zinchenko was fouled for the corner but attackers often get away with them but Mings was pinged for impeding Ederson, that was the right call but soft.
 
I know how incompetent PL refs are and have been for many many years. Yet they still get on me nerves.

Are they bent? Well I’m sure Pep at some point will come out and says a few things about how his Man City team was treated within the game.

As for now I like to think it’s just one of many things Pep uses to motivate his players. And it works.
 
And here's me thinking that the Villa player was guilty of obstruction, as you say we haven't seen a drop ball for years.
There hasn't been Obstruction in the laws for 20 years, and when it was in the laws you were not committing it if the ball is in playing distance.
 
There were some odd decisions with some good tackles by both sides that were blown up for fouls, which I thought strange. Some advantages worked and some didn't. A couple of players on either side could have been booked but weren't....it was just a weird performance from Dean all round to be honest. Decisions for both sides had me scratching my head.

I'd like to see the Zinchenko incident again for the corner that brought their goal. First impression 'live' I just said it's a foul....looking at the replay last night from a different angle maybe the Villa player (was it Young??) was clever and rammed his shoulder into Zinch, dunno....very marginal. That said, fuck me we should be defending the corner better, no excuse on that once the corner is given. But the pen claim for Jesus wasn't a pen (IMO) and neither was the pen claim on the Villa player. I think both decisions were correct. If Gerrard thinks they should have had a pen then he really is clutching at straws.

But for all we are calling Dean a c*nt and VAR is rigged etc etc, that penalty claim on the Villa player was a perfect moment when ref and VAR could have fucked us over. If Dean had called it a pen - and it would have been easy to give it given how close Ake got - I doubt VAR would have overturned it as a 'clear and obvious error'. But he didn't give it, so at least I give him some credit for that.
 
Right so if it wasnt a penalty from Ake on i cant remember, and VAR checked it and saw the villa player kicked it out. Why where villa awarded the corner?

Its fucking dog shit
I don't think VAR can intervene on decisions like corners and goal kicks. Once the ref gives a corner, even if they then check for a penalty and blatantly see it was a goal kick, they can't tell the ref to change his decision. That's one of the oddities of VAR. If that's not the case I stand corrected.
 
Dropped balls are no longer contested yet Dean restarted the game with one, something the commentators applauded and said we should have more off. Tells you all you need to know about the state of the game
I actually thought he got that one right. The Villa player was on the ground with the ball trapped between his legs. He was in no position to play it and no other player could get at it so stopping the game before anybody was hurt was sensible. Clearly not obstruction, where you’re stopping an opponent reaching the ball when it’s not within your reach..
 
I think Dean brought back play (belatedly) because Watkins had been taken out so Villa’s attack dissolved. He hadn’t really given advantage so brought play back.That said, he penalised Fern (late)in the 2nd half and I wasn’t sure if that was was a foul.

I usually like to slate the refs and the Prem’s tend to be shite but I though it was swings and roundabouts with Dean. We committed 4 or 5 fouls in the first half that broke up villa’s attempts to get out of defence and likewise Villa committed their share of spoiling fouls too.

I think Zinchenko was fouled for the corner but attackers often get away with them but Mings was pinged for impeding Ederson, that was the right call but soft.
Mings stood in front of Ederson then proceeded to walk backwards into him as the ball was coming over, correct decision
 
Dropped balls are no longer contested yet Dean restarted the game with one, something the commentators applauded and said we should have more off. Tells you all you need to know about the state of the game
It was like one of those rugby melees, when you couldn't see who had the ball until everyone peeled off the pack. But the dropped ball should have been uncontested, to the team whose player last touched the ball. I believe Raheem was touching the ball when everyone else left the pile of players.

If Dean was still unsure, common sense would dictate that the dropped ball should have been uncontested to the defending team. As you say, contested dropped balls are no longer part of the game.

Dean's relationship to the rules reminds me of an old person's understanding of the Highway Code. They just treat it was it was when they first encountered it, with no real regard to any updates that might have been implemented in the prevailing twenty or more years.

Dean likes to be the centre of attention, and the best way to achieve this is through controversy. Look at the United v Southampton league game from February of this year. Southampton player rightly sent off after two minutes. Later, with United 6-0 up in the 86th minute, he sent off Bednarek for a foul on Martial. He even went to the pitch-side monitor to confirm his decision. United scored the penalty, and then got two more goals to win 9-0.

Southampton appealed Bednarek's dismissal, and won the appeal. It was a clear dive by Martial. But why did Dean favour United in that situation? Surely, the benefit of the doubt should have gone to the team that had played with ten players since the second minutes, already losing by 6-0.

This is typical of Dean, wanting to catch the headlines. He doesn't really care about accuracy of decisions, because his retirement is very close. His main priority is to try and keep Riley happy.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.