United's Corrupt Points Tally.. +4

Can we add the ref and var official to the Ops post
Wolves-
Hooper and Salisbury who both got removed from the following game

Today.
Attwell and Rob Jones
 
You can just about make an argument for the penalty (although it would never be given at the other end), but the red card is bullshit. Covering defender, keeper blatantly getting there first.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
You can just about make an argument for the penalty (although it would never be given at the other end), but the red card is bullshit. Covering defender, keeper blatantly getting there first.
Click to expand...
I personally think there is more an argument for the red card (though, I still think it wasn’t one) than for the penalty, which was very much a case of Rashford initiating contact as the defender tried to avoid him. And almost every pundit agrees it shouldn’t have been a penalty, whilst they seem split on the red card.

But we all knew they were going to go in whatever direction would help a struggling United at home that was looking down the barrel of 3 points from 9 to start the season (2 of which at that point was also down to a highly suspect decision not to give a penalty at the death against Onana).
 
I'm With Stupid said:
You can just about make an argument for the penalty (although it would never be given at the other end), but the red card is bullshit. Covering defender, keeper blatantly getting there first.
Click to expand...
I
SebastianBlue said:
I personally think there is more an argument for the red card (though, I still think it wasn’t one) than for the penalty, which was very much a case of Rashford initiating contact as the defender tried to avoid him. And almost every pundit agrees it shouldn’t have been a penalty, whilst they seem split on the red card.

But we all knew they were going to go in whatever direction would help a struggling United at home that was looking down the barrel of 3 points from 9 to start the season (2 of which at that point was also down to a highly suspect decision not to give a penalty at the death against Onana).
Click to expand...
They shud av had a pen at Spuds (apparently)
 
I'm With Stupid said:
You can just about make an argument for the penalty (although it would never be given at the other end), but the red card is bullshit. Covering defender, keeper blatantly getting there first.
Click to expand...
Martin Keown has said it was a blatant dive. He couldn't believe Var didn't call it. I started laughing at that point but then it turned to anger. 2 draws turned into 2 wins
 
SebastianBlue said:
I personally think there is more an argument for the red card (though, I still think it wasn’t one) than for the penalty, which was very much a case of Rashford initiating contact as the defender tried to avoid him. And almost every pundit agrees it shouldn’t have been a penalty, whilst they seem split on the red card.

But we all knew they were going to go in whatever direction would help a struggling United at home that was looking down the barrel of 3 points from 9 to start the season (2 of which at that point was also down to a highly suspect decision not to give a penalty at the death against Onana).
Click to expand...

This is where it helps to look at the rules I think.

The DOGSO rule has four criteria, all of which must be satisfied. Remember, this is denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Not denying a possible goal-scoring opportunity. From Law 12:
  • distance between the offence and the goal
No issue here, Fernandes is close enough to the goal to have a chance of scoring
  • general direction of the play
Again no issue, they are running towards the goal when the foul happens
  • likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
There has to be no doubt here in the referee's mind that Fernandes will not only gain control of the ball, but keep control of it. He can't possibly determine this with certainty when the ball is a lofty curled pass heading into an area with 2-3 players in close proximity.
  • location and number of defenders
Again, there are simply too many players in the general vicinity for this criteria to be satisfied. He has to be effectively by himself and he isn't.

If pundits are arguing "Fernandes probably gets there first" then that is simply not a high enough bar to meet the requirements of this rule. There has to be literally no shred of doubt in the referee's mind that he is getting there first. He can't be on this occasion, there are far too many variables.
 
SkyBlueFlux said:
This is where it helps to look at the rules I think.

The DOGSO rule has four criteria, all of which must be satisfied. Remember, this is denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Not denying a possible goal-scoring opportunity. From Law 12:
  • distance between the offence and the goal
No issue here, Fernandes is close enough to the goal to have a chance of scoring
  • general direction of the play
Again no issue, they are running towards the goal when the foul happens
  • likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
There has to be no doubt here in the referee's mind that Fernandes will not only gain control of the ball, but keep control of it. He can't possibly determine this with certainty when the ball is a lofty curled pass heading into an area with 2-3 players in close proximity.
  • location and number of defenders
Again, there are simply too many players in the general vicinity for this criteria to be satisfied. He has to be effectively by himself and he simply isn't.

If pundits are arguing "Fernandes probably gets there first" then that is simply not a high enough bar to meet the requirements of this rule. There has to be literally no shred of doubt in the referee's mind that he is getting there first. He simply can't be on this occasion, there are far too many variables.
Click to expand...
I agree, I do not think it was a red card.

I was only saying I thought it was less obviously the wrong decision (again, backed up by VAR) than the penalty.

But I thought both were highly suspect, especially in the context of the match and United’s season thus far.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I agree, I do not think it was a red card.

I was only saying I thought it was less obviously the wrong decision (again, backed up by VAR) than the penalty.

But I thought both were suspect.
Click to expand...

I'm more making the point that perhaps to pundits and us lay-folk it might rightfully seem more debatable. But to a referee I reckon this should be a pretty binary decision, much more so than deciding on what is considered sufficient contact for a penalty.
 
Whats it going to take to bring all this corruption to and end ? because it cant go on much longer as left unchecked it will destroy football in Britain , except the media are not really going to investigate anything that kills the golden goose, and the lesser clubs in the prem seem happy to be done over every week as long as they get an apology and can keep sucking on the money teat. The red teams dont count cos they are benefiting from the corruption and so we come back to City. Undoubtedly we know whats going on, and could go for the nuke button but then we get destroyed in the fallout as well due to where we play our football. So how is this problem solved?
 
United will always earn 10 to 15 points per season off doe eyed officials who kow tow to the so called history and the legendary "presents" and "hospitality" afforded match officials there over the last 30 years!

Whisky nose knew exactly what he was doing when upgrading their changing rooms to resemble 5 star hotel accomodation! Then packing it with fine wine and hampers for them on their return after the game!

It still continues folks!
 
Last edited:
Blue Mist said:
Martin Keown has said it was a blatant dive. He couldn't believe Var didn't call it. I started laughing at that point but then it turned to anger. 2 draws turned into 2 wins
Click to expand...
Imagine being a Forest fan having your weekend ruined by result manipulation. Ditto Wolves fans and whoever they play at old scaffold next
 
Ithryn Luin said:
United will always earn 10 to 15 points per season off doe eyed officials who kow tow to the so called history and the legendary "presents" and "hospitality" afforded officials there over the last 30 years!

Whisky nose knew eactly what hee was doing when making their changing rooms akin to a 5 star hotel! Then packing it with fine wine and hampers for them on their return after the game!

It still continues folks!
Click to expand...
This is bang on.
I've always called it out that they "gain" 10-15 extra points at season to their true tally.
The question that needs seriously answering is why?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top