I accept what you are saying, he expected a free flowing game but if a top referee cannot change his pre match thoughts, he should not be refereeing. That clip above, the same player commits 2 fouls. Neither resulted in a free kick. There was no obvious advantage after the first but I will accept he wanted the game to flow. After the second foul, its a free kick and a yellow. All day every day.
Because Sky, who dictate everything, want a different winner. Arsenal or The Dippers, (they would prefer it to be dips)Can't argue with any of that. Maybe that's why he either looks like a good referee or a terrible one. How many times has he lost control of a high profile game?
I just don't see why this performance would have been deliberately anti-City.
Possibly, but let's not kid ourselves that our league position is down to us and us alone.Because Sky, who dictate everything, want a different winner. Arsenal or The Dippers, (they would prefer it to be dips)
I don't understand why referees need a game plan. Just referee according to the Laws of the Game, and all will be well. The players will know where they stand. The managers will know what's going on and plan accordingly. The assistants will have a much clearer understanding of what's happening. The crowd will appreciate it. Everyone will accept the decisions and the game will be much better for it.I'm not a PGMOL apologist at all as you know, but I tried a while ago to explain what I think happened.
To summarise, he expected a game between two evenly matched teams playing the same sort of game, so he decided before the game to let things go in the expectation that he could do the same, consistently with both teams. His problem was that he didn't read the game. It was clear pretty quickly that it wasn't City vs Arsenal of last year, it was akin to City vs Brentford. He didn't realise that quickly enough, if at all, and so he mismanaged the game. Probably why he handles games either well, when he gets it right, or loses control of so many games, when he doesn't. Not understanding a game isn't a good look for a referee.
I don't believe for a minute that he was out to "get" City. That job is done. The PL has its title race and will have now to the end of the season. No need any more.
Once he was appointed for this game I knew he would ruin a potentially great game.He didn't disappoint!.Can't argue with any of that. Maybe that's why he either looks like a good referee or a terrible one. How many times has he lost control of a high profile game?
I just don't see why this performance would have been deliberately anti-City.
I think this is a very generous assessment.I'm not a PGMOL apologist at all as you know, but I tried a while ago to explain what I think happened.
To summarise, he expected a game between two evenly matched teams playing the same sort of game, so he decided before the game to let things go in the expectation that he could do the same, consistently with both teams. His problem was that he didn't read the game. It was clear pretty quickly that it wasn't City vs Arsenal of last year, it was akin to City vs Brentford. He didn't realise that quickly enough, if at all, and so he mismanaged the game. Probably why he handles games either well, when he gets it right, or loses control of so many games, when he doesn't. Not understanding a game isn't a good look for a referee.
I don't believe for a minute that he was out to "get" City. That job is done. The PL has its title race and will have now to the end of the season. No need any more.
I think this is a very generous assessment.
Because Sky, who dictate everything, want a different winner. Arsenal or The Dippers, (they would prefer it to be dips)
It certainly is...awful performance at Wolves - got nowt - say at least a point dropped. 2 goal lead chucked away against an extremely poor Palace team 2 points dropped. Failure to kill teams off when we were battering them 4 points alone from the murderers and spuds matches.Possibly, but let's not kid ourselves that our league position is down to us and us alone.