Biased against United. Poll like Clatt wanted it to be about him. Two of the worst refs the leagues ever had.
It would have been simpler if you'd've posted this from the start as clearly it's the decision that has scarred you. It was a terrible decision. It happened but I doubt it has had a major impact on Spurs' "development".
Can Utd fans decide whether they're a big club who get all of the decisions, the refs are out to get them or they're treated normally, please? Anyone disagreeing with any of the above seems to be attacked for something, but it really doesn't leave a lot of options.
I don't think there is a pattern to bad decision making - all refs do it, most of the time these days. I don't accept any refs are biased - consciously or unconciously. If they were, the odds are that the bias would be randomly spread too. There may be an argument that some refs bow to crowd or player or manager pressure, but my view is that there is no pattern to this either. Often, it's to avoid controversy (sending a player, awarding a penalty etc) i.e. they bottle it. It's not just the big clubs who can be intimidating. You wouldn't want to upset the Leicester crowd and Nigel Pearson if you could avoid it, would you? I've often thought there is a certain kind of ref who wants to make it clear that he's in charge of the game and won't bow to pressure or provide ammunition to those who would accuse him of bias in favour of the bigger teams. This type is therefore less inclined to give decisions in favour of big teams unless he is sure. Back in the days of "The Alamo" at Old Trafford when Utd were pounding the opposition and there were desperate tackles flying in, holding in the penalty area, handballs and all manner of fouls which teams commit when their backs are to the wall, refs didn't give Utd many of the decisions they should have given. There would have been 2 or 3 penalties every game and teams down to 9 men had the strict letter of the law been applied, but refs let things go. People forget that.
No, people disagree with it. Ferguson disagreed with it. The stats disagreed with it. The refs disagreed with it. That's ignoring the inappropriate contact that he had with officials and the intentional annihilation of anyone who didn't bend to his will. Don't give Utd the rub of the green and the result doesn't go your way? You're fat, you're ****, you're dropping divisions for a while and won't be seen at Old Trafford for years. There's a massive difference between a Pearson slagging off and a Ferguson assassination. One's annoying, while the other actually affects your career. Some of it isn't down to Utd or Ferguson, of course. Regulars in the England team get away with murder and they've had a number of those. Scholes may have had his ludicrous, dangerous tackles reduced to a joke, but how many others get the same treatment from the FA and media? Shearer kicking Neil Lennon in the face was probably the most obvious example:
[Bloody predictive spelling - makes you look a fool] SAF wasn't afraid to criticise refs, but the F.A weren't afraid to continually punish him for his views. Whether or not SAF tried to intimidate refs, it's a myth that they feared him. To the contrary, many seemed to enjoy the challenge of spiting him.The likes of Dermot Gallagher, Graham Poll and Jeff Winter were all just as egocentric, self important and outspoken as SAF. They may have crossed with him (and others), but they didn't take any backward steps.
They didn't punish him in any meaningful way. Fines paid for by the club? Who gives a crap. Touchline bans? Big deal. He slaughtered officials for years and refused to fulfil his media duties, yet he basically got away with it. Mourinho's followed his lead on this completely.
Yes, it's certainly paranoia when the manager in question, the refs in question and the video evidence all points to it. Certainly more paranoid than the guy claiming that the refs are all out to get Utd.
Decisions definitely used to go Fergie's way, but his departure has coincided with a far fairer balance of officiating at United's matches. True, it's still impossible to earn a penalty at OT (if you play for the opposition), but neither do they seem to be gifted as many. Things will probably change, of course.
Liverpool got 3 last season. Granted it could well have been 5. As it goes, the can't get a penalty at OT myth is in fact a myth.
Claims there's a conspiracy against Utd, calls someone a conspiracy theorist for pointing out why they're wrong!
When did I claim theirs a conspiracy against United? I said two refs who think they are bigger than the game often enjoyed making it all about them. No conspiracy. It isnt planned.
