Until you have read the laws of association football you will never know how bad referees can manipulate the Laws Every Law is 'in the opinion of' and leads to misinterpretation
And let’s not pretend these laws aren’t run past the big clubs first either. They love “open to interpretation”. It’s been well documented that Man U get the most favourable decisions, and the likes of Burnley are at the bottom.
I've had my fill of it this season.. West ham match 1 until yesterday its been litterally unbelievable this season.
Problem with this is that 1. Dean is not a medic. He should be erring on the side of safety for the player. It didn’t matter if Hayden was faking it or not the game should have been stopped. So why wasn’t it? 2. Dean did see Hayden down. Decided he was holding his back!! And decided not to blow his whistle. This does away with the “he probably didn’t see Hayden down” or “it all happened too quick” arguments. Also reinforces the argument that Dean is incompetent and/or blind (*) and shouldn’t be refereeing full stop. At no stage did it ever look like Hayden was holding his back. Yet Dean thought he was and he was only 20 to 30 yards away, max. I was sat 165 miles away and I could see he was holding his head. 3. Hayden was “knocked” in the incident. He was underneath 2 players jumping up and is bumped in the head whilst essentially standing between the 2 players jumping. Hayden probably was laying it on but Dean doesn’t know that. With a head injury or an apparent head injury Dean should have stopped the game. That was just one incident of a pathetic performance from Dean and from our point of view not the first time by Dean against Newcastle. We are facing absurdly bad refereeing decisions almost every game this season not every few games like most teams. An example in our previous game Maddison’s dive and cheating. The game before that a penalty not given despite a clear hand ball by Tarkowski. The game before against Norwich that the referee missing a blatant hand ball penalty which was eventually given after 3 minutes of checking the screen by the referee after referral by VAR when it was evident on first view. I could go on (probably am). * Apologies to all the partially sighted and all snowflakes for using the word “blind”. Should save on the lawyers fees.
For the first Liverpool goal I still don’t understand how Konate can throw himself in the air with no chance of getting the ball, get nowhere near the ball, floor two Newcastle players in the process and it’s not a foul. Fraser was clearly fouled and should have had a penalty, no mention that the foul stopped a clear goal scoring chance so should have been a red card too. To be fair I thought Lashelles clearly should have had a penalty given against him too for the push although TAA shouldn’t have been on the pitch.
I dont think refs are under any instructions, theyre just ****ing ****. Theyre useless arrogant over protected morons. Im not chatting about Dave who volunteers in the local pub league, these prem refs act like coppers sometimes, like they **** gold. As if people like that will ever, ever admit they made an error.
I’m not sure about some conspiracy against us. The big sides have always been favoured against the clubs lower down. Clubs like our rivals Sunderland or Derby were cannon fodder in this regard. Sheff U and so on noted it regular. Obviously when you’re up there it’s kind of easy to ignore! Man U for years got ridiculous treatment. Man C and Liverpool are the same now. My main gripe is Mike Dean. He shouldn’t have been reffing that game. His impartiality on Liverpool games had already been acknowledged in the past when he was removed from the 2006 FA Cup final. Why was it even necessary, they have a pool of refs to select from. His decisions were garbage. Regardless of whether Hayden has faked the extent of it or not, the rules state he should have stopped the game. He looked at so he can’t pretend he didn’t see contact with the head or Hayden going down. It isn’t a judgement call for him if the player is actually hurt, the rules don’t work like that. The Trent Alexander one is a foul on Fraser under current rules, with very recent examples to confirm it. I think he played the man first anyway. Difficult for Dean but VAR should have asked him to take a look. And then him acting as a shield for the third was just icing on the cake. His positioning was terrible and Dubs makes that save. He missed numerous fouls on ASM for all I think he’s a fairy. He had an absolute shocker and favoured Liverpool in a ridiculous manner. Some of it was down to incompetence rather than bias but the overall decision making massively favoured Liverpool. Given we all had concerns prior to the game this would happen due to where he is from, it looks really bad whether that played a part in his decision making or not.
All indeed true. Your posts are massive btw. . All true apart from Dubz saving TAA shot. Your right in that Dean is blocking his view and also about it being terrible positioning. But I don’t think Dubz saves it if Dean isnt there. It was a fantastic hit. But he’s everything else a very good case for ****housery against the little guys.
He got a hand to it even with the sighting issue. I reckon he would say he had a fair chance. The only thing I’d say is there is a Newcastle player there also. Deans movement is just weird. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....derarnolds-goal-for-liverpool-v-newcastle?amp
Your right it was Shelvey I think. Yes I didn’t understand Deans movement either. Very strange. My mate is a Liverpool fan and he also thinks the foul and penalty decision went Liverpools way. But they have a different view as to the reason why. Apparently Dean is actually against Liverpool as is a Tranmere fan. That the reason why they (Liverpool fans) think he was lenient towards them in our game is because he doesn’t want to be seen as being against them. Because he wants to referee the “big” matches and ofc Liverpool are the biggest team right now.
He is a Tranmere fan. Could possibly be against, could possibly favour them as from the Wirral. The rules are generally you don’t select people from the area for that reason. Bias either way, sub consciously or not, is unacceptable. If you look earlier in this thread I called it before the game because I knew it would be an issue. So it’s not like sour grapes. HDQ said it also. Completely unnecessary as plenty of refs. The PL don’t help themselves. The damning thing is he was pulled from the 2006 FA Cup final for this very reason so it isn’t really even a debate. You can’t have one rule some of the time until you decide otherwise. Integrity is important. He should not ref Liverpool games.
You sound like you know what your talking about so I’m going to ask to disprove a myth I have just read on factual always correct land which is Twatter. Does getting the vaccination reduce the risk of transmission? Genuine question!
I have Inside knowledge of the arrogance of these Refs thats why I watch them closely The Laws of the game are pretty simple, and are the same Laws for Park football upto Premier League but the way the Premier League treat other officials is disgusting, Where they dictate to the other officials HOW they want the game to be officiated How many times do you see a ball go out or a foul and the Lino waits to put his flag up when it is right in front of him That's the ref telling him which way to flag There are many more signals the ref makes to the officials that the common supporter does not see A great example of George Orwells Animal Farm all refs are equal except for the Premier League refs who above equal
Vaccination reduces the risk of you getting an infection. If you don’t have it then you can’t pass/ transmit it on. So it doesn’t reduce the risk of transmission per se but has the effect of reducing the number of people who have it and therefore reduces the extent of transmission not the Virus’ actual ability to transmit.
So my next question is on topic of human rights. Deep water here mind. If a person chooses not to get the vaccination and isn’t showing signs of the virus and hasn’t been officially diagnosed with Covid. That person isn’t a higher risk than a vaccinated person of infecting someone else? All being vaccinated does is reduce the risk of you catching it in the first place! There’s a lot of people saying the unvaccinated are responsible for increasing the spread. I suppose if it increases the risk of that person catching it by very definition increases the risk of that person spreading it.
