I do think United get big decisions at OT from time to time. I think all the bigger clubs get favourable decisions at home from time to time. Refs are intimidated by the crowd and occasion. I also think sometimes refs don't give decisions as they are worried about being accused of bias. Because United have won a lot of titles the big decisions in their favour are debated to death by angry fans of opposition teams who desperately don't want United to win another trophy. The game at Stamford Bridge this season was a classic example. "Neutral" fans are still foaming at the mouth about United's second penalty as it was dubious. The fact that we should have had a penalty at 0-0 and in another incident Cahill should have been sent off at 0-0 are completely ignored as it doesn't suit the "refs are pro United" agenda. You talk about politics, well the angry mob put a spin on their argument even when the facts make their argument look ****ing stupid. In the 80's people used to say that Liverpool got all the big decisions. They probably did get more than their fair share but I doubt they had much impact on their league title trophy count as the best team over the course of a season always wins the league. I think the suggestion that overnight refs suddenly decided to favour one team over the others, a team that hadn't won a title in 26 years, is laughable. Anyone who genuinely believes that is, no offence, a ****ing moron. Baz will soon pitch up and start bashing on about bribing the officials but even he's not stupid enough to believe that, although he did think the Southampton manager was a potential suitor to buy Liverpool so anything is possible.
The question of bias at OT has not been answered. There's plenty of justification and no little obfuscation but no true reply! Sure, Refs at all grounds will make mistakes - they are only human. Sure some Refs will be influenced by the crowd and/or the occasion. However, one simple fact indicates that there is more then a little truth behind the general perception of bias towards United - THE NUMBER OF PENALTIES AWARDED TO VISITING SIDES AT OT. United themselves have helped to further the supposition by their planned mobbing of referees and the Ferguson watch tapping antics.
So the evidence that United are favored by the officials is the number of penalties awarded against them at Old Trafford? If that really is the case, how come over the past 6 years many teams have conceded less at home, including Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, Everton and even Fulham? I did mention this in my earlier post but you seem to have either missed it or chose to just ignore it.
Read this article. Liverpool have conceded fewer penalties at their home ground than United have in the past 6 years. http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012...-penalty-at-craven-cottage-than-old-trafford/
No you plum. Foredeckdave posted "one simple fact indicates that there is more then a little truth behind the general perception of bias towards United - THE NUMBER OF PENALTIES AWARDED TO VISITING SIDES AT OT." That article disputes Foredeckdave's "simple fact". That is all. The only ****** on this subject is you for failing to follow the discussion. I don't think Howard Webb failing to give a penalty or failing to send off Cahill, both incidents at 0-0, helped us in the Chelsea game. You can pick and choose the incidents to suit your argument but you'll always be made to look like a tool. Carry on.
So let's move on to the penalties for argument. Over the past 8 seasons out of the "Big 4" (and I'm being kind by including Liverpool in that, City and Spurs would no doubt disagree but that's a debate for another thread), the team to win the most penalties has been Arsenal. In second place we have Chelsea, third Liverpool and poor old United are a distant fourth. Must be all the free kicks we get from the refs that have won us all those titles.
You're clutching at straws. You're suggesting that the team that has won a number of titles in the past 8 years has only managed to win a few legit penalties whilst teams like Liverpool and Arsenal who have been scrapping for the runners up (and beyond) places have justly won dozens more penalties. You are a clown my lad, a KLOWN! You wouldn't be so angry all the time if you just accepted that Liverpool are ****ing ****e at the minute, hence their comedy league position under their comedy manager (Woy has 4 points fewer with West Brom, he must piss himself laughing every time he hears about Liverpool's latest surrender), and that the teams at the top of the table are there because they have better players, managers and spirit. Angry and a ****** is a dangerous combination. You can do something about the anger. Now get it sorted. Good lad.
Do you ever spend any time on the United board? Seriously did you ever think of actually talking about your own team on your own board, your on the Liverpool board 24/7 trying to police our board talking rubbish. If you don't like the comments about United on the Liverpool board the **** off back to your own board, your a boring **** that comes out with the same garbage every time.
This is certainly the bloke that sounds angry, no doubt about that. And I really don't get why these angry people whinge about fans of other clubs making comments on the boards of other clubs, there are loads of one club only boards if that's what you want. These open boards are about getting a different point of view or perspective, arn't they ? So really, if you want only Liverpool fans to be allowed to comment you should **** off back ( as suggested ) to a Liverpool only website . oh yeah ....
I think it is you that is clutching at straws. This is NOT a Liverpool/United thing. The general perception is that United have greatly benefited from from lenient refereeing at OT. Now you can break the 'facts' down any way you like but that perception has held good for so long that there has to be more than a grain of truth in it. Davidako does have a point when he states that it's not just the penalties that have been awarded but those that have not. When a BBC commentator states that "that is the first penalty awarded to a visiting side at OT in ? seasons" (sorry, not a stato nerd) then there is an underlying truth somewhere waiting to be revealed.
The problem is that everybody remembers the decisions that apparently helped United win games, but nobody seems to remember (or refuse to acknowledge) the ones that went against them, Chelsea's offside goal, Luiz not being sent off for more than 1 clear second yellow offense, Newcastle's penalty after a perfectly clean tackle, Welbeck having a goal wrongly ruled out for offside, Cahill not seeing red in the Chelsea game, Palacios not being sent off for his double footed knee high challenge on Ronaldo, I could go on but I think you get the idea, and let's not forget the dozens of decisions other teams also get over the season that often get brushed under the carpet because they don't directly affect the title challenge (or won't make a good headline). Everybody likes to jump on the bandwagon and shout conspiracy, but as much as you like to discredit the facts they are exactly that, facts. For every incident you could name that went in United's favor we could more than likely name one that went against them that nobody took any notice of because it didn't make a good headline, just like when Lovenkrands had a penalty appeal turned down for Newcastle against United and it became a big talking point, almost nobody bothered to mentioned that United had a stonewall penalty turned down in the same game when Chicharito was brought down in the box.
what the **** are you talking about old fella? As for the penalties for and against stats, and just to be clear, you're saying that they have no relevance to the argument that United get too many penalties for and not enough penalties against them. Seriously?
The general perception comes because Utd do tend to benefit more than other clubs, but that is because we take advantage of refereeing errors in our favour, but negate most of the ones that go against us. Thus far this season we've had: Penalty wrongly given against Newcastle when Rio won the ball Gary Cahill not sent off for a tackle from behind on Welbeck away to Chelsea Penalty not given for a foul on Welbeck away against Fulham Dempsey elbowed Jones in the face away at Fulham and it wasn't even a foul One penalty that definitely should have been given at home to Stoke and another one that could have been given Adam free kick against Rio for the barest of touches against Liverpool Penalty not given for a foul on Hernandez away to Stoke Ashley Cole not sent off for a stud lunge on Hernandez home to Chelsea Welbeck goal wrongly disallowed for offside away at QPR And that's just off the top of my head. Some of those can be debated, but all of them were controversial and all went against us. Yet of those eight games, we have won four and drawn four, and are eight points clear. So people don't remember the decisions that go against us cos they've made **** all difference to the title race. Ultimately, the perception is there because people remember the last minute penalty claim Fulham had at OT when 1-0 down cos it might have affected the result. They forget the penalty claim we had away at Fulham cos we were 2-0 up and scored a further three goals afterwards. One bad decision in our favour and one against, but the one that went in our favour will be the only one remembered. It's similar to the whole racism thing this season. As was pointed out at the time, two Utd fans were arrested for racism last season. Yet the general (incorrect) perception is now that Liverpool have a race issue because the Suarez incident has thrown the spotlight on the two Liverpool fans who were arrested this season.
I like to get home to see my kids before they go to bed. I appreciate that would be an alien concept for you in so many ways. But good effort anyway. Carry on.
What Dave is saying Swarbs is ignore those facts and look only at the 'general perception' which has been brought around by bitter rival fans It's a good job we aren't all like that or we would all be like Kunakite and think Liverpool are a racist club, I know the facts show you aren't but lets just go with 'general perception'
