so this agenda thing.

[OB1]

I wrote exactly the same thing about the way we play a number of pages back. Being aggressive in the challenge to win the ball back, rather than defending deep and inviting teams on, will naturally result in mistimed challenges. Its natural we run the risk of picking up yellow cards playing this way.

Clattenburg was a closet red one week ago and Mike Dean was a good ref. We have heard little of Clattenburgs bias this week and now Dean is part of the conspiracy. Who got to him over the last week?

I saw that post last night and agreed with it, Frank, but couldn't respond as my Ipad was going crazy. It's actually a discussion which merits a new thread because it gives the manager difficult decisions.

Against Liverpool and Newcastle the only real pressure they had were freekicks around our box, for the reason you gave.

The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away.

the players are walking a bit of a tightrope. When we start to score goals properly, which will happen, it will be much less of an issue of course.

With respect, on the Stoke goal, Dinho got his body shape all wrong and Hart fucked up; both things being far more significant than avoiding fouling.

The way that we try to defend and Pellers demands for his team to be aggressive are bound to lead to a certain amount of fouls that could be avoided if we sat off our opponents more. I prefer us to be aggressive but I do think we give too many stupid free kicks away.

As to Mike Dean, he had a poor game on Sunday. Zab's sending off was a joke: one can debate the validity of the second booking but the first was unmerited because Hazard clearly runs into Zab. Quire how Costa's foul on Dzeko in their box went unpunished is beyond me. However, Dean is usually a good ref for us.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

...The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away..

you will recall that Fernandino had already been booked in accordance with the agenda -otherwise Diouf would have been in a heap crying for his Mame

I'm not even surprised that every booking is now part of your agenda, rather just the important ones ;-)

 

[franksinatra]

I wrote exactly the same thing about the way we play a number of pages back. Being aggressive in the challenge to win the ball back, rather than defending deep and inviting teams on, will naturally result in mistimed challenges. Its natural we run the risk of picking up yellow cards playing this way.

Clattenburg was a closet red one week ago and Mike Dean was a good ref. We have heard little of Clattenburgs bias this week and now Dean is part of the conspiracy. Who got to him over the last week?

I saw that post last night and agreed with it, Frank, but couldn't respond as my Ipad was going crazy. It's actually a discussion which merits a new thread because it gives the manager difficult decisions.

Against Liverpool and Newcastle the only real pressure they had were freekicks around our box, for the reason you gave.

The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away.

the players are walking a bit of a tightrope. When we start to score goals properly, which will happen, it will be much less of an issue of course.

Exactly the key will be getting the first goal as allowing teams to come on to us at that point will be less of an issue as the onerous will not be on us to break them down.

Also from watching our new centre half you can see the sound logic behind the purchase, if this is the tactic we intend to follow, as he appears physical, strong in the challenge and importantly has the speed to recover.

Last season we played like this for the first part of the season and then it seemed to taper off. Whether this was due to the difficulties of playing three times a week, risk of booking and sendings off or due to the fat we often scored early I am not too sure. However it will be interesting to see how we play over the course of this season as the signing of Mangala, and the way he plays, indicates this maybe the norm.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

I wrote exactly the same thing about the way we play a number of pages back. Being aggressive in the challenge to win the ball back, rather than defending deep and inviting teams on, will naturally result in mistimed challenges. Its natural we run the risk of picking up yellow cards playing this way.

Clattenburg was a closet red one week ago and Mike Dean was a good ref. We have heard little of Clattenburgs bias this week and now Dean is part of the conspiracy. Who got to him over the last week?

I saw that post last night and agreed with it, Frank, but couldn't respond as my Ipad was going crazy. It's actually a discussion which merits a new thread because it gives the manager difficult decisions.

Against Liverpool and Newcastle the only real pressure they had were freekicks around our box, for the reason you gave.

The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away.

the players are walking a bit of a tightrope. When we start to score goals properly, which will happen, it will be much less of an issue of course.

With respect, on the Stoke goal, Dinho got his body shape all wrong and Hart fucked up; both things being far more significant than avoiding fouling.

The way that we try to defend and Pellers demands for his team to be aggressive are bound to lead to a certain amount of fouls that could be avoided if we sat off our opponents more. I prefer us to be aggressive but I do think we give too many stupid free kicks away.

As to Mike Dean, he had a poor game on Sunday. Zab's sending off was a joke: one can debate the validity of the second booking but the first was unmerited because Hazard clearly runs into Zab. Quire how Costa's foul on Dzeko in their box went unpunished is beyond me. However, Dean is usually a good ref for us.

Dean has regularly been lauded on here as a decent ref, and probably the best of the lot. However in true BM style, one bad day at the office and he's suddenly under instruction to destroy City.

Clattenberg was the bent one last week, however I'd just prefer to label him as shit, just as his performance at Leicester this weekend was. Again however, as is par for the course, Clattenberg was not bent this weekend, and got the decisions correct.

The "YCNMIU" acronym does wind me up, however its rather apt here.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I wrote exactly the same thing about the way we play a number of pages back. Being aggressive in the challenge to win the ball back, rather than defending deep and inviting teams on, will naturally result in mistimed challenges. Its natural we run the risk of picking up yellow cards playing this way.

Clattenburg was a closet red one week ago and Mike Dean was a good ref. We have heard little of Clattenburgs bias this week and now Dean is part of the conspiracy. Who got to him over the last week?

I saw that post last night and agreed with it, Frank, but couldn't respond as my Ipad was going crazy. It's actually a discussion which merits a new thread because it gives the manager difficult decisions.

Against Liverpool and Newcastle the only real pressure they had were freekicks around our box, for the reason you gave.

The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away.

the players are walking a bit of a tightrope. When we start to score goals properly, which will happen, it will be much less of an issue of course.

With respect, on the Stoke goal, Dinho got his body shape all wrong and Hart fucked up; both things being far more significant than avoiding fouling.

The way that we try to defend and Pellers demands for his team to be aggressive are bound to lead to a certain amount of fouls that could be avoided if we sat off our opponents more. I prefer us to be aggressive but I do think we give too many stupid free kicks away.

As to Mike Dean, he had a poor game on Sunday. Zab's sending off was a joke: one can debate the validity of the second booking but the first was unmerited because Hazard clearly runs into Zab. Quire how Costa's foul on Dzeko in their box went unpunished is beyond me. However, Dean is usually a good ref for us.

I've never seen the Stoke goal since the game, so I'm happy to accept your take on it. Like you, I'd been concerned at the cheap free kicks against Liverpool and Newcastle and I remember as they broke shouting "Don't foul him! Don'e foul him!" at which point they didn't, and they scored, leaving me thinking "You should have fouled him"...

Dean was appalling on Sunday. We've had almost nothing but appalling refereeing all season so far. But it won't stay like this. They aren't corrupt but they are struggling to cope with the modern game. And they are a bit stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea: they blow for everything in the letter of the law and they are spoiling games and not using common sense. They let the game flow and they let something go which creates a goal.

We've had both of those types of refs in the last week.

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

after 38 minutes both teams had two players booked so that respect both teams were walking tightropes

i will add by half time we had another two bookings

but it certainly wasn't all one way

The way we play doesn't help our cause any either. The two most relentlessly punished fouls in the game now are going through the back of players and the cynical pull back to stop the opposition counterattacking. We play the highest defensive line in the league, with the back 4 defending on the front foot, trying to get in in front of the opposition forwards. Fouls and yellow cards are an inevitable consequence of this.

I also don't subscribe to the notion that referees are cheats. They may be shit, they may succumb to pressure, they may make mistakes, but deliberate cheating? Nah. Even Clattenfuck was pretty reasonable for the first 45 down at the Emirates the other day and for a supposed rag he had a nice line in awarding penalties against them this weekend. The notion also that Mike Dean 'cheated' us against Chelsea is too risible for words. Over the course of the last 10 years he's given us more soft decisions than any other referee on the planet. Some you win, some you lose.
There are 2 or 3 exceptions however. Mason and Taylor are rags, it's that simple. Taylor even used to go to the Swamp to watch them as a kid, and yet they pass themselves off as Bolton and Altrincham fans in order to officiate at the Etihad and Old Nafford, and they never give us anything. We really should make more of a fuss about those two. The only other referee to consistently grind my gears over the course of the last 10 years was, ironically (given that some City fans seemed determined to venerate him) was Mark fucking Halsey. From Gillingham to his retirement, he diddled us left, right and centre.

You're making subjective assertions to justify our high card count I'm presenting you with facts. The team with the highest amount of possession gets the 2nd highest amount of yellow cards and that doesn't in any way strike you as strange? I would suggest it probably bucks any trend since these type of stats were collected. Clattenburg gave two penalties to Leicester that were penalties and neither of them were game defining at the point they were taken.

Zabaleta's second foul was a foul nothing more, nothing less. He didn't leave the floor, raise his foot stop in a professional manner a promising attack. He simply attempted to get round costa to win the ball and fouled him in the process. Dean for whatever reason saw that as an opportunity to send our player off at precisely the moment we started to look like we would go on and win the match.

Let's take Bayern munichs booking count for last season who equally play a high pressing game, they accrued 45 bookings last season so that would seem to negate that theory.

I'll give you my interpretation, we get booked for tackles that are nothing more than fouls and in many cases are a result of players throwing themselves to the floor to win fouls and the referees are looking for any reason to book our players that immediately puts them treading a tightrope to not get booked for the remainder of the game and stifling their game in the process.

In the face of pretty damning statistics you continue to try and defend the status quo. Unbelievable.

LOL! Stats without context are like most of your contributions to this forum; somewhat lacking. Government stats on unemployment appear to constitute evidence of sound economic policy, until you look at the corresponding surge in the numbers of people in part time work, on zero hours contracts, or incapacity benefit. There was a fall in the number of people claiming asylum in 2011. Evidence of a tougher Government stance on immigration as touted, or merely a reflection of the fact that the visa regime on foreign students was relaxed at the same time, providing otherwise would be claimants with a legitimate route into the UK?

Whatever, several posters have provided you with a footballing explanation for our booking levels. If you choose to believe in a City hating refereeing agenda instead though........

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

The way we play doesn't help our cause any either. The two most relentlessly punished fouls in the game now are going through the back of players and the cynical pull back to stop the opposition counterattacking. We play the highest defensive line in the league, with the back 4 defending on the front foot, trying to get in in front of the opposition forwards. Fouls and yellow cards are an inevitable consequence of this.

I also don't subscribe to the notion that referees are cheats. They may be shit, they may succumb to pressure, they may make mistakes, but deliberate cheating? Nah. Even Clattenfuck was pretty reasonable for the first 45 down at the Emirates the other day and for a supposed rag he had a nice line in awarding penalties against them this weekend. The notion also that Mike Dean 'cheated' us against Chelsea is too risible for words. Over the course of the last 10 years he's given us more soft decisions than any other referee on the planet. Some you win, some you lose.
There are 2 or 3 exceptions however. Mason and Taylor are rags, it's that simple. Taylor even used to go to the Swamp to watch them as a kid, and yet they pass themselves off as Bolton and Altrincham fans in order to officiate at the Etihad and Old Nafford, and they never give us anything. We really should make more of a fuss about those two. The only other referee to consistently grind my gears over the course of the last 10 years was, ironically (given that some City fans seemed determined to venerate him) was Mark fucking Halsey. From Gillingham to his retirement, he diddled us left, right and centre.

You're making subjective assertions to justify our high card count I'm presenting you with facts. The team with the highest amount of possession gets the 2nd highest amount of yellow cards and that doesn't in any way strike you as strange? I would suggest it probably bucks any trend since these type of stats were collected. Clattenburg gave two penalties to Leicester that were penalties and neither of them were game defining at the point they were taken.

Zabaleta's second foul was a foul nothing more, nothing less. He didn't leave the floor, raise his foot stop in a professional manner a promising attack. He simply attempted to get round costa to win the ball and fouled him in the process. Dean for whatever reason saw that as an opportunity to send our player off at precisely the moment we started to look like we would go on and win the match.

Let's take Bayern munichs booking count for last season who equally play a high pressing game, they accrued 45 bookings last season so that would seem to negate that theory.

I'll give you my interpretation, we get booked for tackles that are nothing more than fouls and in many cases are a result of players throwing themselves to the floor to win fouls and the referees are looking for any reason to book our players that immediately puts them treading a tightrope to not get booked for the remainder of the game and stifling their game in the process.

In the face of pretty damning statistics you continue to try and defend the status quo. Unbelievable.

LOL! Stats without context are like most of your contributions to this forum; somewhat lacking. Government stats on unemployment appear to constitute evidence of sound economic policy, until you look at the corresponding surge in the numbers of people in part time work, on zero hours contracts, or incapacity benefit. There was a fall in the number of people claiming asylum in 2011. Evidence of a tougher Government stance on immigration, or merely a reflection of the fact that the visa regime on foreign students was relaxed at the same time, providing otherwise would be claimants with a legitimate route into the UK?

Whatever, several posters have provided you with a footballing explanation for our booking levels. If you choose to believe in a City hating refereeing agenda instead though........

When you realise you're actually trying to debate with someone who has admitted he proactively searches for anything anti United related in the media before he's even had his rusks and cow & gate milk, you'll start to understand why posts in the manner he does.

 

[tonea2003]

...The goal Stoke scored was because we didn't dive in and give a foul away..

you will recall that Fernandino had already been booked in accordance with the agenda (possibly) - otherwise Diouf would have been in a heap crying for his Mame

good grief man he was booked after 52 minutes,

when depths are needed to be plumbed you plumb em!!

 

[squirtyflower]

c'mon mate you can't have it both ways!
if ferna was rightly booked the timing is irrelevant
the other 3 were booked in a 8 minute period up to the 38th minute
mike dean set his stall out wrongly by being too card happy too early if he had carried on as was then we would have had 7 v 7 by the end, hence your fabregas issue
he had a bad day at the office

I'm not having it both ways, unless you are seeing something I didn't post?

He was right to book Ferdy, end of

He was wrong to allow Fabregas to go unpunished for the same offence on three separate occasions

How is that having it both ways? I want the ref to be fair, Dean was far from it. To say he had a bad day office is to allow the likes of him and Clattenberg to do this regularly and get away with it.

If I acted as impartially as Dean did on Sunday at put it down to a bad day at the office, I'd now have a grievance from the union on my desk.

for what he was booking players for in the latter part of the first half then all 11 on each side would have been booked by the end of the match
he had made a rod for his own back so let a few go he shouldn't have
not sure what you mean by not evenly distributed, numbers wise or time wise?

An interesting way of twisting a meaning, unless, of course, you didn't understand it in the first place

By evenly distributed I would mean that the referee deems foul A to be a booking
A little later on in the game foul B is committed, an almost carbon copy of foul A, but receives no retribution seems to be less than even handed
It becomes more sickening when fouls C and D are then committed in the exact same way by the same player and nothing is done about it.

You even admit to 'him letting a few go he shouldn't have'
Where does that sentiment change from a bad day at the office to a lack of even distribution

If you genuinely believe he let a few go he shouldn't have then there's something seriously wrong with his refereeing as it implies a bias he was aware of rather than just a paucity of performance.

 

[Blue Mooner]

The way we play doesn't help our cause any either. The two most relentlessly punished fouls in the game now are going through the back of players and the cynical pull back to stop the opposition counterattacking. We play the highest defensive line in the league, with the back 4 defending on the front foot, trying to get in in front of the opposition forwards. Fouls and yellow cards are an inevitable consequence of this.

I also don't subscribe to the notion that referees are cheats. They may be shit, they may succumb to pressure, they may make mistakes, but deliberate cheating? Nah. Even Clattenfuck was pretty reasonable for the first 45 down at the Emirates the other day and for a supposed rag he had a nice line in awarding penalties against them this weekend. The notion also that Mike Dean 'cheated' us against Chelsea is too risible for words. Over the course of the last 10 years he's given us more soft decisions than any other referee on the planet. Some you win, some you lose.
There are 2 or 3 exceptions however. Mason and Taylor are rags, it's that simple. Taylor even used to go to the Swamp to watch them as a kid, and yet they pass themselves off as Bolton and Altrincham fans in order to officiate at the Etihad and Old Nafford, and they never give us anything. We really should make more of a fuss about those two. The only other referee to consistently grind my gears over the course of the last 10 years was, ironically (given that some City fans seemed determined to venerate him) was Mark fucking Halsey. From Gillingham to his retirement, he diddled us left, right and centre.

You're making subjective assertions to justify our high card count I'm presenting you with facts. The team with the highest amount of possession gets the 2nd highest amount of yellow cards and that doesn't in any way strike you as strange? I would suggest it probably bucks any trend since these type of stats were collected. Clattenburg gave two penalties to Leicester that were penalties and neither of them were game defining at the point they were taken.

Zabaleta's second foul was a foul nothing more, nothing less. He didn't leave the floor, raise his foot stop in a professional manner a promising attack. He simply attempted to get round costa to win the ball and fouled him in the process. Dean for whatever reason saw that as an opportunity to send our player off at precisely the moment we started to look like we would go on and win the match.

Let's take Bayern munichs booking count for last season who equally play a high pressing game, they accrued 45 bookings last season so that would seem to negate that theory.

I'll give you my interpretation, we get booked for tackles that are nothing more than fouls and in many cases are a result of players throwing themselves to the floor to win fouls and the referees are looking for any reason to book our players that immediately puts them treading a tightrope to not get booked for the remainder of the game and stifling their game in the process.

In the face of pretty damning statistics you continue to try and defend the status quo. Unbelievable.

LOL! Stats without context are like most of your contributions to this forum; somewhat lacking. Government stats on unemployment appear to constitute evidence of sound economic policy, until you look at the corresponding surge in the numbers of people in part time work, on zero hours contracts, or incapacity benefit. There was a fall in the number of people claiming asylum in 2011. Evidence of a tougher Government stance on immigration as touted, or merely a reflection of the fact that the visa regime on foreign students was relaxed at the same time, providing otherwise would be claimants with a legitimate route into the UK?

Whatever, several posters have provided you with a footballing explanation for our booking levels. If you choose to believe in a City hating refereeing agenda instead though........

Don't think your government analogy really works but nice try, like I haven't heard of the phrase lies, damn lies and statistics. Interestingly, no one, other than the usual childish jibes, can actually provide a sensible explanation as to why there is this strange anomaly other than we play a pressing game.

When I point out that Bayern Munich play a pressing game but they have significantly less yellow cards people conveniently ignore that because it doesn't suit their 'theory'. Plus I don't think anyone could argue we played this style last season.

If I further point out that nearly 49% of our yellows come in the first half (meaning we play for significantly longer on a disciplinary tightrope - incidentally the highest % in the league) and the other top 4 teams were in the lower half of the table for bookings as you would expect, that is also down to our pressing style I presume?

But no, we play a much more pressing game than everyone else.....Yeh, that must be the reason.....