Ref Watch City Games - 2023/24

[MadchesterCity]

Well let’s agree to disagree because he got one
So arguing about it changes nothing

Accepting it and not challenging inconsistencies and injustice is also detrimental

 

[cleavers]

Was that when Eddie made a save? I said straight away what if Eddie got injured? It will happen at some point.

Yes I think so, a block at the players feet, and yes it will happen to someone.

 

[bluenova]

The painfully obvious explanation is that someone other than Hooper made that decision, and on the balance of probabilities the obvious answer is usually the truth.

Given that he began to slow down, and put the whistle to his mouth almost as soon as Haaland plays the ball, then this "someone" had to have made the decision and told him, in the second that elapsed between the foul and Haaland getting into a position to kick the ball.

At that point there were six players ahead of the ball - Jack and five Spurs players. Three of those players were near Jack, and two of them were ahead of him. Jack was still in his own half.

Could this "someone" see the future, or did are you suggesting it's so obvious at that stage that letting the pass go ahead would be more dangerous than a free kick from which City could move most of their players up the pitch? So obvious that they would risk highlighting their corrupt interference in the game?

I think you might have fallen off the wrong side of Occam's razor.

 

[cleavers]

Have I stumbled onto RAWK?

Get a grip, there is no conspiracy the referees just make mistakes.

More like "stumbled off" it.

Anyone who believes that was a mistake probably still believes in the tooth fairy.

 

[hello]

I really don't see an alternative explanation. The referee initially made the correct decision (play advantage). Then he decided to stop play when he saw we had a goalscoring opportunity. This is the exact opposite of what it says in his rule book.

In addition, there is very little talk of bribery. Corruption comes in subtle ways, for example, the PL talking of having a new winner every x number of years. The PL might say they think a team winning four consecutive titles is bad for the game. Once that gets back out to the referees, they know they can act with impunity in certain scenarios.

There is also the possibility that Webb might not be acting with complete integrity.

I doubt Webb could even spell integrity never mind display any.

 

[Zabbasbeard]

No ones answering. In that split second he gave that decision, how was it corrupt? Was he ordered prior to the game to fuck us over? Was it an instruction in his ear piece ? Rather than just shouting CORRUPT, how do YOU think its corrupt

He waved play on then stopped playing when Grealish was clean through. Wake up.

 

[laplandblue]

One possibly wrong decision in our favour over the last 10 years (that was actually the correct decision according to the rules in place that season) allows all bad decisions against us to be ignored.

Exactly.

 

[EdersonsSmiley]

More like "stumbled off" it.

Anyone who believes that was a mistake probably still believes in the tooth fairy.

Anyone who believes there is a refereeing conspiracy against Manchester City probably believes that PGMOL is run by lizard people and the earth is flat.

 

[tweety]

The fact we'll never find out the reason behind him stopping the game shows the complete contempt the football authorities have for the fan. Much better to have things in the open so lessons can be learnt. There's been enough controversy this season that surely we can't be far away from this.

 

[meltonblue]

You seem to be deliberately missing the point that he made a decision to allow play to continue. He puts his whistle to his lips when Haaland is fouled but does not blow. Instead, Haaland gets to his feet and the referee signals advantage.

At that point, his decision has been made. No free kick, advantage played.

He cannot then go back to award the free kick, because he has already decided not to penalise the offending team.

The only way he can give the free kick is if he had not already made the decision to play an advantage.

But he had.

I’m not missing the point, you’re focussing on the wrong bit. Like I’ve said several times him waiving play on does not mean his decision has been made. He can still employ wait and see if the advantage doesn’t materialise in the immediate next phase.

If that pass from Haaland goes straight to a spurs player, he can still choose to bring it back too. It's always been a referees choice - some don’t play advantage hardly ever, some allow the wait and see to go longer than others. What he can’t do is allow play to continue past that next phase and then bring it back, (as in until Grealish gets the shot away or gets tackled for example).