In the Evans / Drogba incident, Evans clearly won the ball with a header but yes one of his jumping feet connected with Drogba's chest. Not really the same type of incident lad but tbh I was a little surprised at the time there was no penalty for Chelsea or card (any colour) for Evans. With regard to the booking, I have no idea why Drogba was booked. Ask Martin Atkinson.
Quite ironic actually - of all the players to have lunged in with high feet in recent years (Maxi, Evans, Torres, De Jong), only Paul "gets away with murder" Scholes has actually been rightly punished with a red card. Although according to some of the scousers that's cos Scholesy's was much worse than any other tackle in history You won't end a career, but you could certainly break a rib if a hard metal stud catches it at the wrong angle. Didn't Ben Thatcher give some young lad a collapsed lung with a similar tackle some years back? Broke a rib into his lung IIRC. Although Thatcher was a whole different world of crazy... Let's be honest, had the decisions gone the other way we'd still be talking about an important big game of football for all the wrong reasons. Ultimately, there will only be zero controversy when players don't make fouls or go to ground easily - as soon as the ref has to make decisions like that then it will always be a talking point.
Ivanovic should have gone for the foul on Evra and Torres should have gone for the foul on Cleverley. Had these decisions been properly made, Chelsea would then have been 2-0 down with 9 men on hte field. Any later offside goal would have been an irrelevance because there is now way Chelsea would have come back to 2-2 with 9 men. Following these errors, I agree that Torres' 2nd yellow card was very harsh (he did make a meal of it but fair is fair as with Young) and, of course, the winning goal was definitely offside. Having made 2 errors in Chelsea's favour through not sending off the players before their team got on the scoresheet, the officials then made 2 errors in United's favour, the second of which (and probably both) did affect the end result; but, had United not been on the receiving end of the bad decisions in the first half, the offside goal would not be a talking point. So I do not think you were robbed.
If all these incidents which you refer were really red cards, every other game would end up with 5 or 6 sending offs. Ultimately at 2-2 two key decisions were blatantly wrong and resulted in you winning and us down to 9 men with very little chance of then getting something from the game. The shame is that at 2-2 this was on a knife edge and could have gone either way. The grand stand finish was ruined by officials. Least for us it is early in the season and hopefully we can recover.
Sorry mate, still disagree with you there. The grandstand finish was ruined by Ivanovic's insanity (everyone knows you never run across the back of someone clean through on goal) and Torres having already gotten himself a yellow card for a stupid tackle. Had he not kicked Cleverley in the chest, then the booking for diving would have meant no more than Valencia's booking in a similar situation. Look at your players before you look at the officials.
The only issue with the red cards is Torres shouldn't even have been on the field to get a second yellow. I love how quickly he stopped holding his poor knee in agony when he saw the decision. Simulation at its finest. Ivanovic was a nailed on red every day of the week.
Ivan granted but with 10 men we'd have still have had a chance. As for Torres, no. As per Graham Poll on the radio this morning, a ref can't book aplayer if there is contact (which evans and fergie admitted there was) so Torres was doing what most players do, making the most of contact. There should have been no risk of getting a booking. Young could have been booked for the Ivan red on that logic.
You'd still have had a chance of a result, but Ivanovic ruined the grandstand finish. Even before Torres went RDM had taken off Oscar, so Chelsea's goal at that point was obviously to hold on for a draw. If anything, Hernandez' wrongly awarded goal helped matters at that point, as it forced Chelsea to attack rather than parking the bus. Torres shouldn't have been booked for the dive, but then it is very difficult for a ref to be certain about the contact in those sorts of situations, particularly when the contact is so slight. My point is that it took two yellow cards for Torres to get sent off. The first one of them was most definitely his fault, and should really have been a red. So Torres is just as much to blame as the ref. And remember that Valencia was booked when there was contact as well, so at least Clattenburg was consistent (for once!)
Interesting you have mentioned Poll. He also said of the tackle on Young in the Daily Mail: "...Ivanovic is shown the red card. It is perfect technique and the correct decision."
Yes I have never seen Vidic, Rooney or Scholes get sent off. Never. You clearly have a well thought out point so well done you you clever bastard
Liverpool fans feel Young dived lol. Only the scousers eh Every Chelsea fan on this site and beyond has no complaints over the first red but never fear, scousers are here to perform acts of delusion on Chelseas behalf.
From the Manchester Guardian Chelsea were not particularly hard done by In recent times, a lot of hot air has been emitted regarding Manchester United's supposed preferential treatment from referees. Some lunatics genuinely believe there is an official conspiracy involving Sir Alex Ferguson, the FA, the CIA and Nasa. Their attitude will not have been changed by events at Stamford Bridge, yet the fuss over Sunday's game is misplaced, a convenient narrative that doesn't stand up to the most basic scrutiny. Fernando Torres should have been sent off long before his dubious second yellow card. Chelsea were not unlucky to be down to nine men; they were lucky not to be down to eight, because Mikel John Obi should have received a second yellow card for fouling Antonio Valencia. Chelsea were the better team at 2-2, but they were about to go 3-2 down when Branislav Ivanovic committed the foul for which he was correctly sent off. And while Javier Hernández's winner was offside, United would probably have won the game anyway. Hernández's goal does not significantly impact on the balance sheet of refereeing mistakes in matches between United and Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. Since their previous league win at Stamford Bridge in April 2002 United have suffered a series of shocking decisions, most notably in 2002-03, 2007-08, 2009-10 and 2010-11. Two of those almost cost them the league; a couple of mistakes from Martin Atkinson in 2009-10 probably did cost them the title. They were due a decision at Stamford Bridge. They are due a few more before things can be said to have evened themselves out. Rob Smyth
Makes a change from that twat. He's the one who did the "shredding his legacy" article in 05/06 and another one decrying SAF only a season or two ago.
But of course he said something fair about Utd so he must be sniffing SAF's bum hole or some other such nonsense...
Not just the Scousers this time, I think PISKIE started a thread on the Arsenal board claiming that Young dived while shouting the usual conspiracy bollocks. I think they also complained about Chicharito's offside goal while defending their own dodgy winner by claiming Mackie was playing Arteta onside.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...referee-guide-October-20-21--Graham-Poll.html First part of this article. Chelsea players lying about a ref because he crossed them.
This bloke sums up that thread for me: I can't believe none of them can see the BS they are all spouting
