Is Old Trafford United the Juventus of English football?

[KennyDalglish]

I dont want to discuss this more in the Old Trafford forum because that would make me a 'troll'.

Seriously, have you guys seen one team that gets as much lucky decisions go their way as Old Trafford United? Or the point is, is Old Trafford United just lucky or are they just another Juventus?

Against Manchester City, it was extra extra extra time. Against Sunderland, its a ridiculous red card. Thats 4 points out of 6 instead of 1.

I dont want Old Traffordians coming here abusing me now - this is a common forum. I want people who support every club to post their honest opinions here. Maybe I am biased, maybe I am not - one thing I know, each time Old Trafford United plays a match, there will always be some lucky decision that goes their way.

[Bronaldo]

The "extra, extra time" has been discussed and explained. Unless you can provide evidence that only Manchester United get favourable extra time at home, you cannot make such a claim- proof or retract, please.

A player on a yellow card kicks the ball away. Kicking the ball away in such manner is considered a yellow card. Player was given a yellow card. Can you explain what was wrong with that?

[billyireland]

Premiership 2008/09:

Liverpool opponents red cards: 10*
Liverpool players red cards: 0

Man Utd opponents red cards: 2
Man Utd player red cards: 5

Liverpool get more penalties than Man Utd in the 08/09 Premiership season. Liverpool concede less penalties than Man Utd in the 08/09 Premiership season.

Liverpool scored more last 10 minute winners and more injury time winners than Man Utd in 2008/09.

Please discuss. Everybody feel - fans of all teams -free to discuss.

*IIRC, this included players from Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Everton & Villa - all the other top 6 teams in the Premiership. Man Utd's opponents two red cards came vs. Stoke & West Brom. The FA & the refs were even so biased towards Man Utd that they decided not only to give Brad Friedel a red card vs. Liverpool but to rescind it in time for the Villa-United match immediatley afterwards, that dastardly bunch...

[Stretch Armstrong]

The "extra, extra time" has been discussed and explained. Unless you can provide evidence that only Manchester United get favourable extra time at home, you cannot make such a claim- proof or retract, please.



Explained? Care to provide a link?

[Stretch Armstrong]

Premiership 2008/09:

Liverpool opponents red cards: 10*
Liverpool players red cards: 0

Man Utd opponents red cards: 2
Man Utd player red cards: 5

Liverpool get more penalties than Man Utd in the 08/09 Premiership season. Liverpool concede less penalties than Man Utd in the 08/09 Premiership season.

Liverpool scored more last 10 minute winners and more injury time winners than Man Utd in 2008/09.

Please discuss. Everybody feel - fans of all teams -free to discuss.

*IIRC, this included players from Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Everton & Villa - all the other top 6 teams in the Premiership. Man Utd's opponents two red cards came vs. Stoke & West Brom. The FA & the refs were even so biased towards Man Utd that they decided not only to give Brad Friedel a red card vs. Liverpool but to rescind it in time for the Villa-United match immediatley afterwards, that dastardly bunch...

What do the stats regarding red cards/penalties prove exactly?

Want to add the fact that Liverpool scored more goals too?

I don't believe that there is any Moggi like organised conspiracy, but it's clear to me that the top teams get preferential treatment from refs, Manu more than most. Ferguson has too much power with refs, just read another article from him mouthing off. He gets away with it too much and should be punished in a way that will actually affect him.

[billyireland]

I agree that the refs don't side with any particular big side... all the top four clubs benefit from decisions from the ref, and it is not fair on the rest of the league. But this singling out of Man Utd as if they get all of the decisions where nobody else does, and claims that it must be bribery, a conspiracy, etc are just stupid.

It would have to be the worst conspiracy, or the most half-assed bribe in the history of the world that we give the refs, if it results in our most direct title opponent last year getting considerably more calls than us. Surely if there was such a conspiracy there would have been a few dodgy red cards thrown Liverpools way during that close run-in (and a few dodgy ones for our opponents as well in tighter games, not just vs. WBA & Stoke), we would have got more penalties than anybody else (iirc Arsenal also got more penalties and conceeded less than us last year), and if "Fergie time" is as prevelant as some people claim, and exclusive to us, then we would have had the most injury time winners... right?

I am not trying to claim there in any kind of conspiracy, in fact the stats I posted above were to blow out of the water all of these idiotic conspiracy theories.

[Bronaldo]

Explained? Care to provide a link?

Goal celebration lasted a minute (Bellamy)
United made a substitution (+30 seconds)

I think Owen scored 94 seconds after the 4 minutes.

[lolsson88]

No you're not biased, my dear.
The referees that officiate at Old Trafford are.

[billyireland]

Hm, nice retort to how Liverpool got more advantageous calls than us last year. You certainly proved me wrong...

[JackBastard]

A player on a yellow card kicks the ball away. Kicking the ball away in such manner is considered a yellow card. Player was given a yellow card. Can you explain what was wrong with that?

That is not a bookable offense. It wasn't a foul in the first place, and then he was kicking the ball back the 10 yards or so to where the "offense" took place while it was still in his possession. I don't doubt that had it been the other way around no card would have been given.

[lanman]

That is not a bookable offense.

Not in itself, but delaying the restart is. If the opposition want to take the free kick quickly (as in the case when behind late in the game) then his actions could certainly be interpreted as attempting to delay the free kick.

It wasn't a foul in the first place...

Completely irrelevant.

.....and then he was kicking the ball back the 10 yards or so to where the "offense" took place while it was still in his possession.

Watch it again. He clearly kicked the ball away so that Man Utd could not collect the ball for a quick free kick. It was a soft booking, but not unjustified.

I don't doubt that had it been the other way around no card would have been given.

Another Sunderland player had already been booked for the same offence earlier in the game. Whether a Man Utd player would have been booked or not is purely speculation as they did not commit any such offence.

[Bronaldo]

Not in itself, but delaying the restart is. If the opposition want to take the free kick quickly (as in the case when behind late in the game) then his actions could certainly be interpreted as attempting to delay the free kick.



Completely irrelevant.



Watch it again. He clearly kicked the ball away so that Man Utd could not collect the ball for a quick free kick. It was a soft booking, but not unjustified.



Another Sunderland player had already been booked for the same offence earlier in the game. Whether a Man Utd player would have been booked or not is purely speculation as they did not commit any such offence.

This.

[Stretch Armstrong]

None of this detracts from the fact that Ferguson holds too much sway. You can see the consternation on officials' faces when he berates them, in stark contrast to the smug smirks or fierce rebuttals given to Fergie's counterparts should they complain.

[Harry Boulton]

The game at the weekend:

Liverpool losing 1-0 at the time, the assistant shows 3 minutes of added time. The referee plays 5 minutes in total, yet no one has pointed this out. Why? Because Liverpool did not get an equaliser or winner? Poor them, what shame.



The added time has been explained.

The time shown on the board is a MINIMUM, not a maximum. Against City there was a minumum of 4 minutes of added time but you have to factor in any goals that are scored during that time, celebrations afterwards, any substitutions that are made in that time and any throw-ins, corners and/or fouls/bookings that take place. All have to be taken into account to ensure that 90 minutes of play is completed, and not just 90 minutes on someones watch. Ferguson was very clever against City. He made a tactical substitution bringing Carrick on, knowing that this would add time on and allow his side some more time to get a winner. This may be exploitation of the rules, but it is thoroughly legal and there is nothing legally questionable about it.

If Man Utd have perfected the art of exploiting this time then there is a lesson to be learned. Players should play until the referee blows the whistle, not stop when they think he should have blown. Liverpool, again, found to their cost that if you stop playing in these dieing moments just because you think the game is up, that you can be punished and they were. City were the same, Sunderland were too.

The red card gainst Sunderland was 100% justified. 10 minutes earlier Anton Ferdinand was booked for exactly the same offence. Richardson was already on a booking and anyone who indulges in the same offence 10 minutes later whilst on a booking already is not unlucky, they're stupid, thoughtless and deserve to be sent off.


That is not a bookable offense. It wasn't a foul in the first place, and then he was kicking the ball back the 10 yards or so to where the "offense" took place while it was still in his possession.


If the referee interprets it as a show of discent then it is a bookable offence. As has been said just now, Ferdinand had been booked for EXACTLY the same offence 10 minutes earlier and was booked for his trouble so Richardson knew the risk he was running. Please explain why Richardson deserves to be let off when his team mate had been booked just minutes earlier for an identical offence? In a time when consistant application of the rules is being called for, this is only common sense and anything other than that would be unfair in the extreme. Whether the challenge was a foul in the first place is irrelavant. Players are told to play to the referee's whistle, and in these instances the referee's word is final. It's not like he was awarding a penalty or a free-kick on the edge of the box. It was a none threatening free-kick and Richardson should have got on with the game, instead of indulging in what was interpreted as either a delaying practice or a public show of discent.

This hoo-haa about added time at OT is ridiculous. Added time is used all over the country. Most teams see this as a time when the game is petering out and players generally go through the motions. Ferguson does not and seeks to use every minute of time to get as much as he possibly can. This has resulted in season changing results. Villa last year being the prime example.

You play until the referee blows, and nota minute before. Un ited have been winning games in the dieing seconds for years. That other sides have not learnt their lesson is hilarious and, quite frankly, embarassing.

[Stretch Armstrong]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article6862416.ece

Looking forward to Fergie's response...

And is there really any point in fining him?

[Harry Boulton]

Hey, the old man lost the plot. His was bang out of order to bring into question the referee's fitness in the first place.

The true blame lies at the feet of the managers selection, and the players themselves, not least Nani who continues to amaze and confound in equal measure in almost every game.................

[The Jitty Slitter]

I agree that the refs don't side with any particular big side... all the top four clubs benefit from decisions from the ref, and it is not fair on the rest of the league. But this singling out of Man Utd as if they get all of the decisions where nobody else does, and claims that it must be bribery, a conspiracy, etc are just stupid.

Exactly.

If you look at the pattern of inexplicable refereeing, one is drawn to the conclusion that they are seeking particular outcomes, not favouring any one side.

Look at Juve versus Bayern for a recent example from Webb.

[billyireland]

Strange... nobody posted in here over the last 24 hours.

What. A. Surprise.

Anybody want to tell me how Carragher was not sent off for his foul near the end... at Anfield? Reminds me a fair bit of one of the most 'dead cert' red cards of last season, which nobody (myself very much included) complained about.

Vidic red card at Anfield
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t64/captainfantasticpants/carraghernored.jpg

Carragher non-red card at Anfield
http://i157.photobucket.com/albums/t64/captainfantasticpants/vidicred.jpg

[broseph]

My thoughts exactly. Vidic's card on Gerrard was a mirror image. Add to it a early no-call on Carragher who clearly went over the ball and into Carrick, a shove in Giggs' back in the first half that happened in the box and wasn't even looked at, yellow to Berbatov (for what exactly?), and a very late red to Mascherano who had made quite a few mistimed tackles and should've had a yellow card in the first half for persistent fouling, which would have him marching 20 minutes or so from time instead of when he actually went. I am not saying United were not fouling Liverpool players but they seemed to have paid for the fouls and Liverpool has not.

But whatever. United are definitely ref's favorites. No argument here.

[Stretch Armstrong]

Gerrard had control of the ball, Owen didn't.

Had Gerrard managed to hurdle Vidic, he would have had a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Had Owen managed to get to the ball first, he would have been in a promising position.