Abu Referee Agenda

Giggsyking said:
Agree with you. But us having the lowest number of penalties between all PL clubs is strange and tells that we were on the unlucky side of the decisions more than the lucky one specially talking about an attacking Premier league team.
Click to expand...
Yep, close calls that can go either way are seemingly never given our way. Even the Bruno goal had calls of its offside, the rules are wrong.
it’s always I can see why it’s not given or I can see why it’s ruled out. Put a tenner on a series of 50/50 bets and realise how much your returns are. It’s absurd how many times it goes the other way from us
 
Stone wall penalty not given to us against Palace, one replay, not discussed in the studio after the game.

We still have no idea if we should have got a penalty against Arsenal as we didn’t see a replay of AWB being fouled.

4 games later Sam Matterface is still talking about the ’offside’ goal given to us against City. It’s been mentioned in more than one game as well even though following the current offside rules the goal stands. The rule is stupid but it was correctly given.

Don’t tell me there isn’t an agenda.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
Referees want to play it safe, there is no agenda. It is safe to give a decision against United as there is no back lash in the media and ETH doesn't play the mind games with the referees. The Bruno goal was talked about for a week on every show, referees want to avoid such scrutiny.
Click to expand...
Basically this.
 
Official referees twitter: https://twitter.com/FA_PGMOL

Just in case anyone is bored and wants to ask the officials why Salah was deemed onside but Rashford not. Or how Carroll could put Eriksen in crutches without even getting a card.
 
These things do tend to even out over a season, or at least they do for other clubs.

With United though, we get one 50:50 go our way, eg the Rashford offside call - the sort of decision that clubs benefit from all the time - and for the majority of the media, pundits, other fans and managers it’s like the worst thing that has ever happened in the history of football and the worst miscarriage of justice since the Birmingham Six. It will be on the front page of the BBC sport website , there’ll be questions in parliament, and it’ll be trending on social media for a week. Every other detail of the match will be a footnote.

And then, whether consciously or unconsciously, for several weeks after, refs won’t give us a single 50:50 decision. Then months later, after it’s all died down, we’ll get another 50:50 and we get to do it all again.

Meanwhile, when we get a bad call against us (and I don’t mean a 50:50, I mean an actual bad decision) there will be…total silence from everyone except us. MOTD probably won’t even mention it in the highlights.

And the worst thing is, because of the disproportionate attention our (relatively few) favourable calls get, there seems to be a sense among the general public that refs are biased in favour of us, rather than the opposite.
 
It's easier to give 50-50 decisions against us, than for us. The entire footballing community gets up in arms and the decision is analysed for days and weeks (and sometimes talked about for decades). Has to play on the mind of the referee when making the decision.
 
Giggsyking said:
Agree with you. But us having the lowest number of penalties between all PL clubs is strange and tells that we were on the unlucky side of the decisions more than the lucky one specially talking about an attacking Premier league team.
Click to expand...
The players have to be in the box to get a penalty, we haven't had the ball in the box anywhere near as much as we used to so logic says we'd get less penalties
 
Do people seriously believe referees are deliberately conspiring against us
 
lsd said:
Do people seriously believe referees are deliberately conspiring against us
Click to expand...

Conspiring? No, but they are greatly affected by media narratives while also being generally incompetent.
 
Every teams supporters believes the refs conspire against them and think their opposition are pathetic for claiming the same thing. Mass irrationality.

Go into any match thread and you will probably find at least one instance in every match where there are 3/4/5 pages of "blatant pen" "Corrupt" "Cheating ref" and then you see the incident and it is some innocuous soft shit barely worth a second look. Var has led to so many pathetically soft pens that the interpretation of any contact in the box is wildly over dramatic.
 
I don't believe in an any kind of officiating conspiracy against United, but it's hard to look at the offside decision yesterday and ask WTF. I have no explanation for it, but in the absence of smoking gun evidence such as memos from the FA or even a text between officials, I'll chalk that and other bizarre decisions that went against us (the boro handball not called being the summum bonum of refereeing malpractice) to random incompetence.
 
I have no idea how some people can stay calm to this.

Lucky referee's decisions have brought many different titles to many clubs in the past 15-20 years. Without being lucky with just one decision against us, Mourinho would probably never become what he is now, without being lucky with Barca Pep could have at least one CL title less, Real Madrid could have couple of CL titles less because in literally every title they won there was some contraversy, etc. It's part of the game, but it's important part of the game that could well make you champions if you had more luck at certain times, so I would definitely like ETH to try to influence the referees more, because literally every big manager does it.
 
Eric_the_Red99 said:
These things do tend to even out over a season, or at least they do for other clubs.

With United though, we get one 50:50 go our way, eg the Rashford offside call - the sort of decision that clubs benefit from all the time - and for the majority of the media, pundits, other fans and managers it’s like the worst thing that has ever happened in the history of football and the worst miscarriage of justice since the Birmingham Six. It will be on the front page of the BBC sport website , there’ll be questions in parliament, and it’ll be trending on social media for a week. Every other detail of the match will be a footnote.

And then, whether consciously or unconsciously, for several weeks after, refs won’t give us a single 50:50 decision. Then months later, after it’s all died down, we’ll get another 50:50 and we get to do it all again.

Meanwhile, when we get a bad call against us (and I don’t mean a 50:50, I mean an actual bad decision) there will be…total silence from everyone except us. MOTD probably won’t even mention it in the highlights.

And the worst thing is, because of the disproportionate attention our (relatively few) favourable calls get, there seems to be a sense among the general public that refs are biased in favour of us, rather than the opposite.
Click to expand...

This is a lovely summary. Media do have an ABU agenda as ultimately all other PL clubs' fana between 1990 and 2013 have leftover PTSD (see Jermaine Jenas commentary on United) from our dominance. Media exaggerate every favourable call for us and pressure is on referees to make the "easy" decision and not be discussed for a week.
 
Can anyone really say that something isn’t right about decisions regarding United anymore?!
 
The English referees are the worst I've seen ever. The decisions I see on consistent basis in the league make me question my sanity. Thanks God only a limited amount of them are allowed to officiate games in Europe and international tournaments.
 
It's a simple equation: If you give Man Utd a decision it could be a national news item. If you don't give Man Utd a decision nobody but reds gives a toss.

Referees know what the 'safe' call us when it comes to us. That's what we are seeing.

The ABUs in the media have won. The pressure they've put on referees means you can even put United players out for months without getting a card. We will probably only get a pen if an opponent lands a right cross to one of ours in the box.
 
OldSchoolManc said:
Can anyone really say that something isn’t right about decisions regarding United anymore?!
Click to expand...
To be honest, I really think it's just the overall standard which is low and a lot of refs being growing up hating United and trying to stick it into us. The twat today deserves to get his ass kicked. Was a stonewall scumbag behaviour..
 
This seems like a massive overreaction. Didn't see many controversial calls today.
 
Whether it's conscious or not, they are clearly screwing us over time and again. Not just with the big calls, but with free kicks and bookings as well.
 
#07 said:
It's a simple equation: If you give Man Utd a decision it could be a national news item. If you don't give Man Utd a decision nobody but reds gives a toss.

Referees know what the 'safe' call us when it comes to us. That's what we are seeing.

The ABUs in the media have won. The pressure they've put on referees means you can even put United players out for months without getting a card. We will probably only get a pen if an opponent lands a right cross to one of ours in the box.
Click to expand...

It's exactly this.

They were still banging on about the Bruno goal in the derby 2 weeks later. Lee Dixon was moaning about it during City vs Arsenal.

You give something against Utd and the media and opposition fans love it and it's swept under the rug.
 
Jev said:
Could have been given, not stonewall, he went down very easily. Hardly something that warrants these kinds of conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying this as a United fan, but objectively speaking, it's a stonewall penalty. I don't see how anyone can see it any other way.
 
I just think that ref was so reluctant to give anything that created any news. And due to that cowardness we didn't get two penalties
 
You must log in or register to reply here.