Do you really believe in ABU decisions, officials with agendas against us etc

[Hansi Fick]

Which most of you just disregard in your deliberations about bias and agendas in the refereeing decision against your team is that the most obvious, undeniable bias and agenda is in yourselves and the lens through which you watch the games of Man United - the lens of fans strongly supporting one side.
There's just no way around it, it colours your perception and it means that you spent pages moaning about one decision (the Pogba one to disallow the goal which was indeed absolutely soft) while the fact Maguire got away with a yellow for what was a 100% nailed on red card doesn't find any mention.

I don't blame you, but actually believing in yourselves to spot bias in refereeing when it comes to your own games is just not on.

 

[darko]

Has anyone got stats for disallowed goals? Is it just a scenario where they're all hitting us at the same time rather than being stretched out over the season?

The 2nd goal being disallowed yesterday was a terrible decision. First was a soft 50/50.

I thought that the first was the correct call (I thought it was given for offside) but the second was wrong.

The one with Middlesborough was hand ball and how or why VAR doesn't get it right I just don't know.

I was watch .Six Nations Saturday I like thd way they explain their decisions. Why should football be any different?

 

[shamans]

It is easy to give a decision against United as there is no back lash. Klopp would have destroyed them. Man City through their media contacts would have buried them. We are too nice.

Oh please they've had many, many decisions go against them. Just watch their games sometimes. It's just garbage refs honestly.

 

[Solius]

Which most of you just disregard in your deliberations about bias and agendas in the refereeing decision against your team is that the most obvious, undeniable bias and agenda is in yourselves and the lens through which you watch the games of Man United - the lens of fans strongly supporting one side.
There's just no way around it, it colours your perception and it means that you spent pages moaning about one decision (the Pogba one to disallow the goal which was indeed absolutely soft) while the fact Maguire got away with a yellow for what was a 100% nailed on red card doesn't find any mention.

I don't blame you, but actually believing in yourselves to spot bias in refereeing when it comes to your own games is just not on.

I like to think I’m pretty objective when it comes to it but of course I would say that! I think a yellow was fair for Maguire. The ball was skipping towards de Gea and it was very far from goal. The rule says obvious goal scoring opportunity and it wasn’t that.

 

[TheReligion]

Which most of you just disregard in your deliberations about bias and agendas in the refereeing decision against your team is that the most obvious, undeniable bias and agenda is in yourselves and the lens through which you watch the games of Man United - the lens of fans strongly supporting one side.
There's just no way around it, it colours your perception and it means that you spent pages moaning about one decision (the Pogba one to disallow the goal which was indeed absolutely soft) while the fact Maguire got away with a yellow for what was a 100% nailed on red card doesn't find any mention.

I don't blame you, but actually believing in yourselves to spot bias in refereeing when it comes to your own games is just not on.

I don’t disagree as such but I do think there’s huge issues with regards to so called professionals being unable to interpret the current rules, deliver fair and consistent decisions and be accountable for their actions.

 

[Hansi Fick]

I don’t disagree as such but I do think there’s huge issues with regards to so called professionals being unable to interpret the current rules, deliver fair and consistent decisions and be accountable for their actions.

Yeah both the officiating of certain problem areas (penalties, "contact", hand balls, VAR intervention) as well as the reporting and punditry about it is a mess, a lot of times. Consistency is often all over the place, too, I don't disagree. Not just in the PL, also in Bundesliga, we had some shockers.

 

[Hansi Fick]

I like to think I’m pretty objective when it comes to it but of course I would say that! I think a yellow was fair for Maguire. The ball was skipping towards de Gea and it was very far from goal. The rule says obvious goal scoring opportunity and it wasn’t that.

I had read it in the minute by minute like that, and I extra watched it back earlier today and I was surprised how clear of a red it was. The striker would definitively have reached the ball and would have been 1 v 1. Maguire was not even in pursuit of him when the foul happened, completely against his run. We all know De Gea is not good at taking sweeping positions and he wasn't. Should have been a red card, for me.
Chalking off a scored goal for such a soft duel like the Pogba one is probably worse, but still.
Point was, in the world view of a fan certain things loom larger than others, and that's an undeniable, fundamental bias that doesn't need to be proven, it's default.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Which most of you just disregard in your deliberations about bias and agendas in the refereeing decision against your team is that the most obvious, undeniable bias and agenda is in yourselves and the lens through which you watch the games of Man United - the lens of fans strongly supporting one side.
There's just no way around it, it colours your perception and it means that you spent pages moaning about one decision (the Pogba one to disallow the goal which was indeed absolutely soft) while the fact Maguire got away with a yellow for what was a 100% nailed on red card doesn't find any mention.

I don't blame you, but actually believing in yourselves to spot bias in refereeing when it comes to your own games is just not on.

I can spot shit decisions whether they're against United or another club. But one pisses me off and puts me in a bad mood for hours while the other I just comment on "that's wrong". Most fans can see any bad decision, our reaction will be different based on who it impacts which is logical.

That said, I don't think Pogbas was a foul but if you're giving that type of contact as a foul, the push in the back of Rashford has to be a foul too.

The issue for me last night was Jasper Carrot regularly makes twattish decisions and that the events will happen in plenty of games and not be VARed. The consistency is shit.

As for Maguire, it's not a red never mind a nailed on one.. as plenty of refs have said. Red has to be denying a CLEAR goal scoring opportunity and has been pointed out lots of times, there's no way the forward gets to that ball (pace, wet pitch, DDG position) which the officials actually seemed to recognise. Well done them... for once.

 

[TheReligion]

Yeah both the officiating of certain problem areas (penalties, "contact", hand balls, VAR intervention) as well as the reporting and punditry about it is a mess, a lot of times. Consistency is often all over the place, too, I don't disagree. Not just in the PL, also in Bundesliga, we had some shockers.

Personally that’s the issue and I don’t think it should be that hard to achieve. People will always feel hard done by if there’s no consistency. Especially when you add in the lack of accountability and transparency within the body of professional referees.

I could stomach decisions like the handball goal and the ruling out of United’s third goal last night if the decisions were consistent across the board.

Currently you have different interpretations of the rules being applied week in week out by a group of people who meet regularly to review such matters and discuss how the rules should be applied. There’s clearly huge failings.

One thing that would help is to have referee’s mic’d up during games along with allowing VAR reviews to be heard. This would not only be transparent but would allow people to understand why a decision had been reached.

Vague statements from Stockley Park don’t cut it and the individuals making the decisions need to be accountable themselves. If they perform poorly they should be dropped. It’s the only way to improve standards.

 

[Berbasbullet]

I’d love to mic the refs up and watch them fall apart as we realise they don’t know the rules of the game, it’s blatantly a boys club and they all look out for each other.

 

[Hansi Fick]

People will always feel hard done by if there’s no consistency. Especially when you add in the lack of accountability and transparency within the body of professional referees.

Agreed.

As for Maguire, it's not a red never mind a nailed on one.. as plenty of refs have said. Red has to be denying a CLEAR goal scoring opportunity and has been pointed out lots of times, there's no way the forward gets to that ball (pace, wet pitch, DDG position) which the officials actually seemed to recognise. Well done them... for once.

You mean, Peter Walton and, who is it, Stuart Atwell on BT having the back of their colleagues on the pitch? Then it must have been beyond doubt!

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Agreed.

You mean, Peter Walton and, who is it, Stuart Atwell on BT having the back of their colleagues on the pitch? Then it must have been beyond doubt!

What about the Burnley manager?

"I personally feel the decisions were right, even the Maguire one"

Is that an allowable opinion to you?

 

[Hansi Fick]

What about the Burnley manager?

"I personally feel the decisions were right, even the Maguire one"

Is that an allowable opinion to you?

All opinions are allowable. But that Dyche is feeling magnanimous in victory, if we can call the draw that for him, is not exactly surprising either.

 

[Mickeza]

There’s no bias from the referees perspective but BT would have spent 16 hours talking about VAR and those first half decisions had they been in our favour claiming football was so much better in the 90s with humphreys saying we just want our game back over and over again into the camera like the pretentious bellend he is.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

All opinions are allowable. But that Dyche is feeling magnanimous in victory, if we can call the draw that for him, is not exactly surprising either.

Sounds like whatever anyone says, you're sticking to your "that was a nailed on red".

You're right about one thing... there are posters on here with bias (unconscious or otherwise) and agendas.

 

[Hansi Fick]

Sounds like whatever anyone says, you're sticking to your "that was a nailed on red".

You're right about one thing... there are posters on here with bias (unconscious or otherwise) and agendas.

Decisions are rarely 100%. Surely one could argue for a yellow being adequate, but only to the degree that one can argue for a Pogba foul being warranted.

I think that giving the goal and sending off Maguire would have been the more correct decisions.

Obviously, "You're biased" - "No you're biased" will not get us anywhere.
I'll just point out, again, that it's not a debate that you as a fan are by definition biased, while in order to stick some sort of anti-Man United bias to me in my judgement of those instances, without reason, you need to operate rather paranoidly.
That doesn't make my opinion or judgement foolproof or correct, of course.

 

[darko]

I never understood the clear and obvious error reasoning. If it is too close for the VAR official to make the decision, how is that person even a referee. If the official thinks it's too close for them to over turn then the on field referee can look at it. The term 'obvious error' bothers me.

As far as I'm concerned, VAR has been great for offside rulings. Now they just have to straighten other VAR calls.

 

[darko]

There's nothing wrong with VAR. It's just technology. Blaming VAR for poor decisions is equivalent to blaming Microsoft Word for poor writting.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

True story: I know someone who had foot surgery and developed an infection - took forever for him to get over it. This person actually, at one point, entertained the idea that him being a United fan (some of the medical staff involved in the operation were either City fans, according to his research, or from Liverpool) had something to do with the quality of the treatment he received. I'm not kidding - he actually believed that certain nurses and doctors didn't give a feck about him because they knew he was a United fan.

As someone said above, as fans we sometimes project our own - extreme - bias onto others who simply do not share our mindset at all: because they're, you know, professionals who are mainly concerned with doing their job properly.

Anyway, it's a fact that United benefited from VAR last season. Someone did a "VAR removed" table - and in that hypothetical scenario we would've lost some points and ended up in 3rd.

(Also, the very idea that there's some kind of ABU factor involved in refereeing decisions is precisely what we, as United fans, mocked Liverpool fans for back in the day. The lack of self-awareness displayed by some people is staggering).

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Blaming VAR for poor decisions is equivalent to blaming Microsoft Word for poor writting.

In fairness, most people aren't blaming the tech itself - but (obviously) how it's used (by human agents).

 

[romufc]

The refereeing in England is sub standard at best. Ref's make up rules as they go along, match to match. Lots of goals we concede and they are given, the caf blames DDG and Lindelof for being soft.

Last season at Burnley, we had the same issue, Maguire foul and was not given. If the Maguire one is a foul, I would like to see every corner goal looked at because I guarantee those will be fouls.

The second one makes no sense at all, the linesman flagged after the ball went in, why was this not looked at by VAR? Its an absolute joke really. If that was a foul, Rashford should have had a penalty.

 

[mark_a]

Well refs are human so they'll have biases of some kind. I'm sure they strive not to be biased and probably get training in that?

Though I reckon biases are more complex than just pro-United or anti! Even though it seems like they have it in for us at the moment!

One bias I'm sure I do see is pro-City. Officials are slow to card players and quick to give penalties. The slowness in booking (or talking to players to say there's a booking coming if you don't calm it down) helps their cause in stopping other teams playing. I've said this before, but when they beat us at OT a few seasons back, we'd had loads of the ball for the first 15 mins but we kept getting fouled. After that they dominated and won. I checked BBC text commentary when I got back & they'd commited 12 fouls in 15 mins on us, right from the KO! Now I realise that the ref isn't going to card anyone so soon unless it's a bad one, but surely if the game is more stoppage and actual football they might at least have a word with someone? They're meant to referee to the "spirit of the game" and all that!! I'm sure with City it's party because they get so much press for playing beautiful football & they have no reputation at all for committing fouls, but their game runs on the engine room of dispossessing the other side at any cost

Other biases being when the managers come out with quotes designed to influence refs. Stuff like "United get a lot of penalties". This is really clever as it is bound to complicate the ref's thinking around giving us anything. These days "complicating" might mean considering a decision might be an error and therefore going (unnecessarily) to VAR.

I also definitely feel that the underdog sometimes gets decisions against us. Plus as a match-goer, I see visiting sides waste time against us & the referee rarely says anything until 80+ minutes, yet I've seen refs talk to our players early on about that (not that we even do it much)! With that one though, it just gives me the sense that the ref isn't really asserting his control over the game, so it tends to persist and get worse.

Definitely a huge issue with badly applied VAR. How refs can get called to the monitor then spend an age watching it over and over again to make a call on something meant to be "clear and obvious error" is a mystery to me!

 

[PSV]

There's no referee bias, they are just not performing at a level befitting the strongest league in the world.

Unstable refereeing will mean that some teams every season will feel hard done by. Maybe we're one of those teams this year.

Firstly, we might have to have a look at the rules as a whole. Make it easier if necessary. Think arcade, not chess.

They also need to open up for international referees in the Premier League so we can increase quality. Championship can stay English, after all it's still probably a top 15 league in Europe.

And lastly refs should be called to the interviews after the game to explain their controversies.

 

[Cloud7]

In fairness, most people aren't blaming the tech itself - but (obviously) how it's used (by human agents).

See this is the issue. People criticize VAR, they never say it's the referees behind VAR that are making a mess of things, they blame VAR itself, which is dumb. The problem comes back to, once again, referees not being good enough. The same ones making crap calls on the field are the ones making crap calls behind VAR the next week.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

I don't know the rules of football any more

You can handball, so long as you pass it with your foot afterwards

and

You cannot score OG's - still absolutely clueless what that was ruled out for.

Realistically what were the human reasons for both decisions - it was because the officials wanted to keep the underdogs in the match. There's absolutely no way that Boro goal stands if United score it and there's zero chance they'd have ruled out the OG Mee scored for us if Burnley had scored from it. You cannot convince me otherwise.

That said, United bring it on themselves. Officials don't try the same shit against Liverpool, Chelsea or City because their respective managers would all go ballistic. Same why Fergie got away with a few. Solskjaer and now Rangnick are very content with the poor decisions and I don't know why.

 

[#07]

The refereeing in England is sub standard at best. Ref's make up rules as they go along, match to match. Lots of goals we concede and they are given, the caf blames DDG and Lindelof for being soft.

Last season at Burnley, we had the same issue, Maguire foul and was not given. If the Maguire one is a foul, I would like to see every corner goal looked at because I guarantee those will be fouls.

The second one makes no sense at all, the linesman flagged after the ball went in, why was this not looked at by VAR? Its an absolute joke really. If that was a foul, Rashford should have had a penalty.

100% on all of this.

How are we meant to win when its not just the opposition we have to beat but the officials too?

Against Boro you could write it off cos we didn't take our chances. Against Burnley we had the ball in the net three times though! Even if you accept the first one chalked off was offside, the second one that was ruled out was an absolute p!$$t@ke. There will be literally hundreds of goals scored, exactly like that, the length and breadth of Britain this week. Not even the lad Pogba was supposed to have fouled stopped. Utter joke.

 

[lex talionis]

I categorically reject referee bias against United, but I have to admit to being staggered by horrifying decisions going against in the last two games. Yes, of course we remember disallowed goals more than we do inconsequential midfield fouls or close calls on throw-ins, but nevertheless it’s really hard to look at the handball that wasn’t called, the offside call on Maguire and the dubious foul call on Pogba as all being spot on correct calls.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

See this is the issue. People criticize VAR, they never say it's the referees behind VAR that are making a mess of things, they blame VAR itself, which is dumb. The problem comes back to, once again, referees not being good enough. The same ones making crap calls on the field are the ones making crap calls behind VAR the next week.

Yes - but, again, many who have a go at "VAR" actually mean to have a go at the refs who use it.

Of course, there's also a segment who are against the technology itself (or rather, the use of such technology in football on general principle - which is pretty much in "old man yells at cloud" territory).

 

[Pogue Mahone]

There's nothing wrong with VAR. It's just technology. Blaming VAR for poor decisions is equivalent to blaming Microsoft Word for poor writting.

I hate this argument. VAR and the way it is implemented are inextricably linked. If it can’t be implemented properly (if, say, it’s still too reliant on a fallible human element) then don’t fecking foist it on us.

Goal-line technology was a great example of when new tech improves the sport. And this wasn’t because the people using it are so much smarter than the people using VAR. It’s because that was a problem suited to a technological solution. Just like line calls in tennis or LBW in cricket. But that’s a very narrow set of issues where technology like this is useful and doesn’t interfere with the game as a spectacle.

Most of the shit that VAR gets involved with was never going to be amenable to this sort of solution, which is why it’s so incredibly and predictably annoying.

 

[Cloud7]

I hate this argument. VAR and the way it is implemented are inextricably linked. If it can’t be implemented properly (if, say, it’s still too reliant on a fallible human element) then don’t fecking foist it on us.

Goal-line technology was a great example of when new tech improves the sport. And this wasn’t because the people using it are so much smarter than the people using VAR. It’s because that was a problem suited to a technological solution. Most of the shit that VAR gets involved with was never amenable to this sort of solution, which is why it’s so incredibly and predictably annoying.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with allowing referees a second look at something that happens on the field. Things happen at high speed, or their view is sometimes blocked. Allowing them another chance to review an event makes sense.

 

[romufc]

100% on all of this.

How are we meant to win when its not just the opposition we have to beat but the officials too?

Against Boro you could write it off cos we didn't take our chances. Against Burnley we had the ball in the net three times though! Even if you accept the first one chalked off was offside, the second one that was ruled out was an absolute p!$$t@ke. There will be literally hundreds of goals scored, exactly like that, the length and breadth of Britain this week. Not even the lad Pogba was supposed to have fouled stopped. Utter joke.

Its an absolute joke, you have VAR but cannot use it because apparently the linesman put his flag up for a foul. Surely, this can be checked by VAR?

How is the official sure it is a foul? He took his time to give the decision ? Even then he had to look past Rashford, surely you let it play on and VAR can look at it if its a goal?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with allowing referees a second look at something that happens on the field. Things happen at high speed, or their view is sometimes blocked. Allowing them another chance to review an event makes sense.

Only if the decision about when they do or don’t have another look is 100% consistent. And even then anyone who has ever watched MOTD knows that it’s possible to watch multiple replays of the same incident and have completely different opinions on what happened. And that’s without the pressure and artifice that comes from quickly watching one or two replays on a fecking pitch side telly in the rain, with players and fans screaming abuse at you.

 

[Meino]

I do not think there is an deliberate bias BUT i do believe the outdated mindset of the class of '70/71 referees are biased unintentionally.
They have the old british conservative mindset, good old hardworking boys get away with more than the elitist red devils.
I do not mean this in an offensive way but it is a very clear british hierarchical structure problem, which is more common in the older generation.

 

[NicolaSacco]

Sorry but I totally disagree with you.

Consistency in the game is not hard to achieve. Even more so with the implementation of VAR. How, for example, can the Firmino interference be ignored in that instance yet we’ve had countless other decisions ruled out for far less in identical circumstances? The alleged foul last night for United’s third goal and the handball v Boro are two others which highlight inconsistencies and lack of understanding of the how the rules should be delivered. There’s also seemingly no threshold on when decisions should be referred to the referee on field or why they often aren’t.

Other sports such as rugby, cricket and tennis use technology yet you’ll be pushed to find regular disputes over decisions and interpretations of the laws of the game. You also can hear what’s being said by the officials which shows transparency. Another thing lacking within football.

No consistency and no accountability is a recipe for disaster as people will understandably come to the conclusion there’s a lack of integrity, honesty and professionalism from high paid top flight officials

And yet you’ve still not highlighted a consistently correct league! Which implies that a layman (I’m assuming, unless you’re a pro ref?) claiming consistency should be simple, versus multiple leagues with professional referees all not finding it simple, would indicate that you are the one who is wrong.

I respect your disagreement- I genuinely do. I’m sure there are 101 things that could be done better, but they have to be weighed up against the cost of taking several minutes to make a decision. If you think that rugby doesn’t have multiple debatable decisions then I don’t know what games you are watching. The players and commentators are far far less dissenting compared to football but 50/50 decisions happen literally all the time. Tennis, I think, is very different. The major call is generally whether or not the ball is out, which is equivalent to whether or not the ball crosses the goal line in football. Which I’m guessing you don’t have an issue with. Other issues in tennis such as time taken between serves, are literally a matter of a stopwatch. Both very black and white issues and it surprises me that you’d draw a comparison.

Just for my own peace of mind, what was the firmino situation? Like, what match? I either didn’t see it or have forgotten. The referee’s explanation for the Maguire incident seemed to be that he was offside AND THEN blocked a player- is that what firmino was accused of?

 

[NicolaSacco]

Personally thought the decisions last night where correct, the Middlesbrough none hand ball decision was a joke though.

The handball was an utterly bizarre decision. I appreciate that referees are told to follow rules to the letter (or they’d literally be slated for NOT doing that) but I find it odd that if for example a foul occurs within a pattern of play leading to a goal (I.e. the Boro creator had fouled someone rather than hand balled in order to get the cross in) then that would be legitimately ruled out whilst the handball wouldn’t. As I say, that may be the literal interpretation of the rules to the letter, and personal attacks and accusations aimed at referees would be wrong in that case, it still highlights a huge discrepancy and should be modified as soon as possible.

 

[Heinzesight]

I think the big chinned cnut took it upon himself to flag for a foul.

 

[TheReligion]

And yet you’ve still not highlighted a consistently correct league! Which implies that a layman (I’m assuming, unless you’re a pro ref?) claiming consistency should be simple, versus multiple leagues with professional referees all not finding it simple, would indicate that you are the one who is wrong.

I respect your disagreement- I genuinely do. I’m sure there are 101 things that could be done better, but they have to be weighed up against the cost of taking several minutes to make a decision. If you think that rugby doesn’t have multiple debatable decisions then I don’t know what games you are watching. The players and commentators are far far less dissenting compared to football but 50/50 decisions happen literally all the time. Tennis, I think, is very different. The major call is generally whether or not the ball is out, which is equivalent to whether or not the ball crosses the goal line in football. Which I’m guessing you don’t have an issue with. Other issues in tennis such as time taken between serves, are literally a matter of a stopwatch. Both very black and white issues and it surprises me that you’d draw a comparison.

Just for my own peace of mind, what was the firmino situation? Like, what match? I either didn’t see it or have forgotten. The referee’s explanation for the Maguire incident seemed to be that he was offside AND THEN blocked a player- is that what firmino was accused of?

You know it’s impossible for me to highlight a consistently correct league. It’s a silly request really as you well know.

Point one, there’s no requirement to take several minutes for each decision. To strive for consistency doesn’t equate to accepting this nor is it necessary. Unsure what you’re suggesting with this?

Point two, Rugby (and cricket) are both transparent and the officials are accountable given their decisions and discussions are clearly explained on mic during the game. Fair point on tennis.

The game I refer to is v Palace. He jumped for a header and took Mitchell away from Ox who then slotted in unmarked. Clearly offside and clearly impacting on play. The Jota penalty in that same match was another absurd one which the referee didn’t give but was then forced to look at the monitor and reversed his decision. He’d actually made the right one in the first instance.

The Maguire one you could argue Rodriguez wasn’t anywhere near Varane so was he interfering with play? You see blocks on set pieces each week so I’d say it’s quite soft. The third goal was worse mind.

Ultimately professionals should be held accountable and there should be transparency in their decision making. We may not like a decision but without either of the above you can’t blame people for feeling as though there’s a lack of integrity and understanding of the rules which is totally unacceptable at that level.

This isn’t Sunday league where random parents jump in as the Lino because they’ve pulled up.

 

[phelans shorts]

You know it’s impossible for me to highlight a consistently correct league. It’s a silly request really as you well know.

Point one, there’s no requirement to take several minutes for each decision. To strive for consistency doesn’t equate to accepting this nor is it necessary. Unsure what you’re suggesting with this?

Point two, Rugby (and cricket) are both transparent and the officials are accountable given their decisions and discussions are clearly explained on mic during the game. Fair point on tennis.


The game I refer to is v Palace. He jumped for a header and took Mitchell away from Ox who then slotted in unmarked. Clearly offside and clearly impacting on play. The Jota penalty in that same match was another absurd one which the referee didn’t give but was then forced to look at the monitor and reversed his decision. He’d actually made the right one in the first instance.

The Maguire one you could argue Rodriguez wasn’t anywhere near Varane so was he interfering with play? You see blocks on set pieces each week so I’d say it’s quite soft. The third goal was worse mind.

Ultimately professionals should be held accountable and there should be transparency in their decision making. We may not like a decision but without either of the above you can’t blame people for feeling as though there’s a lack of integrity and understanding of the rules which is totally unacceptable at that level.

This isn’t Sunday league where random parents jump in as the Lino because they’ve pulled up.

This is absolutely not true on cricket. Only reviews are explained via mics, and even then it’s only the third umpire who is heard. 99% of decisions are made on field and we never know any more of them (just ask everyone who’s still pent up about England winning the World Cup). That’s ignoring that even the third umpires do still get stuff wrong, or the technology doesn’t work and they have to make it up.

 

[TheReligion]

This is absolutely not true on cricket. Only reviews are explained via mics, and even then it’s only the third umpire who is heard. 99% of decisions are made on field and we never know any more of them (just ask everyone who’s still pent up about England winning the World Cup). That’s ignoring that even the third umpires do still get stuff wrong, or the technology doesn’t work and they have to make it up.

It’s not untrue. United would have used a review on the disallowed goals last night and if we use that method everyone would have heard the decision making process in detail.

On a side anyone pent up about England winning the WC a few years ago needs to get out more.

 

[Fitchett]

Attwell has shafted us as the VAR for the last two matches. Who on earth has thought it a good idea to appoint him as the on field referee for our next match, at home to Southampton on Saturday? What the f*ck is going on?