Referee - RESPECT!

[Webbo]

I've often thought that the bigger teams (or more famous if you prefer) get the rub of the green with refs. I don't know if they are star struck or that they start the game with certain expectations of who ought to win and it clouds their judgment.

It seemed to me that tackles from our players were more harshly treated than tackles from theirs. The ref couldn't have been influenced by the crowd because Newcastle were barely audible. I don't believe that the ref would be dishonestly bias. It's the only explanation I can think of.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

I've often thought that the bigger teams (or more famous if you prefer) get the rub of the green with refs. I don't know if they are star struck or that they start the game with certain expectations of who ought to win and it clouds their judgment.

It seemed to me that tackles from our players were more harshly treated than tackles from theirs. The ref couldn't have been influenced by the crowd because Newcastle were barely audible. I don't believe that the ref would be dishonestly bias. It's the only explanation I can think of.

So leicester fans calling him a twat (or things to the same effect) would make him want to give decisions our way how?

[Webbo]

So leicester fans calling him a twat (or things to the same effect) would make him want to give decisions our way how?

If he's offended by things like that then he's in the wrong job. If he's influenced by things like that he should never referee again.

[Guest ttfn]

I was furious at the time but watching it back, the ref didn't have an awful game.

Wellens was lucky not to be sent off for the first yellow and deserved a yellow for the second although a warning would have been nice. As fans, we should be more annoyed with Wellens for the two stupid fouls than the ref.

The challenge on Waghorn - Taylor got the ball and Waghorn happened to have got there a split second too late so he caught him on the follow-through and it looked terrible at the time because Waghorn got taken out.

Berner kicked their player in the knee as he ran past for the first yellow. Nowhere near the ball. Definite yellow and not comparable to the challenge on Waghorn.

Berner's second foul - that should have been a yellow really. I would have been spitting blood if he'd actually sent him off - incandescent - but it was a horrible tackle and deserved a yellow card. Again not near the ball.

The handball by Carroll was as blatant as anything. Unbelievable. I didn't spot it at the time though and neither did most of the crowd.

Howard's challenge wasn't that bad. I thought he won the ball to be honest, just in a bit of an agricultural fashion.

Whatever. Brilliant game, love those niggly games where the ref's decisions and some committed challenges get the crowd pumped up.

No, that's a load of guff I'm afraid. I saw Taylor get the ball at the time, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a foul. It was totally reckless and unnecessarily forceful and dangerous. It was a truly awful decision.

Berner should never have been booked, it was a run of the mill foul. Free kick, no more. The second Berner one looked bad, I was convinced he'd go.

[davieG]

You forget that referees are human not robotic instruments and many decisions they make will have different view points, especially when a decision effects a team you want to win.

Personally, I wouldn't want consistant, know where you stand refereeing - where would the fun it that be? The best atmosphere at games tend to be caused by refereeing decisions or non-decisions and we'd have one less subject to make into a 13 page thread (only leaving maddog's insane rants).

I prefer my atmosphere to be created by exciting non-stop football, that means the referee doing everything they can to keep the game flowing without unnecessary interruptions. That means being consistent so players know where they stand, if they do they'll not foul as much.

[Corky]

The ref had a poor game, Wellens I think on reflection should've gone, but we should've had a penalty for handball and the trip on Gallagher outside the box was worthy of a yellow for the preceding free-kick, if Berner's in the first half on Butt was.

That's all we want, consistency.

[Chrysalis]

I dont know which is true.

(a) ref a newcastle fan

(b) ref told to side with newcastle to aid their promotion

© ref been paid off

(d) ref simply incompetant

but one of them is, my anger is the lack of consistency, the yellow cards were going to one team the soft 2nd yellow for wellens meant if he was consistent then newcastle also would have had someone sent off and waghorn would have won a penalty.

[Sparky]

My view on the decisions

Wellens has to go for me, lucky he didnt walk for the 1st one, horrible tackle.

Berners 1st yellow card was a tad harsh imo, his tackle in the 2nd half was a minimum yellow card. If Wellens was still on the pitch Bruno would have walked

Carrolls block is hand ball for me (have not seen a replay of Butts yet)

My biggest gripe is the lack of any consistancy, Newcastle were making the same tackles we were getting booked for and getting off with it

[Bob Weasel Fox]

I dont know which is true.

(a) ref a newcastle fan

(b) ref told to side with newcastle to aid their promotion

© ref been paid off

(d) ref simply incompetant

but one of them is, my anger is the lack of consistency, the yellow cards were going to one team the soft 2nd yellow for wellens meant if he was consistent then newcastle also would have had someone sent off and waghorn would have won a penalty.

[spot on buddy, you are absolutely right, how anyone in there right mind can say the ref had a good game is totally unfathomable, let alone City fans saying the ref had a good game - Have they all gone mad or turned to the dark side (become a Derby fan?) or turned to the unfeasably dark side (become a F***st fan?) or the last remaining thought must be they have relatives up in geordieland because there really is NO explanation or rational thought process in thinking the ref had a good game - Shocking!!!!]

[Bert]

Fourth game in a row we've had a blatant penalty turned down.

[Bert]

No, that's a load of guff I'm afraid. I saw Taylor get the ball at the time, but that doesn't mean it wasn't a foul. It was totally reckless and unnecessarily forceful and dangerous. It was a truly awful decision.

Berner should never have been booked, it was a run of the mill foul. Free kick, no more. The second Berner one looked bad, I was convinced he'd go.

That's a good point to be fair. Howard won the ball then took the man, yet the ref still gave a foul.

[Koke]

I think I need to watch this game again because I thought he did alright.

So do I.

[Tony Pine]

shocking ref

[marbelladave]

So do I.

So please, just for me, explain:

Why Carrols handball was not a penalty?

Why a tackle committed by Wellens gets a second yellow and a similar tackle on Waghorn, in the box, is waved away?

These are only the most obvious examples of a biased and inconsistant ref.

The only reason he did not send Berner off for a dreadful tackle is that he knew he had fooked up big time and was trying not to make it any worse. willy puller!

[ozleicester]

From the internet stream, I felt the ref had a "typical" match.

The yellow for Wellens was justified and his sending off whilst a bit soft, was within the expected rules, to be fair Wellens was stupid and to blame on both occasions.

The free kick handball was a clear penalty, and simply a refereeing mistake.

The 2nd penalty claim was a 50/50 call and not something i can really fault the ref for.

From what i could see, the game flowed well and the referee didnt impede that in the main.

[marbelladave]

From the internet stream, I felt the ref had a "typical" match.

The yellow for Wellens was justified and his sending off whilst a bit soft, was within the expected rules, to be fair Wellens was stupid and to blame on both occasions.

The free kick handball was a clear penalty, and simply a refereeing mistake.

The 2nd penalty claim was a 50/50 call and not something i can really fault the ref for.

From what i could see, the game flowed well and the referee didnt impede that in the main.

Whilst probably not obvious on the broadcast, Newcastle were niggling and leaving their foot in almost from the outset, offences the ref chose not to penalise. When the City players did the same free kicks were given every time.

It was this that pissed off some of our players, including Wellens, and the rest you know.

BTW the first handball would have been a penalty even at Old Trafford, it was that nailed on!

[The Doctor]

When Marriner sent Wellens off the Family stand should have made it clear what they thought of the ref by reorganising their placards

RAPIST

was thinking this. I would have rearanged to spell (in slightly smaller letters), "Respect - No Thanks", However we need some proper fan organisation to start sorting these things out.

Handball is very rarely given; it has to be deliberate handball... and why would a player deliberately handle the ball in his own box?! Although, I can quite clearly see the other basis of the argument; the players hands were in an unnatural position, he did it to make himself seem bigger. Would I have given the penalty? It would have annoyed one team (unlike some decisions that can be accepted) for sure, and if one team / crowd were being dicks, I think I'd have unknowlingly advantaged the other team

perhaps because the shot was dropping right into the bottom corner and the keeper was other the other side of goal, meaning unless Harper is Mr Tickle (Massively long arms), he wasn't going to reach that and his side would have been 1-0 down.

[samjohnson]

http://thefa.com/Leagues/Respect/NewsAndFe...pectreport.aspx

Apparently we showed respect -

[Guest Mee-9]

My signature says alot about the ref.

[MrSpaM]

My signature says alot about the ref.

It looked bad at the time, but that picture says it all. That tackle is a straight red, and was right infront of the ref. Looking at the picture he could have easily ended waghorns season.

We don't usually get our way with the ref, but the newcastle game was a shambles by all the officials. Anyone who doubts that should look at that picture and ask themselves how that was a throw in.

Maybe the FA should start a "refs respecting the rules of the game with an un-biased view" campaign.

[DB11]

They maybe non-existent now but they were the norm for many a year.

I'll say again, for the last time I've seen many a handball given that doesn't match your definition both for and against Leicester and for teams I have no allegiance to and at the time I've been mildly angered by the unfairness of the decision. i believe i even started a topic on it in the past.

I'll also add that the reason that players like Wellens who commit, on the face of it stupid fouls as his 2nd booking was because they see players doing similar and getting away with it time and time again, as I mentioned earlier Waghorn was fouled in a similar yet more robust fashion in the penalty area and it was totally ignored.

You'll not convince me that yesterday provided a consistent (and I don't mean biased) performance from the referee.

I found the UEFA guidelines for handball, if you're interested.

Although football is a game in which players constantly move their arms and hands as a natural part of their movement, it is recommended that in deciding if a player is handling the ball deliberately, it is essential to consider the following points:

§ Was it a hand to ball situation or ball to hand?

§ Are the player’s hands or arm in a “natural” position?

§ Should the player take the consequences of having his hand or arms lifted high?

§ Does the player try to avoid the ball striking his hand?

§ Is the player able to avoid the ball striking his hand?

§ Does he use his hand or arm to intentionally touch the ball?

[davieG]

I found the UEFA guidelines for handball, if you're interested.

Although football is a game in which players constantly move their arms and hands as a natural part of their movement, it is recommended that in deciding if a player is handling the ball deliberately, it is essential to consider the following points:

§ Was it a hand to ball situation or ball to hand?

Surely if it's ball to hand then all the following are irrelevant.

§ Are the player's hands or arm in a "natural" position?

How can this be determined hands/arms go all over the place when trying to get to the ball - so what is natural, it's so subjective

§ Should the player take the consequences of having his hand or arms lifted high?

If they're in a natural position for the situation or it's ball to hand does it matter?

§ Does the player try to avoid the ball striking his hand?

Trying to avoid the ball could end up as being seen as hand to ball but of course they should but in the heat of the situation it can't possibly be compulsory

§ Is the player able to avoid the ball striking his hand?

See previous comment

§ Does he use his hand or arm to intentionally touch the ball?

That's hand to ball surely and an unnecessary point.

So hand to ball, ball to hand are not 'non-existent' theories!

I think those extra points just complicate the issue and make it even more subjective. It should be purely down to the referee judging whether it was hand to ball and therefore intentional.

Never the less I think there's a lot of referees that out to read those guidelines because from wht I've seen that's not how hand balls are being decided.

[ithuriel]

In my opinion the referee made some mistakes and is human but city on another day with a different referee could easily have had two penalties, no wait, we we're playing Newcastle

[leftsideoverhere]

I found the UEFA guidelines for handball, if you're interested.

Although football is a game in which players constantly move their arms and hands as a natural part of their movement, it is recommended that in deciding if a player is handling the ball deliberately, it is essential to consider the following points:

§ Was it a hand to ball situation or ball to hand?

§ Are the player’s hands or arm in a “natural” position?

§ Should the player take the consequences of having his hand or arms lifted high?

§ Does the player try to avoid the ball striking his hand?

§ Is the player able to avoid the ball striking his hand?

§ Does he use his hand or arm to intentionally touch the ball?

Don't want to dive into the argument particularly but reading those points which UEFA say are "essential to consider" and then watching the Newcastle free-kick incident again I'm even more incensed. The player's arm moved up to intercept the ball so it was 'hand-to-ball'. Having your arm at head hight with the elbow outwards is anything but natural. Clearly the arm was 'high' and the player should take the consequences of having his arm high when it did not need to be there - he was standing in a fooking wall, for crying out loud, not falling out an aeroplane. Far from avoiding the ball, the player lifts his arm as the ball approaches him. He would have been able to avoid the ball striking his hand, just by leaving his arm pointing downwards from the shoulder. It is therefore difficult to interpret the above as anything other than an instruction to the ref to give the penalty as the player appeared to use his arm to intentionally block the ball's passage over the wall. Don't you agree, DB11?

[Matt]

I don't think I understand the offside rule, I think probably 3 times today (Atleast) the referee/assistants gave us offside and the ruling of offside I understand they were clearly onside, and it's not just today it happens week in, week out. On a whole though and I think it's a coincidence todays referee was one of the better officials.

Certainly better than Mr Marriener or whatever his name is.

It is amazing how when we lose or draw the referee gets a lot of abuse and seems to make alot of bad decisions but when we win no-one bats an eyelid, coincidence?

However, It does make me laugh when we lose or draw when people blame it on the referee though.