Those who think there's no agenda need to read this...

[tony de wonderful]

We have previously blogged that Peter Walton, in the last 22 matches where he has refereed City or United, has produced 0 City victories and 0 United defeats

That is pretty daft really. A referee does not 'produce' a result he is only one factor in the result. Another thing is that statistics do not prove anything, all we can say unless presented with more evidence is that statistics show casual relationships.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

From the Football Is Fixed blog Link

The three core referees whose match performances exhibit (obviously unintentional) bias in favour of Manchester United continue to be utilised in favour of the Red Devils despite the retirement of Red Walton.

Having been given Howard Webb as referee or dominant 4th official to a very junior referee in the last three Premier League games, the EPL have made Chris Foy the 4th official for the next match at Eastlands versus West Bromwich Albion.

This is key for two reasons.

Firstly, even though Fred Done has paid out on a United triumph, the combination of Arsenal away and Foy on the Albion should neatly terminate interest.

Secondly, any sendings off or players reaching the level of a ban for bookings will mean such individuals miss the Manchester derby. Ferguson wants more revenge and continues to be willing to bring the game into disrepute in so doing. In 2012, City have not won any match where one of the Old Trafford Three are in charge.

What a weird fluke!

And on 25th March Link:

Why Manchester City Will Not Win The Title

Since Man Utd lost to Blackburn and Newcastle, things have changed...

We have previously blogged that Peter Walton, in the last 22 matches where he has refereed City or United, has produced 0 City victories and 0 United defeats, but there are two (possibly three) other PGMOB referees with a marked bias in decision making in favour of the Old Trafford club - Chris Foy, Howard Webb and Anthony Taylor are the men in question.

In the 11 league matches since Newcastle/Blackburn (including the City/Utd FA Cup tie as it is pertinent to the argument), Manchester United have been given Walton, Webb, Foy or Taylor (WWFT) as referee/4th official for 8 of those matches.
WWFT gives United 6 wins 1 draw 0 defeats with Fulham to come!!!

We list these matches, results and match decisions at the end of this blog. In the same period, Manchester City have won 8 out of 9 league matches when not subjected to any of the WWFT team.

On the three occasions where WWFT have intervened, City lost at Everton, drew at Stoke and were mugged by Foy in the FA Cup match.
City 8 wins 0 draws 1 defeat without WWFT versus City 0 wins 1 draw 2 defeats with WWFT!!!

This is not normal. And the match decisions merely enhance our case that the 2011/12 Premier League title is a sham.

Man Utd Matches Refereed By WWFT Since Newcastle/Blackburn

Man City Won (Sending Off in Favour of United) Foy - referee.
Bolton Won (Penalty in Favour of United) Walton - referee.
Stoke Won (2 Penalties in Favour of United) Foy - 4th official to junior referee.
Chelsea Drew (2 Penalties in Favour of United) Webb - referee.
Liverpool Won Taylor - 4th official.
West Brom Won (Sending Off and Penalty in Favour of United) Foy - 4th official to junior referee.
Wolves Won (Sending off in Favour of United) Taylor - referee; Webb - 4th official.
Fulham on Monday night - Webb - 4th official to junior referee.

I have to say that as someone who tries to see all sides to an argument, the longer this season continues the more I lose my faith in referees. I truly hope they are impartial, but I'm finding it more difficult to believe they act impartially.

It worries me enormously that whether they know it or not they are acting in a way that does give certain clubs an advantage. I questioned their consistency earlier in the season and expressed my desire to see proper use of video technology in games - I cannot see any logicaly reason why any football manager would not want this.

They could have a proper tennis like appeal system which allowed a manager to raise a set number of challenges per game (1 per half?). If they are proved correct the original decision is reversed and they get the opportunity for further appeals. If they are wrong, then they lose their appeal and play continues as planned (or with a free kick to their opponents).

This could easily have been accomodated in Utd's last game and would have proved the penalty should not have been given because of the offside.

City and similarly minded clubs should push for this now.

I'm pretty sure all the managers (Fergie & Wenger included) have said they would like the use of such technology. In particular, goal-line technology.

Why would Fergie support such a thing if it meant possible favouritism could be reduced?

 

[Pigeonho]

Its all about 'context' and that is the thing you are missing. The time added on in the game you mention was clearly to and for the benefit of united. We were happy with a draw away at OT united were not, united were dominating in this particular period of the game and hence the added time, more than likely, was to benefit the rags, and not us, and so it proved.

Had it been clearly obvious at the time that 6 minutes was more than justified then you wouldnt have heard a complaint from me but no one at the time could understand where the extra minutes when there had been no injuries, came from - that was the first time i had heard substitutions used to justify extra 'injury' time.

Clearly wrong decisions are made by all referees but this in no way justifies the amount of times the rags seem to benefit from in some cases outrageous decisions and how few times they are seemingly on the end of wrong ones.

Ok then, so what did Martin Atkinson have to gain from adding that time 'clearly for the benefit of United'?

1. So's he didn't get shouted at off Fergie? (that regularly gets said on here, that grown men fear being shouted at off another grown man)

2. Because 'he's a rag ****'

3. So he gets another United game because he won't have been shouted at off Fergie

4. Because he needs/wants/has been told to make City fail?

5. So he can sleep well at night knowing Sky will shove a few grand into his account for keeping their cash cow up top?

6. Any of the above?

7. Any other reason?


Oh, and what if we had scored? What would have happened then?

This has been answered several times. It's not about a conspiracy or agenda, it's about referees succumbing to external pressures, imaginary or not, such as: the media, fans, managers, importance of a match to a particular club, status of a particular club etc coupled with internal pressures such as: not wanting to fucking up on a big stage; wanting to referee high-profile matches; knows that he can give a decision against a particular player and if it's wrong then, so what, there are no repercussions, see Barton, Balotelli, Shawcross et al.

Would you succumb? I have often, (and i'm sure many a Blue have), wished I was Andy D'urso that time when Stam and Keane went for him. There's fucking no way I would have backed away and looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights. I'd have given it back, whether its worth losing my job or not i'd have given it to those cunts that day. He succumbed that day, but I can't believe that refs succumb mainly at Old Trafford or mainly for united, as it would mean they are complete and utter shit heads and if people like your good self and many others could see it so blatantly, surely their bosses would too and simply not appoint them to United matches anymore? If I was a ref, (take away the City fan in me and pretend I support Sheff Wed for example), and got a match at OT, I couldn't give a flying fuck what got wrote about me, what Taggart said or anything else for that matter - I would simply call what I saw, whether pro or against United or their rivals that game. I'm a meer 34 year old bloke from Manchester, yet I am confident I would handle the pressures on me if refereeing was my chosen profession, otherwise I would have sacked it off if the pressures were too much. The actual refs in place then, are they all sucking at the United teet so's not to spoil their future chances of reffing them?

 

[Dubai Blue]

This has been answered several times. It's not about a conspiracy or agenda, it's about referees succumbing to external pressures, imaginary or not, such as: the media, fans, managers, importance of a match to a particular club, status of a particular club etc coupled with internal pressures such as: not wanting to fucking up on a big stage; wanting to referee high-profile matches; knows that he can give a decision against a particular player and if it's wrong then, so what, there are no repercussions, see Barton, Balotelli, Shawcross et al.

I can certainly see undeniable aspects in that, but most of them are simply down to human nature.

How, for example, would you prevent referees being influenced by what they read in the media? You can't. How do you prevent them from succumbing to the collective will of 75,000 people breathing down their neck? You can't.

Do I think it's wrong that England 'stars' like Gerrard, Rooney, Lampard (and before them Shearer), get preferential treatment from referees/FA panels when compared to the Bartons and Balotellis of this world? Abolsutely. But I don't think that's the particular 'agenda' that most people on here are getting all upset about.

 

[ardwickboy]

People are beginning to talk about the EPL becoming like the Italian league just a few years ago, when money was changing hands and certain teams kept getting the decisions in their favour.....................just saying like.

 

[tony de wonderful]

Yep Webb is the wost for that, he's a boot-licker to the footie and media establishment. Invariably that means not upsetting anyone important to much and going with the status quo (i.e pleasing the big clubs like United). I really think the guy is a toad and I have no respect for him. Webb is too much about Webb.

 

[Nascent Blues]

Yeah but everyone says it United who get all the decisions and that we don't! So on that basis then every ref must be a United fan, thus hating City. That is the general opinion on here that United get ALL of the decisions in their favour. That, of course, is complete bollocks. They get decision for and against them like we do and like all of the other clubs do. Thing is though, as said re Atkinson, refs aren't labelled Blues on here when we get decisions for us, it's as though people just need to feel we are hated and that United are loved. Why that would be I have no idea.

This is where I disagree. I posted in another thread about how if you lost 10 quid on the 1st of January you wouldn't expect to find exactly 10 quid over the following year. To actually assume that decisions even themselves out is totally fucking illogical - why would they? I also mentioned in an earlier post about Salford (and other small rugby league teams),over many years, getting relatively fuck all, because the top teams invariably get the rub of the green. It has been, is and will be the same in football. To say that the top, established teams, don't come up trumps with regards to decisions over an entire season just doesn't bear out what I witness on a weekly basis.

From where I'm reading he has not said that. He's just sad that team get decision for and against them. He's not mentioning numbers.

I don't buy into the 'it evens itself out over a season' nonsense either.

What baffles me is how there's always a 'sly' reason why decisions are given against United.

1. To even things out which have happened earlier in the season
2. Because it has happened a time in the game which gives the opposition no time to bounce back
3. Because the ref knows he's already given a bad decision in favour of them, he preceeds to give small, irrelevant decisions against them to make it look fair.

There always seems to be a reason why they've been awarded decisions against them instead of just saying, unlucky.

What's the point in mentioning it then? It's obvious that teams, over a game or entire season, get both correct/incorrect decisions for and against them. The issue is the very 'numbers' that he didn't mention, can you not see that? If in one game a particular team gets 2 shit calls but 10 great calls then the other team's seriously fucked off. Multiply this over a season and that's some important 'numbers'. In other words, if you get 55% + of favourable decisions over an entire season then that is one big fuck off bonus and puts others at an immediate disadvantage. If the same teams, year on fucking year get the same advantage then you can see why I believe there is an inherent bias (others call it an agenda which I personally don't believe in) in our game.

 

[Pigeonho]

Yep Webb is the wost for that, he's a boot-licker to the footie and media establishment. Invariably that means not upsetting anyone important to much and going with the status quo (i.e pleasing the big clubs like United). I really think the guy is a toad and I have no respect for him. Webb is too much about Webb.

Are we not a big club then? What about our newly found worldwide appeal, would he not want to be seen to promote that if he was all about licking the current arse to lick?

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Yep Webb is the wost for that, he's a boot-licker to the footie and media establishment. Invariably that means not upsetting anyone important to much and going with the status quo (i.e pleasing the big clubs like United). I really think the guy is a toad and I have no respect for him. Webb is too much about Webb.

I think he upset a lot of people when he refused to send off NDJ for a karate kick in the WORLD CUP FINAL (a match in which only the world's best referees can take part in).

I might be wrong but I'm sure he explained his decision as to why he didn't.

Yes, he's made mistakes. As have most referees (unfortunately too much in some instances). That doesn't take away from the fact that he's a top class ref.

What you mean 'too much about Webb'? I don't think he's a bottler, I think he's prone to mistakes.

Hey, even Collina made the odd gaff but he was also an 'I don't fuck about' referee and look at the respece he earned throughout his career.

I'd give anything to have 20 Collina's in the premier league and I'd much rather have a Webb than a Foy, Walton & Clattenburg.

 

[Nascent Blues]

This has been answered several times. It's not about a conspiracy or agenda, it's about referees succumbing to external pressures, imaginary or not, such as: the media, fans, managers, importance of a match to a particular club, status of a particular club etc coupled with internal pressures such as: not wanting to fucking up on a big stage; wanting to referee high-profile matches; knows that he can give a decision against a particular player and if it's wrong then, so what, there are no repercussions, see Barton, Balotelli, Shawcross et al.

I can certainly see undeniable aspects in that, but most of them are simply down to human nature.

How, for example, would you prevent referees being influenced by what they read in the media? You can't. How do you prevent them from succumbing to the collective will of 75,000 people breathing down their neck? You can't.

Do I think it's wrong that England 'stars' like Gerrard, Rooney, Lampard (and before them Shearer), get preferential treatment from referees/FA panels when compared to the Bartons and Balotellis of this world? Abolsutely. But I don't think that's the particular 'agenda' that most people on here are getting all upset about.

I've already said, on numerous occasions, that the word agenda is unhelpful. But, whether unwittingly or not, you have just backed up what I have been saying all along, and that is certain teams and players DO get preferential treatment. Once you admit that you have to come to the conclusion that certain teams are better placed than others and that certain referees are not wholly impartial.

There is no agenda.

There is however instances, to a greater degree for some teams, of subconscious/conscious bias made manifest in the particular decisions made by particular referees - or a culimination of decisions that when added together ultimately leads to the same outcome - a positive, unwarrented and undeserved advantage for one particular team to the detriment of another.