All supposedly top referees in England are shite imo and all have their problems, from Atkinson to Oliver. We just have to live with it.
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.
Anyone but Oliver for me
The International break has given people too much time to think about things. With referees it's always been about having the least shit one as possible, nothing has changed.
Martin Atkinson. Fecking United over since time began.
I was reading a countdown of some sort on the internet somewhere, and on the list was a reminder of that Chelsea/Spurs FA Cup Semi Final(?) where Atkinson decided to award Chelsea a goal for a ball that didn't even go close to crossing the line.
He's just a rubbish ref.
He's just a rubbish ref.
Funny that some his worst decisions against us have been in favour of Chelsea too...
ABO should become a thing
Seriously though, Atkinson is a homer.
Except at OT
I can't remember if it was in the other thread, but someone had crunched the numbers on him when he was in charge of ourselves and Chelsea, and basically for about 5 years Chelsea never lost a match where he was ref, and our rate of loss with him was over double our average.
Relatively small sample size, anecdotal memories abide etc etc, but he's the one ref in the league I genuinely feel, subconscious or not, does not give us a fair run.
Then again, we have Mourinho now, so refs being against us kind of comes with the territory, because he has treated them horribly in his career.
Relatively small sample size, anecdotal memories abide etc etc, but he's the one ref in the league I genuinely feel, subconscious or not, does not give us a fair run.
Then again, we have Mourinho now, so refs being against us kind of comes with the territory, because he has treated them horribly in his career.
Every ref is bad according to this forum, we've just got to get on with it.
Just to be fair Micheal Oliver gives him run for his money as the worst referee in PL.
Motherfecker.. at least he’s better than Oliver.
As long as we aren't playing Chelsea, it is fine with him being the referee in our matches.
Oliver is the one I dislike most, mostly because of his double standards and total inconsistencies, while I have the feeling that we never win with Marriner as referee despite that he usually does his job well.
Oliver is the one I dislike most, mostly because of his double standards and total inconsistencies, while I have the feeling that we never win with Marriner as referee despite that he usually does his job well.
The cnut booked Herrera just because of crowd pressure.
We've got a 100% win record v Liverpool with Atkinson as referee.
If we lose I'm blaming you for jinxing it Damien.
Yeah! It will be all your fault Damien!
I can understand complaints about him being a poor ref, but I have absolutely no respect for the opinion that he (or any ref for that matter) is biased against us. Hands down the most petty thing for a fan to whinge about.
I don't think he's biased, i think he can be grossly incompetent.
Remember that time Sunderland scored a goal against Arsenal when the Sunderland striker (maybe Altirdore?) shrugged off someone pulling on his shirt, then went one on one and scored a goal, only for the ref (Atkinson) to not play advantage, pull it back for a free kick on the edge of the box, and then book the Arsenal defender instead of sending him off for denying a goal scoring opportunity... despite the fact that the Sunderland player literally scored a feckin' goal from the one on one he had.
That takes a special kind of idiocy I'd say.
Oh feck me.
Just saw this bumped, don't tell me this loathsome cnut is in charge Saturday lunchtime?
Just saw this bumped, don't tell me this loathsome cnut is in charge Saturday lunchtime?
How many games?
I think he's pretty clearly biased for Chelsea for some reason, and not just with us. They've had so many dodgy decisions from him against lots of clubs.
When Chelsea aren't involved he's just shit. He used to be out on his own but Oliver and Dean have been pushing him recently.
Level of refereeing especially last season was abysmal.
I include some of the decisions that went in our favour in admitting that.
As long as it's not Oliver or MMike Dean I don't think any one is that different from the other.
Michael Oliver though is an embarassment. Every single game he referees is a farce, becuase he referees the first hour competely different to how he referees the last 30 minutes. Suddenly producing yellow cards for minor things that he wasn't even calling as fouls earlier in the game. In his mind he must think he is being clever, because no matter how many times this results in both sets of paers being furious, needless sending offs, players getting away with blatant red cards earlier in the game, etc. He carries on doing it.
Dean seems to decide what decisions he's going to make before the game and then referees it based on that. For example if a fuss is made about shirt pulling from corners, you can 100% guarantee that next time Dean referees a game, he'll give a penalty for it, regardless of whether it actually happens. Sometimes he seems to decide someone is going to be sent off so books people for minor things then gives them a red card the next time they do anything at all.
The fact the two of them keep being given games undermines the rest of the referees and the whole system imo. The need to "protect" incompetent referees from fair criticism seems to outweigh the need to address the fact they are incompetent.
Michael Oliver though is an embarassment. Every single game he referees is a farce, becuase he referees the first hour competely different to how he referees the last 30 minutes. Suddenly producing yellow cards for minor things that he wasn't even calling as fouls earlier in the game. In his mind he must think he is being clever, because no matter how many times this results in both sets of paers being furious, needless sending offs, players getting away with blatant red cards earlier in the game, etc. He carries on doing it.
Dean seems to decide what decisions he's going to make before the game and then referees it based on that. For example if a fuss is made about shirt pulling from corners, you can 100% guarantee that next time Dean referees a game, he'll give a penalty for it, regardless of whether it actually happens. Sometimes he seems to decide someone is going to be sent off so books people for minor things then gives them a red card the next time they do anything at all.
The fact the two of them keep being given games undermines the rest of the referees and the whole system imo. The need to "protect" incompetent referees from fair criticism seems to outweigh the need to address the fact they are incompetent.
feck sake
Well that's a pretty sanctimonius attitude to take.
Refs are human beings and much as we'd like to believe that all of them are completely above any kind of bias human nature dictates that probably just isn't true.
Anyone remember the season that Fergie called out Alan Whiley for being unfit? After that, and for the rest of the season, the refereeing against us was atrocious. It was, completely obviously, a 'punishment' dished out by other refs for what Fergie had said.
We've also seen, from the various 'rent-a-quote' refs who have gone into the media after their careers that lots of them have massive egos and see themselves as part of the 'story'.
In short - as in life - most refs straight as a die, some refs incompetent but basically fair, some refs swayed by crowd and/or other external factors, some completely biased.
He was the ref for Juanfield.
Good omen.
Good omen.
Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I'm not at all saying that no ref is subliminally biased; I am saying that I have no respect for arguments that a ref has a consistent agenda against us. Not because they don't exist in some form, but because it has to be the most ridiculous thing to complain about. Firstly, these guys do an impossible job. Not a difficult job; a genuinely impossible one. There's a reason criticism of them is so frequent; mistakes are inevitable, because the game is played at breakneck pace, and the human eye can only catch so much. And as a result, its just such a lame argument. Complaining about referee bias is unbelievably petty; these guys have the hardest job in football and get abused every match. No wonder some of them are arrogant; they have to have some way to deal with the relentless (and public) criticism from fans, managers, and pundits. Maybe one time in twenty, there's legitimate cause to suggest a decision may be the result of bias. But suggesting a ref holds a long-time bias is really just an excuse in disguise, and is not worthy of genuine debate.
I acknowledge that some bias may exist, but I can't stand people complaining about it as though its a regular thing that should be obvious to everyone. It's something I genuinely feel is a waste of breath. Want to complain about the state of refereeing? Complain about the fact that referee's still don't have mainstream video assistance (although that hopefully is coming soon).
I posted those stats on a Newbies thread a couple of years ago.
Don't have the time to update everything now, but from his first match with us in 2005 > 2006 season up to the end of 2015 > 2016 season, the stats were for EPL only, excluding cup matches -
UNITED
Without Atkinson -
Played - 392
Won - 256 / 65.31%
Drawn - 72 / 18.37%
Lost - 64 / 16.33%
With Atkinson -
Played - 26
Won - 16 / 61.54%
Drawn - 4 / 15.38%
Lost - 6 / 23.08%
CHELSEA
Without Atkinson -
Played - 390
Won - 236 / 60.51%
Drawn - 88 / 22.56%
Lost - 73 / 18.72%
With Atkinson -
Played - 28
Won - 18 / 64.29%
Drawn - 7 / 25.00%
Lost - 3 / 10.71%
So during those 10 years we were almost 50% more likely to lose a match with him in charge, and Chelsea were almost 50% less likely to lose a match with him in charge, and Chelsea didn't lose at all during the first 17 games he was the referee stretching from 2006 > 2007 thru to 2012 > 2013.
Last edited:
See stats in the post above! They don't prove anything on their own, but certainly good cause for having a bit of a moan on a forum...that's what it's here for!
3.
03/03/2007 Liverpool FC 0:1 Manchester United (Scholes sent off)
14/12/2014 Manchester United 3:0 Liverpool FC
22/03/2015 Liverpool FC 1:2 Manchester United (Juanfield, Gerrard sent off after 38 seconds)
De Gea, Jones, Mata, Young, Fellaini, Herrera, Valencia played in the last two. Carrick played in all three.
They're all shit who cares.
Also, your sample size is way too small, rendering your whole comparison invalid, and you have no idea how statistics work. What a shitshow of a post. Yeah, give relative numbers of something that isn’t even touching 100 in absolutes, otherwise people might notice that actually, if United had won one of those games they lost/drew with Atkinson, they would have just the same relative number as Chelsea!
Oh no....Not you again.
True....I'm not a professional statistician, so you tell me what the sample size should be....
True....I'm not a professional statistician, so you tell me what the sample size should be....
I think @fcbforever just trolls me - can't for the life of me understand why he would even be looking at this thread if it wasn't to....But there we go....
Ah well.....It's a public forum.
Ah well.....It's a public forum.
Personally think that he's one of the best of a pretty poor bunch. That opinion won't change after Saturday win, lose or draw.
It was way up in general, I looked into it, and I saw someone posting shit that is statistical valid as your average study about chemtrails. Since it's a public forum, I pointed out exactly that.
Read up on sample size and then see why what you wrote is utterly irrelevant at best and complete nonsense at worst.