Would still be a pen, or it should be.
Awb got the ball on Sunday but came through Silva.
Martin Atkinson
- Thread starter Smoking_Owl
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
Awb got the ball on Sunday but came through Silva.
I would really question his judgment if he thought that wasn't a penalty. As stonewall a pen as you are likely to see both in real time and on replay
Yes that is true.
On the feed I watched the commentators suggested he tried to blow the whistle before but was close to the shot happening and got out of the way.
I've seen play stopped before when no head injuries. A keeper rolled up on the ground like that for a long time I think more than not the ref intervenes, it's just a free goal. If a keepers ankle is broken do we carry on until a goal is scored?
On the other hand we can't have keepers going down softly and stopping play tactically if getting swamped. our own player injured him but I still think De Gea made the most of it expecting play to be stopped, he should've done more. It's a risk you take as many times the ref stops the play with a keeper out but technically it can play on.
Atkinson has screwed us over several times over the past decade and there are people willing to giving him the benefit of the doubt?
The prick hates us and cheats against us
The prick hates us and cheats against us
Premier league and FA is really letting themselves down with world class players, shitload of money and such subpar refereeing? Surely there must be some kind of shocking piece of management somewhere in their structure which needs to be assesed, otherwise we will see the same dross again and again from washed out never good enough referees in the first place.
This. Absolute tosser, could have blown the whistle but decided not too. That pen he didn't give against Fred was next class bullying from that geezer. Shockingly incompetent. Terrible ref.
I see goal posts moving.
Give up mate.
You have Evra a Utd legend saying the goal should have stood.
You need to question why De Gea went down like a ton of bricks curled up in a ball facing the wrong way then was up a minute later.
Granted the ref maybe could of handled it better but you then set the standard of keepers falling over everytime they feel a slight nudge claiming a foul.
Didn't Allisson try it recently vs West Ham?
His ''incompetence'' seems to ramp up a level in United games but strangely usually just one way. Of course I'm sure this life long Leeds fan is completely unbiased towards United.
If you watch the replay from a higher angle from behind the United goal you can see him look to de gea, long before the ball makes its way to smith rowe. This is when he looks again so knows the keeper has been out for all that time, and he should blow it instantly. He fecked up.
thats true, and so is the fact that de gea should never go down that easily and because he didn’t blow, of course the goal should stand. Not blowing when he saw de gea again was poor
if anybody has it in them to do a compilation of his decisions against United I think it would make a decade long disaster show
thats true, and so is the fact that de gea should never go down that easily and because he didn’t blow, of course the goal should stand. Not blowing when he saw de gea again was poor
if anybody has it in them to do a compilation of his decisions against United I think it would make a decade long disaster show
How did the clown miss the Fred peno ?
I don't really know what he's meant to do different for the Arsenal goal. He's following the action so he doesn't see De Gea is down and everything happened very quickly, he finally sees De Gea literally when they're about to shoot and score, is he meant to blow the whistle a millisecond before the ball goes in the net so the goal can't stand?
And he's meant to do this all because our players are clumsily stepping on each other and De Gea decides to do his usual "let me pretend to be injured and hope the ref bails me out"?
I knew 100% De Gea wasn't seriously hurt and would continue the game no problem, I'm not one to bash him but the guy is seriously soft and I've seen him take this risk dozens of times going down injured when the ball is still in play, he just usually gets away with it.
His decision to wave play on for the penalty is hilarious though
to think a couple of years ago before VAR we'd have got no pen and we'd all be having a true meltdown right now. How can't they get such basic decisions correct.
And he's meant to do this all because our players are clumsily stepping on each other and De Gea decides to do his usual "let me pretend to be injured and hope the ref bails me out"?
I knew 100% De Gea wasn't seriously hurt and would continue the game no problem, I'm not one to bash him but the guy is seriously soft and I've seen him take this risk dozens of times going down injured when the ball is still in play, he just usually gets away with it.
His decision to wave play on for the penalty is hilarious though
to think a couple of years ago before VAR we'd have got no pen and we'd all be having a true meltdown right now. How can't they get such basic decisions correct.He was the only person in the stadium who thought it wasn't a pen...including the Arsenal players.
Man waved no foul like a baseball umpire calling safe. He was literally Right there to see how blatant a penalty that was. Dear me
I thought his worst mistake for the Arsenal goal wasn't allowing it - it was his positioning which led to him being a blocker and making it impossible for Rashford to get near Smith-Rowe ahead of the shot.
I think the first goal was legitimate and it was just down to De Gea being soft.
But the penalty, holy shit! As blatant as possible and if this were a Man Utd vs Chelsea match, even after VAR recommended he review it, he still would not have given it to us.
I don't really know what he's meant to do different for the Arsenal goal. He's following the action so he doesn't see De Gea is down and everything happened very quickly, he finally sees De Gea literally when they're about to shoot and score, is he meant to blow the whistle a millisecond before the ball goes in the net so the goal can't stand?
And he's meant to do this all because our players are clumsily stepping on each other and De Gea decides to do his usual "let me pretend to be injured and hope the ref bails me out"?
I knew 100% De Gea wasn't seriously hurt and would continue the game no problem, I'm not one to bash him but the guy is seriously soft and I've seen him take this risk dozens of times going down injured when the ball is still in play, he just usually gets away with it.
His decision to wave play on for the penalty is hilarious though
De Gea doesn't have to be seriously hurt though, just hurt enough to be down.
Now as it happens I don't think he was even that hurt, I thought it was just gamesmanship on his part, but the ref can't know that. So as soon as he sees De Gea is crumpled down on the ground he should stop play. In this case he hesitated, the goal was scored, then he (wrongly) wanted to disallow it anyway but wasn't able to.
I don't think De Gea can have any complaints because he was exaggerating the injury, he was just unlucky that feigning of injury didn't actually work because it usually would. From Atkinson's POV though even leaving aside the not stopping play thing, the fact that he would have then disallowed the goal if not for VAR deserves criticism itself. He should have stopped play before the goal was scored but once it has been he can't then disallow it.
It's much more than a decade. He was the linesman who failed to flag for a clear offside against Thierry Henry in 2003. As a ref, he cost us the treble in 2008, by refusing to give us an early penalty against Portsmouth in an FA Cup Quarter Final match, when Distin wiped out Ronaldo, as Portsmouth fluked their way to a 1-0 win. Later on, numerous shocking decisions favouring Chelsea against us at Stamford Bridge. The man is a complete and utter cheat, a Leeds fan who constantly abuses his position when refereeing our matches.
That cnut wasn't going to give us a penalty until VAR intervened.
This sets a précédent. Every keeper could just pretend to be injured to stop play if the referee does not notice.
Atkinson clearly an Arsenal fan but he was right on the Arsenal goal. In fact, De Gea should be sold on that basis alone. Mans is made from paper mache. We need a keeper that isn’t going to collapse and cry every time one of his own players is in his own yard
He's apparently a Leeds fan.
Which would account for the near 20 years he's been fecking us over.
It doesn't set a precedent because it's nothing new. Stopping play when goalkeepers are down injured is already the norm. That's why Atkinson wanted to disallow the goal, he knew he should have stopped play initially.
we should get fred to breathe on de gea every time the opposition attacks
There are plenty of shit refs, like Michael Oliver for example, who I think are just generically shite. They're inconsistent, they're arrogant etc. But they are like that for everyone.
Atkinson is the only ref i'm convinced that has something against us. It's happened far too often over the years to be a coincidence.
Atkinson is the only ref i'm convinced that has something against us. It's happened far too often over the years to be a coincidence.
To think Howard Webb was vilified for a contentious penalty
When you consider over the last ten years or so he's given so many decisions against us, has he actually given us a penalty without the help of VAR?
Its not apparently its a fact he's a Leeds fan.
When you consider over the last ten years or so he's given so many decisions against us, has he actually given us a penalty without the help of VAR?
Actually he was wrong twice on the Arsenal goal. First for not stopping play before it but second for then going to disallow it once it had gone in. If VAR hadn't intervened he would have screwed Arsenal out of a goal.
Just this season alone he turned down a stonewall pen away to West Ham which almost cost us the 3 points, and he turned down the stonewall pen tonight originally.
He must have been gutted watching the replay realising there was no way he could get out of having to change his mind.
He's a coward. Two big decisions tonight and both of them needed Var to intervene.
Whatever about the Arsenal goal, not giving Fred the penalty when he was almost as fecking close to him as Odegaard is beyond me. Shit ref and always has been.
It's about timing as I say. If he spots De Gea is down when the ball is neutral, then he'd stop the game. As it happened in this instance, he would have had to have blown his whistle as Arsenal took the shot into an empty net, and there would have been uproar had he done that, so he can't really win. Could we blame him for not noticing De Gea down earlier? Maybe, but it's harsh because he's following the play and the transition from initial clearance to shot happened quite quickly.
I know it's already standard to stop play when a goalkeeper is down, but if that's the rule why don't they go down on every opposition attack and they can never concede a goal? The reason they very rarely go down when the opposition is still on the attack because they know they'll liable to concede a goal if the ref doesn't spot them in time, or doesn't feel they've been fouled by the opposition. It sets a terrible precedent for referees to have to stop the game when a keeper is down just as the opposition is about to score as it's basically a get out of jail free card every time the opposition is on a dangerous attack. If the precedent is that the ref stops the game only when he spots the keeper, and providing there isn't an immediate goalscoring opportunity, then it discourages keepers from feigning injury like De Gea has done here. That makes more sense to me than having a blanket rule that a goal can't be scored if a keeper is on the floor because the ref will blow the whistle a millisecond before the goal is scored.
And let's not forget, he's not been touched by an opposition player. Quite often we see the game stopped for keepers because they've had some sort of collision with an opposition player that has resulted in a soft foul being given, you can't go a step further and have keepers given the licence to feign injury from themselves or their own teammates.
Can't believe that there are people who think the 1st Arse goal shouldn't of stood. The fact of the matter is that De Gea got knocked by Fred and then stayed down too long. It wasn't a foul and there is no rule, rightly, that play should stop for a GK on the floor. That goal was valid, the only issue with that passage really was that he wasn't going to give it once it went in.
On the pen however, that was poor as it was a obvious peno that shouldn't have required VAR.
On the pen however, that was poor as it was a obvious peno that shouldn't have required VAR.
I think what irks me about the first goal is the line that "because he didn't blow his whistle before the ball crossed the line, he must give the goal". If a player commits a foul, say climbing on the back of a defender, while heading the ball in to the goal. The ref will rightly blow the whistle for the foul, after the ball has crossed the line. So where is the difference here? If the ref believes that the game should have been stopped (which 99/100 it will be for an injured goalkeeper), but he hasn't reacted quickly enough, to blow the whistle, why can't he pull the game back after the ball crosses the line?
I'm not saying that's what happened here, maybe the ref didn't want to stop the game in this situation for whatever reason, but this hard line of "the ball crossed the line, so it makes everything that happened before then moot", is what I find frustrating.
I hope De Gea has learned from it though.
I'm not saying that's what happened here, maybe the ref didn't want to stop the game in this situation for whatever reason, but this hard line of "the ball crossed the line, so it makes everything that happened before then moot", is what I find frustrating.
I hope De Gea has learned from it though.
Choosing not to blow also sets a precedent. Keeper could have the exact same scenario and the attacking team will score. Ref does the same and doesn't blow. So imagine he did his cruciate, and under the rules now it has to be a goal. Is that fair? There would be uproar over that, from us and most neutrals too.
I was pulling your hair with the second reply
VAR was worth it just for watching him in that moment he was called over to the monitor, when he realised he could no longer intentionally rob us.
It is fair in my opinion. Why should the game be stopped for a keeper when it doesn't get stopped for outfield players. You think If a defender on the run pulls his hamstring and the striker has the chance to score, the game should be stopped?
Fact is it was given a goal because Fred was the one that caused the injury and not an Arsenal player and it was still part of the same attack. Not like the ball was cleared far away and the ref let the game continue.
Goes back to at least 2009 for me.
Even if unbiased (which I doubt), he shouldn't be allowed to referee our games simply off the number of mistakes he's made. Got to draw the line somewhere.
So moral of the story is, just rifle the ball into the back of the net if someone goes down and there’s a good chance the goal will stand.
On what grounds can the goal be disallowed?
