MrMortimer (U8234)

I agree with what you said but i was just stating my personal opinion on it and have held that belief for as long as i can remember. There have been a lot.

ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 3 minutes ago

comment by Javier-Stevie&Aquilani (U7411)

posted 3 minutes ago

I have seen countless decisions that have been dubious and have gone in Uniteds favour. Like MrMortimer said everyone can remember being wronged at United at least once and it seems there is an overwhelming sense of agreement that United get the majority of decisions, especially at home.
=======================

I have seen LFC get the same, more recently Suarez's dive against Arsenal. You still lost though.

The overwhelming sense of agreement comes from people who are dense and are bitter about their clubs failing.

For every decision that you claim has gone in our favour I could name 2 or 3 that have gone against us.

We are the biggest club in the country and the spotlight is on us all the time, creating the impression that we get it all.

We do not. What I find amusing is that when things do not go for us or ridiculous decisions get given against us, none of you bat an eyelid.

That my friends clearly highlights your bitterness and bias and clealry shows why your comments and ideas mean fk all.

We all get decisions for us and we all get decisions against us.
=================

Most of that bile is just a rant to be honest. Largely inaccurate and hate filled.

This is classic bull: For every decision that you claim has gone in our favour I could name 2 or 3 that have gone against us.


I don't buy into the 'evens itself out' rubbish that United keep perpetuating.

Nobody can tell me that for for 20 decisions going Uniteds way also go for West Brom.

Like I said it's a majority opinion for a reason and it's got little to do with club preference.

Javier

Fair enough - I just am trying to make sure my posts remain free of any personal sentiment on the subject.

Daredevil - I'm not a bitter rival fan, and agree that decisions go for and against sides. Will you accept that the stats given about the total number of penalties do not and cannot "prove" the myth to be false.

Again - I'm not saying the myth is true, I'm just saying that the measure given in this thread is not proof either way. Surely you can agree on that?

comment by filters=wimps (U11635)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)

posted 12 minutes ago

The article is a foolish one and only a fool would not understand this. Take them team out of it, take United out of it, then look at it with a fresh mind, you'll then get over the confusion.
===================

I agree, it's just as foolish as the imbeciles who say Utd get all the decisions. Idiocy at its finest. They do not factor in the decisions Utd do not get.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Exactly. The only point I've been making is not that United are more likely to get the decisions but that these stats don't prove that they don't.

comment by Javier-Stevie&Aquilani (U7411)
---------

Kind of like yours wouldn't you say. No facts and no evidence to present the gifts we get and the gifts we do not get.

Go ahead, name them and I will give you 2 or 3 examples that didn't go for us.

Where's your article criticising the ref for the Newcastle penalty at OT?

Javier - Daredevil

There will be anecdotal evidence for both arguments! And let's be honest I'm sure daredevil will be able to product more occasions when decisions went against United simply because he will have seen united more often! That will prove nothing.

Exaclty Mr Mortimer. I watch every single Utd game and can identify 5-6 decisions that do not go our way. From corners, freekicks, pens etc but a lot of people do not do that and pick on the events that the media hype up to sell papers.

Same applies to every football club but unfortunately some fans will never admit that, once Utd is involved.

If Utd got the decisions Bolton have got over the last couple of games, there would be anarchy in the streets.

Guess what, no one's talking about those.

ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago

Exaclty Mr Mortimer. I watch every single Utd game and can identify 5-6 decisions that do not go our way.
====

Frankly pathetic comment. It's like you take it as a personal responsibility to see what united should be getting. A devine right to favourable decisions. Correct ones you will say.

Daredevil - I think you can name more that go against United than an opposing fan could name that go for you because you watch more.

Just as I'm sure a Liverpool fans could name more that go against Liverpool than you could that go for them.

However - that isn't proof that the number that go for United is the same number that go for other clubs. You might be able to say 10 decisions that go against you... a Chelsea fan might be able to name 20, an Arsenal fan 30...

At the moment we have evidence that some decisions go for clubs, some go agianst. (Noclubs get no decisions)

We do not know how many go for each club. So to say it all evens itself out over the course of the season is as much of a myth as saying United get more.

I am sure most of the top clubs will prefer to say it evens itself out, whereas I am equally sure most of the lower clubs will feel hard done by over the course of the season. All fans will have their own opinions - but they will not be based on fact.

The evidence given in this thread does not prove United do not get favourable refereeing. Just as taken a year earlier it doesn't prove they do. The truth is we don't have the statistics to say whether they do or not. It is, as yet, unproven.

The myth says that utd get all the decisions and although the article cannot and dosent address every decision it dose give a figure of 8 possibly 9 pens conceded by them at OT in this particular time period.

For the fools who propogate the myth surely you would expect these figures to be a lot lower than the rest of the league....

the article dosent dispel the myth but in the area of penaltys conceded by utd at OT it dosent actually support it...

maybe horward webb wasnt officiating when those 8 or 9 pens were awarded eh.....

oops sorry one myth at a time.....

comment by Javier-Stevie&Aquilani (U7411)

posted 15 minutes ago

ManUtdDaredevil (U9612)
posted 2 minutes ago

Exaclty Mr Mortimer. I watch every single Utd game and can identify 5-6 decisions that do not go our way.
====

Frankly pathetic comment. It's like you take it as a personal responsibility to see what united should be getting. A devine right to favourable decisions. Correct ones you will say.
===========================

Read the comment again., You clearly do not understand the point I was making.

I'm talking about refereeing errors

“The myth says that utd get all the decisions and although the article cannot and dosent address every decision it dose give a figure of 8 possibly 9 pens conceded by them at OT in this particular time period.”
The myth does not say that. The myth says that United get a disproportionate number of decisions.

“For the fools who propogate the myth surely you would expect these figures to be a lot lower than the rest of the league....”
If the myth is true – then one would expect United to get more decisions for them. Measuring how many go against them does not tell the story of how many went for them…. Since there aren’t an even number allotted to each team every game. It is quite possible a team concedes more penalties than any other side, and yet still gets favourable refereeing as the referee could miss more than they give.

“the article dosent dispel the myth but in the area of penaltys conceded by utd at OT it dosent actually support it...”
Thank you – it doesn’t dispel the myth… that’s all we’ve been saying from the start. It neither proves nor disproves.

Finally somebody gets it. It's just a shame it took 400 comments to get there.

The myth does not say that. The myth says that United get a disproportionate number of decisions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------



seems like the parameters of the myth chop and changes to suit the argument

the figues not decisions given for utd in the article (re penaltys conceded) are not disproportionate in relation to several other teams and dont support the foolish notion of the myth. Wouldnt one who supports the myth expect the the figues to reflect how disproportionate the favorable utd decision making supposedly is

The parameters do not change. I think it has always been the same - that Man Utd get favourable treatment from referees. That has always been the same.

Firstly - the number of penalties given over a period of time is not an accurate measure since it is not time but actual penalty instances which will be the important measure!

Secondly - measuring decisions given ignores the other side of favourable refereeing which is not giving decisions when they should.

If one supports the myth they would expect Manchester United to have more favourable decisions than other teams. They would expect them to concede proportionally less penalties than opponents. Just measuring the amount given does not measure the amount given, nor does it measure the proportion of those that should have been given. As such it is a useless statistic in this argument.

The parameters do not change. I think it has always been the same - that Man Utd get favourable treatment from referees. That has always been the same.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

no actually the myth as proported by the FOOLS actually jumps from nobody gets a decision at OT to UTD get all the decisions at OT to UTD get a "disproportunate" amount of favorable decisions at OT

Now whatever way you want to describe the myth if the decision making is as BLATANTLY biased as the FOOLS proport it to be it is NOT reflected in the figures given in the article for penaltys conceded by UTD at OT in the period given when put against several other teams in the league.

You're wasting your time, the others get it, 'filters' won't.

“no actually the myth as proported by the FOOLS actually jumps from nobody gets a decision at OT to UTD get all the decisions at OT to UTD get a "disproportunate" amount of favorable decisions at OT”
OK – the myth is that United get a disproportionate amount of favourable decisions. As I have said to you in a previous post – when someone says United get ‘all’ the decisions or no one gets a decision – they do not mean literally.
If that was the myth then a referee giving a throw in to the opponents at OT would be proof that a decision went against United! If people do say “all” decisions go United’s way then they are wrong. I don’t know anyone who has said this though… I would suggest if someone did say this they are exaggerating to emphasise the point – in the same way that someone “missing by miles” when shooting does not literally miss by miles.

“Now whatever way you want to describe the myth if the decision making is as BLATANTLY biased as the FOOLS proport it to be it is NOT reflected in the figures given in the article for penaltys conceded by UTD at OT in the period given when put against several other teams in the league.”
I am confused why you think people are blatantly biased. The responses on here have been reasonable – I’m not sure of any bias shown – there has certainly been none on my part.
Agreed the figures showing the penalties conceded by United do not show the myth to be true. As I have said all along they cannot show it to be true or false since the information is not reflective of what you are actually measuring.

Go back to my previous example – what is more dangerous, driving a car or wrestling lions? Do the stats prove that wrestling lions is less dangerous than driving?

I am confused why you think people are blatantly biased.

nowhere did i say people were blatantly biased...

It is argued as part of the myth that the decision making is disproportunately favourable toward utd at OT. I am pointing out that in the area of pens conceded by utd at OT as stated in the article dont support this assertion. One would expect such blatant bias or "disproportunate" decision making to be reflected in these numbers but it aint.

Filters
In the area of penalties conceded by United at Old Trafford – the stats don’t support the assertion that United get favourable treatment.
This is true – but simply because the stats can’t support the assertion – neither can they side against it… because the stats are not the information that is relevant.

The number of penalties given – do not show how many are turned down. So whilst a referee may give 5 penalties against United at OT – they might turn down another 90. If the referees give 5 out of 5 at OT and 15 out of 15 at Arsenal – then that is fair since there is no disparity between the decision making. If however they give 5 out of 90 at OT but 15 out of 15 at Arsenal then there is considerable disparity and a suggestion that referees do not treat United as they do other sides.

The penalty conceded stat is alone unusable in the arugment.

Again – 10 people out of 50million die driving. Whilst 2 out of 2 die wrestling lions over the same period of time.
Which is more dangerous?

According to your logic – driving is more dangerous than wrestling lions since more people have died doing it over a similar period of time. Do you see the folly of the argument?

The myth is that utd get disproportionte decisions in their favour thats what the FOOLS beleive. One would think that this would manifest or show up even in the limited stats that are put forward in the article. UTD do not stand out in the limited table in the article their position couldnt be described as disproportionate. Granted these figure alone do not disprove the myth
but its strange how unremarkable the numbers are when you consider how fervently the FOOLS beleive in their claims.

maybe those 8 or 9 pens conceded were because howard webb wasnt officiating. Thats also part of the myth.

Your not one of those FOOLS who beleive in the howard webb myth are you....

"Your not one of those FOOLS who beleive in the howard webb myth are you...."

That one's a bit easier to backup. You just have to watch the games in which he's refereed United. I'm of the opinion he did give United more decisions, however I think he has spent the season trying to shake that tag off and thus actually been giving United less.

“The myth is that utd get disproportionte decisions in their favour thats what the FOOLS believe.”
That is the myth – and those who believe in it may be fools… just as those who believe that it evens itself out over the season could also be. Given that we don’t have the stats to judge I wouldn’t really say “fools” is the right term to use.

“Granted these figure alone do not disprove the myth but its strange how unremarkable the numbers are when you consider how fervently the FOOLS beleive in their claims.”
Thank you – the stats do not disprove the myth.

You might expect them to show more… but a patient doesn’t always have all the symptoms of a particular illness, just because he doesn’t have one that doesn’t mean he doesn’t have the illness.

“maybe those 8 or 9 pens conceded were because howard webb wasnt officiating. Thats also part of the myth.

Your not one of those FOOLS who beleive in the howard webb myth are you....”
You keep trying to do this- you keep trying to lure the discussion into other myths and it’s quite obvious why. When put altogether then the claims look more fantastic and just the ramblings of paranoid “ABUs”. You do this because when stood alone – your argument on this subject has been proven wrong and you have had to accept that the stats given do not prove the myth to be false.

TOOR - the Webbone isn't any easier really since there are still too many variables and many decisions are down to interpretation and the running of the game. For example a referee may book a player for a challenge in one game because it is the 5th tackle in a minute and the game is getting testy - whereas the exact same tackle in a different game may only get a talking to because the management of the game doesn't require further action.

It is near impossible to prove referee bias being reasonable doubt.

You keep trying to do this- you keep trying to lure the discussion into other myths and it’s quite obvious why. When put altogether then the claims look more fantastic and just the ramblings of paranoid “ABUs”.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------



but thats what they are. the paranoid ramblings of ABU's.....

TOOR has just proved the point with his remark about howard webb a referee who is very much part of this foolish paranoid myth.....

"your argument on this subject has been proven wrong and you have had to accept that the stats given do not prove the myth to be false."

agreed but they are stats that show that UTD have conceeded penaltys at OT. That the numbers of pens conceeded in this particular period are not disproportionate to certain other teams who played the same amount of games. I repeat alone it dosent dispel the myth but it certainly dose nothing to support it...

The myth cannot be proved. Which is why it will be called a myth until the FOOLS advocating it supply the proof to back up their paranoid ramblings....