I don't agree on the last point...Screw headline debate, why isn't the investigations into these matters just done an awful lot quicker?! I'd really be surprised if it turned out statistically to prove that the likes of Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal etc were more heavily penalised over a season than Wigan or West Brom say... I've often felt, having watched Match of the Day religiously since I was a nipper, that it's the lower teams who are frequently punished undeservedly where it matters, on the pitch. Time and time again, you watch, teams who languish at the foot of the table are given horrendous decision after horrendous decision, to which the commentator lends the less than sympathetic variant on "well you don't get much luck when you're down the bottom" etc. What a pitiful excuse that is for poor refereeing. Most, in not all terrific starts or lengthy unbeaten runs incorporate more than a fair share of dodgey decisions or "lucky breaks". I've seen with Newcastle this season (Stevie Taylor just loves to stick that leg out :/)... I genuinely believe that it's got to the stage where premier league teams outside of the top four are so evenly matched there is a case for asserting that it's not merely "the three worst" that go down, but the three unluckiest. Refereeing decisions do not even themselves out, it's one of the most quoted lines in football circles, and it's utter bullchat. It's not bloody karma. Referees aren't some mystical force of nature, they're subjectively analysing each game they take charge of, and it's been scientifically found that psychology plays more than a little part. It's about reaction to the crowd subconsciously and consciously, and more so the eminence of the teams in combat. Furthermore, if one could negate psychology and if you took a wide enough range of samples, a team would have both good decisions for and bad decisions against, but probability wise you're dealing with flipping a coin here. "If you flip so many times, you should get an equal number of heads and tails"... Well that's an aim not a scientific conclusion, isn't it? Because if after 2 flips you have one head and one tail, you may stop and call that evidence. After 3,998, you may have even numbers and stop. But really probability is on a universal, never-ending scale, and so with refereeing decisions. And let's get rid of this media nonesense shall we... Poor Chelsea? How about northern teams? Completely ignored for most of the year by the southern media, until they decide to venture from their safe air-polluted city to capture one dimwit carrying a sofa round the corner on his head past St James'... To interview a thick Geordie accent coming from the mouth of someone wearing a Liverpool top (for the record I suppose SportsDirect have weekly sales on)... According to the press of this country, it would be hard to garner an impression which surrendered any other undertones than that of a northern public who walk around naked and caked in mud, throwing spears at wild pigs, desperately trying to warm a southern made pie but having difficulty starting a fire with two sticks, worshiping a giant statue of Shearer and occasionally raiding southern towns to satisfy our cannabilistic urges. Rarely will you find a positive word about a Sunderland, Newcastle or Boro team in your rags. Barely will you find mention of us even unless our dipshit owner decides to do something daft and there's enough idiots around St James' for reporters to reinforce the image I just created. London clubs receive a lot, and I suspect since they are closer to media stations, are the easiest targets of football journalism, but they are by far and away not the hardest done to when one looks at overall pictures. Ever heard or read that Geordies are deluded? Where did you hear/read that? A paper, because anyone who has ever been to the Toon would not say such. I've not yet heard a Geordie brand all Londoners for the riots bar the occasional amusing football chant, so I think some thinking is required if you truly want to moan on this subject. Oh and the article was indeed well written, just I didn't agree with the contents.
JPF--Referee's like everyone else have their performances appraised, and are affected by what comes out of them! I dont suppose we will get to know the detail of what happened at Foy's, suffice it to say that he is on duty in the PL today! Its nice to know what neutrals think of Foys job last week--because I'm sure its not just Chelsea fans who consider he went a little bit over the top with his cards. There are many great ref's in the past that would have pulled potential offenders to one side and given them a strict warning about their conduct. That doesn't seem to happen any more, and its affecting the quality of games that spectators pay a big price to watch!
