It's also the punditry too in my opinion. If you go on match of the day or whatever, any time we get a decision that's 60/40 against us, they analyse the shit out of it for 10 minutes. If there's a 60/40 we SHOULD have had? Not a fecking word. And that's not just ingrained bias - it's -information bias-. If you keep telling people that man Utd get all the decisions - but you never mention the ones we don't get - referees and fans will always have the opinion that we are lucky with decisions so any bad decision we do get is evening things out. It's a propaganda battle.
Only if the referee did not see the incident. There’s no way he didn’t see that incident.
I get that argument. There's some truth in it, although I'd say the biggest factor in Brighton having time and space is DDG hoofed the ball constantly, nobody reached them, and I don't think we had the energy in the team after Thursday. Having a yellow doesn't really stop you getting close, it stops you taking significant risks such as going to ground unnecessarily.
They had chances because they play some good football and they were playing a noticeably fatigued team, trying to find their way after getting battered in Europe.
You're the silly one, if you can't see what was going on. Pawson clearly applied a different set of criteria for awarding free kicks and cards to United from what he applied to Brighton.
That's dumb as they get involved in other matters even if the ref sees it
Var only intervenes in anything if it involves upgrading Casemiro’s yellow to a red. I’ve never actually seen them do anything else.
I disagree, Craig. It’s not when you finally booked Brighton in the 90th minute, it’s the fact you let them stop counters at will, commit dangerous tackles, and then didn’t allow United the similar freedom that smacks of bribery.
There was one point a Brighton player absolutely clotheslined a United player and deserved a booking, but we were attacking so he waved advantage. Rashford loses the ball about 0.5 seconds later, and nothing more was said about it. So no yellow card, and no advantage either!
I wish I was on Craig's salary. The over the table one would do.
I think if you have already gone down the rabbit hole of believing in bribery, which many of the posters here seem to then it probably explains why mountains are being made of molehills.
I just think he's a less than average ref, there are better ones around the PL so there's no surprise he makes poor decisions. There's no conspiracy. It all sounds a bit like Liverpool fans to me.
I did some analysis on the impact it has on games we play under another ref who generally always gives us more yellows than the opposition. Our win rate drops from around 74% to around 53%. It has a massive impact.
Yeah. I do believe this is a standard yellow card. One of those they give against United and while it "feels harsh" pundits claim we can't complain because it's naive going in like that. Then another game going for United they say it's undeserved, harsh and lucky for United. Maybe even the ref gave United an advantage. That is why he didn't give it, to not give the game any 'unfair luck' or advantage either way. But In the end, they're just biased as feck. Ref clearly just gives the advantage to the other team, not really considering that these narratives he takes into consideration, isn't balanced.
It's an interesting statistic. Without having studied it, my instinct would be that increased yellow cards compared to opposition would correlate with a negative impact on results in a wider sense than a sampled referee.
City has been 8 times (going 9) League winners in the last 12 years, and came 2nd in between. I don't see any Goliath vs David with them.
I agree with you. There are certain narratives and stories they want to create. I only gave one example.
