Why isn't there a bigger deal being made of the unprecedented Højlund-Rodri penalty?

Martial

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
627
That penalty being given by VAR was the biggest turning point in the match, and it was over something that occurs in almost every single set-piece in history, and multiple times in the same match.

The fact it was a VAR decision from Michael Oliver which favoured City, who conveniently also works for UAE, should be the absolute focus of the aftermath.

Why isn't there a bigger deal being made of this?
 
Martial said:
That penalty being given by VAR was the biggest turning point in the match, and it was over something that occurs in almost every single set-piece in history, and multiple times in the same match.

The fact it was a VAR decision from Michael Oliver which favoured City, who conveniently also works for UAE, should be the absolute focus of the aftermath.

Why isn't there a bigger deal being made of this?
Click to expand...

Who do you expect to make a big deal of it??

The media who notoriously hate United and have their tongues firmly lodged between the cheeks of city??

The players??

The ex-players employed by said media outlets

You’re barking up the wrong tree
 
Robert Sanchez missed the ball and took out an Arsenal player the other week. It wasn’t even talked about past the replay let alone for a week after like the Onana one. We’re treated differently in the media.
 
Tiki-Taka said:
Utd have bigger problems.
Click to expand...

United started an outfield back 6 of:

Dalot - Maguire - Evans- Lindelof
McTominay - Amrobat

We needed fair refereeing to have any chance.

United started well, and the turning point was the completely unprecedented penalty being given for no reason other than it was against United, and for City, consciously made or not.
 
Martial said:
That penalty being given by VAR was the biggest turning point in the match, and it was over something that occurs in almost every single set-piece in history, and multiple times in the same match.

The fact it was a VAR decision from Michael Oliver which favoured City, who conveniently also works for UAE, should be the absolute focus of the aftermath.

Why isn't there a bigger deal being made of this?
Click to expand...

The fact that Oliver is paid by the state that owns City is a huge conflict of interest, it should never be allowed. Forget the penalty for a minute, why is a ref with such a close financial relationship with the regime that owns a club in the league allowed to officiate, or hold any kind of position?
 
The answer is pretty obvious. By the end of the match it was looked at as relatively inconsequential.
 
It was a penalty.

But this in the Brighton game was no foul, no card and no VAR review for 5 mins to look for the minimal contact that warranted a grown man throwing himself to the ground.

 
Rozay said:
The answer is pretty obvious. By the end of the match it was looked at as relatively inconsequential.
Click to expand...
Precisely. It's also not really the narrative that sells, United in crisis generates much more interaction.
 
I assume you’re looking for something beyond the obvious truth of, “because it’s United”?
 
As others said, mostly because it's not very interesting as a story. If the match had finished 0-1, it might be talked about a bit more.

But also, it's United. At this point referees surely know that being as harsh with us as possible is the best course of action if they want to avoid a potentially career-damaging media shitstorm. Look at the Wolves incident: Wolves received an official apology and the ref got dropped. And then we got denied an obvious handball at Spurs, VAR didn't even check Gabriel manhandling Hojlund in the box, and now this, with barely a peep from anyone. United getting dicked by refs isn't a story, nobody cares. Giving us anything is always a gamble; fecking United over has no consequences.
 
It doesn’t come close to breaking in to the top 10 most controversial VAR incidents this season so far, and the general consensus is that we’d have gone on to lose in a similar fashion whether the penalty was given or not anyway. Who do you expect to say what?
 
The pen was ridiculous, he earned because he pirouetted around better than a ballet dancer. But penalty aside, United didn’t even look like scoring when they had the ball. City looked dangerous every time they went toward. Did the pen change the outcome? I don’t think so.
 
It was a weak ass pen but such incidents have definitely happened before.
 
Erik ten Hag doesn't empty his midfield if we go into HT at 0-0, and we keep in with a shout. It's more than fair to say he shouldn't have done that at 1-0 anyway, however.

There's also the fact that their second was practically identical to the Haaland chance that forced an important save from Onana before the break. If you give a player like that two identical clear cut chances in the space of 20 minutes, they're gonna score one of them. That was probably the single moment that annoyed me most during the game, moreso even than the silly penalty.
 
Ever since the Onana incident versus Wolves, we must be punished.

No way it was changing the outcome of the game but we need to start calling out these joke decisions. Evans was more fouled for Rice's goal against us in the Arsenal game, than Rodri was here.

We could ask for a replay?
 
ToToMarshall said:
It doesn’t come close to breaking in to the top 10 most controversial VAR incidents this season so far, and the general consensus is that we’d have gone on to lose in a similar fashion whether the penalty was given or not anyway. Who do you expect to say what?
Click to expand...

See this is what the OP is talking about. That incident happens every week in probably every match. The sheer number of times it could happen should make it the most controversial VAR decision.
 
At the penalty incident, isn't Gvardiol also pushing Rashford? Isn't this a foul too?
 
RedStarUnited said:
See this is what the OP is talking about. That incident happens every week in probably every match. The sheer number of times it could happen should make it the most controversial VAR decision.
Click to expand...
Liverpool had a goal disallowed for offside after VAR and later released audio showed it was very comfortably onside, in a game where the decision was probably far more critical to the result. It’s not a talking point next to that.
 
ToToMarshall said:
Liverpool had a goal disallowed for offside after VAR and later released audio showed it was very comfortably onside, in a game where the decision was probably far more critical to the result. It’s not a talking point next to that.
Click to expand...

Depends what you consider controversial then. Let me try to bring it to the real world - anyone that gets caught speeding gets a fine and no jail time. If one day a person goes jail for speeding instead of a fine , that is controversial isnt it? The Liverpool decision is as if a person gets told they were speeding when clearly not. Its bad but it wont happen again and again.
 
Because the score was 0-3 .. never a pen , even that tit Dermot just agrees it's a foul and there should be more pens given now like that..

Until it happens to Arsenal City or Liverpool, it won't be talked about.. same as the hand ball at spurs, loads of pens given after that for same thing??.. but it's ok Utd deserve feck all don't they.. same ref as last season as well? The one that gave Bruno goal.. hmmm think on it .
 
RedStarUnited said:
anyone that gets caught speeding gets a fine and no jail time. If one day a person goes jail for speeding instead of a fine , that is controversial isnt it? The Liverpool decision is as if a person gets told they were speeding when clearly not. Its bad but it wont happen again and again.
Click to expand...
That's quite a false equivalence I think, unless there is a provision for going to jail for speeding.

It should go:
Everyone speeds a little but don't usually get fines despite it being illegal.
We were speeding and got caught by an overzealous officer, so we received a fine according to the law.
Liverpool were given a fine despite not speeding.

The penalty decision was harsh but it was a clumsy challenge. It's fine to tussle if the opponent is tussling back but you don't unilaterally hold him once you're beaten.
 
led_scholes said:
At the penalty incident, isn't Gvardiol also pushing Rashford? Isn't this a foul too?
Click to expand...

Exactly. That makes the decision by VAR even more ridiculous.

And then later on, Hojlund was clearly pulled back by Stones when through on goal, but even if he went down which he shouldn't need to do, I sincerely doubt a penalty would have even been given by Michael Oliver in VAR.

Why is that?
 
Martial said:
That penalty being given by VAR was the biggest turning point in the match, and it was over something that occurs in almost every single set-piece in history, and multiple times in the same match.

The fact it was a VAR decision from Michael Oliver which favoured City, who conveniently also works for UAE, should be the absolute focus of the aftermath.

Why isn't there a bigger deal being made of this?
Click to expand...
Who is gonna make a bigger deal? A bunch of fans don't set the agenda on what the media follows up on. They are given a fixed agenda to discuss and express their opinions. Even some of our fans are busy on the internet saying the penalty was a fair call and others are busy trying to get ETH sacked somehow, that they don't want anyone to focus on referee decisions.
 
led_scholes said:
At the penalty incident, isn't Gvardiol also pushing Rashford? Isn't this a foul too?
Click to expand...
The reason the penalty was given was because Rodri may have got to the ball and Hojlund potentially impeded him from playing the ball, which may have resulted in a shot on goal. Hojlund was also never getting to the ball, and never going for the ball, the only action he made was to pull Rodri back.

Gvardiol and Rashford’s tussle was inconsequential as far as the initial ball coming in was concerned.

I’m not presenting this like it’s something I agree with, I’m just giving what the reason was.
 
Since Klopp had his little hissy fit we have been awarded just 4 penalties. I wish our manager would push the narrative that the refs are against us more than he does. I also wish the ex United players in the media would do more to help our situation, but they seem to be revelling in our current state.
 
Because we're shit. No one will listen to bunch of losers, as much as that might hurt people's feelings here. Will look like a loser moaning to cover for his loss.
 
Because our manager said "no comment" about it. Klopp and Pep would make a huge story about it.
 
The penalty incident was largely immaterial by the end of the game because it was such a meek effort from United, but the main reason is there just isn't the appetite for that story.

Nobody cares about a hard luck story concerning United because most neutrals revel in the club's demise too much to care. Chelsea have spent more money than us in the last couple of years and have actually started this season worse than we have, but you won't see Sky Sports dedicating the same amount of time to it as a talking point as they will for us.

Same goes for ref decisions for and against us. Think of the media coverage of the Onana Wolves incident versus the Romero handball in the Spurs game. One was talked about for weeks and the other was barely even acknowledged. It doesn't fit the narrative of everything and everyone around the club being toxic and/or incompetent.
 
Because Bruno throws his hands up in the air when United lose...that is the bigger story apparently :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.