Teams near the top get more penalties because they're in the penalty area more often. It's not rocket science.
The discussion point is: ‘Bigger’ teams get more of the marginal decisions in their favour than ‘smaller’ teams. This has **** all to do with the frequency of how many times a team is in the penalty box. Feel free to come back and wheel out another tired ****ing cliché though.
As far as I recall, the 't' verb ending is English English (think it has Anglo-Saxon origin). Whereas the 'ed' is US English. I always use the t ending and depending upon context, would read 'learned' as meaning erudite, instead of past tense of to learn. Might be slightly out, but can't be arsed to check. But like a lot of American spellings, they're in common use in England too.
'cos our penalty against West Ham was a stone wall'er? Sometimes they're given, sometimes they aren't. We were on the ****ty end this time around, unfortunately.
The whole 'the big teams get the decisions' theory is just nonsense. I'll be honest and just say that it's a bit of a 'whingy' thing to say. I bet Bruce didn't claim that only the big teams get the decisions when Brady fell over against West Ham.
True. But the point of this thread is that 'smaller' teams usually fall into the sometimes they aren't given catergory.
That's not even being discussed, it's about contentious decisions. If Brazil make 30 forrays into the penalty box against Taiwan's 1, does that mean that Brazil should be awarded a penalty if a call is made?
IMO the decision given against Elmo was a naive one made by a ref who has never played the game himself. There's no denying it blocked the travel of the ball, and quite possibly a scoring opportunity, and from the replays Elmo looks to be holding his arms up against his chest like a fairy whereas you see many defenders go in for blocks with their arms behind their backs... But equally, there is no way he could have moved them in time when it bounced up off his thigh. I don't particularly think there was any bias in that decision.
I don't believe that refs go into it thinking: 'right, I'm going to give Spurs everything'. But psychologically they get sucked in, buckle or inadvertently play to the crowd. As pointed out, the MOTD cameras revealed the ref would have struggled to see the impact and seemed to be swayed by Tottenham's players and the crowd.
And now we have confirmation, as if any was needed, that Everton's 'goal' last week was offside, confirmation by the Dubious Goals Committee, what we need now is a dubious penalty decision committee!!! http://www.evertonfc.com/news/archive/2013/10/28/barry-credited-with-hull-strike? Gareth Barry has been credited with Everton's opener in the recent 2-1 victory over Hull City. The Blues raced into an early lead at Goodison Park when Kevin Mirallas' shot from outside the box crept inside Allan McGregor's near post. But after reviewing the footage, the Premier League's dubious goals committee have determined the Belgian's effort was touched by Barry en route to the back of the net. The decision has granted the English midfielder his first goal for the Toffees since arriving on a season-long loan from Manchester City.
It's not nonsense at all, it happens all the time and it happens in all leagues. When we were a big fish in a small pond in the lower leagues, we used to get the benefit of these sort of decisions.
Again, this isn’t what this thread is discussing. Why not save the above comment and any future pearls you may have for a future thread concerning the ratio of the frequency of goal mouth chances to penalties awarded.
Are you genuinely saying you don’t understand my point or just trying to be picky to somehow support your view?
Yes. The last 2 away games we have LOST to clueless officials who have failed to do the basics of there jobs. True. But we are now behind 1 - 2 after yesterday. Hopefully Mr Marriner will level things up for us on saturday.
