during the 90's u couldn't buy a pen at old trafford , was bordering on the scandalous ...
yeah, but everyone, including the fa and the refs are against united, dontchaknow!?
yeah, but everyone, including the fa and the refs are against united, dontchaknow!?
--------
I find it amusing when they finally get a bad decision go agaisnt them after months of special treatment and then use it as evidence that they're not favoured.
This is true however some blame the club, it isn't the club's fault. Referees feel intimidated, with recently retired referees confirming that they have felt intimidated and this has caused them to add more time on than they should and also not to give penalties unless they are completely undisputed, which is supposed to be the case anyhow.
There are still too many people against video evidence but eventually it will come in and the arguments and cries of everybody is against us will stop. All teams get bad decisions against them and all get them for them. I do think however Man United's have been highlighted more because of their success, the past twenty years.
Look at yesterday's game between us and Aston Villa - Dunne clearly saved the ball with his hands, which should have been a penalty and a sending off. I say clearly but with the speed it happened the referee had no chance in judging it. Video evidence would have easily sorted that situation.
It is very frustrating that in this day and age, video evidence is being used in sports all over the world but the most popular sport around the world lags behind. Frankly if I was in a position of power within the footballing governing bodies - I would be embarrassed.
It is very frustrating that in this day and age, video evidence is being used in sports all over the world
--------
I know this is a seperate issue but I'll bite anyway. I'm against video evidence and goal line technology. Reason being, I love the fact that we can debate these things after a match.
Just listen to a phone in, everyone has their say on different aspects of the game. Once technology is introduced then the game will just be a calculated match leaving the fans no room for post match discussion.
Football has survived this long and is still no.1 - no technology for me.
Once technology is introduced then the game will just be a calculated match leaving the fans no room for post match discussion.
-----------------------------------
i disagree. with technology, we'll be discussing how well the players did, as opposed to endlessly discussing which mistakes the refs made this week. Surely as we pay them millions a year, that's as it should be?
Surely as we pay them millions a year, that's as it should be?
------
I'd be more interested in reducing the refs salaries as opposed to changing the flow of a football match.
shower of numpties you are,the chance of getting a penalty anywhere diminishes if you dont get into the opposition box,the fact that teams usually spend most of their time defending at old trafford makes this so,but lets not let this get in the way of a conspiracy theory eh?
mxyzptlk (U1361)
----------
riiiiight,
why didn't we think of that... how silly of us.
Of course it's because nobody entered Uniteds box for a decade.
Deary me - I think you'd be more suited to sportwitness lad
A decade of not conceding a penalty at home in the league is a damning statistic.
I remember when a Nottingham Forrest player had the audacity to enter the Man U box many moons ago. Slur Alex cruelly shot him in the back, and despite the outcry from the whole nation, Ferguson was excused by the FA and hid in the OT toilet to avoid the furore,
What all you ABU's fail to realise, is that the opposition need to have the ball and get in to your PENALTY BOX, as that is the only time that a PENALTY can be awarded.
Now, if you are the best team in the country, especially at home, that won't happen very often, as you will have the majority of the possesion, and even when the oppo's get the ball, making it to your box is very hard.
Ask your dads, it was the same for Liverpool from the mid 70s to 1990. But we just accepted that it was because you were the best team who rarely allowed the oppo to get to your box, and when they did, you had defenders who could deal with it and didn't need to commit a foul.
But then, why let common sense get in the way of a good "CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY! " story.
I bet you lot are regulars on RAWK? Reading through that after a United game, well, bloomin hysterical!!
What all you ABU's fail to realise, is that the opposition need to have the ball and get in to your PENALTY BOX, as that is the only time that a PENALTY can be awarded.
------------------
Someone already responded to that smae notion didn't you see? We are talking about a DECADE without a penalty at home!
They had the odd penalty which was missed... but it still remains an anomaly which points to the actions of the clubs management and players rather than incompetence on the part of the officials.
"...I know this is a seperate issue but I'll bite anyway. I'm against video evidence and goal line technology. Reason being, I love the fact that we can debate these things after a match. "
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
------
A large chunk of it yes. The fact that we can disagree on just about everything makes football the best sport in the world. I'd hate it if everything was black and white.
comment by Metro (U4267)
posted 22 minutes ago
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
------
A large chunk of it yes. The fact that we can disagree on just about everything makes football the best sport in the world. I'd hate it if everything was black and white.
---------------------
I'm just not so sure it would.
The nature, cause and the issues themselves may change but without debates about footballing decisions what would pub/work conversations entail?
Sporting success (or failure) should be objective not subjective. That is why synchronised swimming, board diving, gymnastics, ice skating/dancing etc., are not sports. They may be great to watch (for some people) but then so is ballet.
You could not imagine the IOC suggesting that the winner of the 100 metres final should be decided by a panel of judges. Why should decisions about offside, foul play, or the relative position of ball and line be made subjectively by one person in a split second?
Sporting success (or failure) should be objective not subjective.
--------
This is an interesting point but surely not everything can be considered objective. Was it a foul ? Is he interfering in play? etc
Of course, even now when we show replays of the ball on the line, commentators are occasionally unsure.
Ask people if they thought Luis Garcias goal was in and you'll get a host of answers even though we have the benefit of action replays.
metro are you always full of your own self importance or do you save it for your wummery?
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Was watching LFC TV yesterday - mad stat
Page 1 of 1
posted on 23/5/11
during the 90's u couldn't buy a pen at old trafford , was bordering on the scandalous ...
posted on 23/5/11
yeah, but everyone, including the fa and the refs are against united, dontchaknow!?
posted on 23/5/11
yeah, but everyone, including the fa and the refs are against united, dontchaknow!?
--------
I find it amusing when they finally get a bad decision go agaisnt them after months of special treatment and then use it as evidence that they're not favoured.
posted on 23/5/11
This is true however some blame the club, it isn't the club's fault. Referees feel intimidated, with recently retired referees confirming that they have felt intimidated and this has caused them to add more time on than they should and also not to give penalties unless they are completely undisputed, which is supposed to be the case anyhow.
There are still too many people against video evidence but eventually it will come in and the arguments and cries of everybody is against us will stop. All teams get bad decisions against them and all get them for them. I do think however Man United's have been highlighted more because of their success, the past twenty years.
Look at yesterday's game between us and Aston Villa - Dunne clearly saved the ball with his hands, which should have been a penalty and a sending off. I say clearly but with the speed it happened the referee had no chance in judging it. Video evidence would have easily sorted that situation.
It is very frustrating that in this day and age, video evidence is being used in sports all over the world but the most popular sport around the world lags behind. Frankly if I was in a position of power within the footballing governing bodies - I would be embarrassed.
posted on 23/5/11
It is very frustrating that in this day and age, video evidence is being used in sports all over the world
--------
I know this is a seperate issue but I'll bite anyway. I'm against video evidence and goal line technology. Reason being, I love the fact that we can debate these things after a match.
Just listen to a phone in, everyone has their say on different aspects of the game. Once technology is introduced then the game will just be a calculated match leaving the fans no room for post match discussion.
Football has survived this long and is still no.1 - no technology for me.
posted on 23/5/11
Once technology is introduced then the game will just be a calculated match leaving the fans no room for post match discussion.
-----------------------------------
i disagree. with technology, we'll be discussing how well the players did, as opposed to endlessly discussing which mistakes the refs made this week. Surely as we pay them millions a year, that's as it should be?
posted on 23/5/11
Surely as we pay them millions a year, that's as it should be?
------
I'd be more interested in reducing the refs salaries as opposed to changing the flow of a football match.
posted on 23/5/11
shower of numpties you are,the chance of getting a penalty anywhere diminishes if you dont get into the opposition box,the fact that teams usually spend most of their time defending at old trafford makes this so,but lets not let this get in the way of a conspiracy theory eh?
posted on 23/5/11
mxyzptlk (U1361)
----------
riiiiight,
why didn't we think of that... how silly of us.
Of course it's because nobody entered Uniteds box for a decade.
Deary me - I think you'd be more suited to sportwitness lad
posted on 23/5/11
A decade of not conceding a penalty at home in the league is a damning statistic.
I remember when a Nottingham Forrest player had the audacity to enter the Man U box many moons ago. Slur Alex cruelly shot him in the back, and despite the outcry from the whole nation, Ferguson was excused by the FA and hid in the OT toilet to avoid the furore,
posted on 23/5/11
What all you ABU's fail to realise, is that the opposition need to have the ball and get in to your PENALTY BOX, as that is the only time that a PENALTY can be awarded.
Now, if you are the best team in the country, especially at home, that won't happen very often, as you will have the majority of the possesion, and even when the oppo's get the ball, making it to your box is very hard.
Ask your dads, it was the same for Liverpool from the mid 70s to 1990. But we just accepted that it was because you were the best team who rarely allowed the oppo to get to your box, and when they did, you had defenders who could deal with it and didn't need to commit a foul.
But then, why let common sense get in the way of a good "CONSPIRACY! CONSPIRACY! " story.
I bet you lot are regulars on RAWK? Reading through that after a United game, well, bloomin hysterical!!
posted on 23/5/11
What all you ABU's fail to realise, is that the opposition need to have the ball and get in to your PENALTY BOX, as that is the only time that a PENALTY can be awarded.
------------------
Someone already responded to that smae notion didn't you see? We are talking about a DECADE without a penalty at home!
posted on 23/5/11
They had the odd penalty which was missed... but it still remains an anomaly which points to the actions of the clubs management and players rather than incompetence on the part of the officials.
posted on 23/5/11
"...I know this is a seperate issue but I'll bite anyway. I'm against video evidence and goal line technology. Reason being, I love the fact that we can debate these things after a match. "
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
posted on 24/5/11
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
------
A large chunk of it yes. The fact that we can disagree on just about everything makes football the best sport in the world. I'd hate it if everything was black and white.
posted on 24/5/11
comment by Metro (U4267)
posted 22 minutes ago
Do you really think the debating will stop just because of the presence and use of 'technology'?
------
A large chunk of it yes. The fact that we can disagree on just about everything makes football the best sport in the world. I'd hate it if everything was black and white.
---------------------
I'm just not so sure it would.
The nature, cause and the issues themselves may change but without debates about footballing decisions what would pub/work conversations entail?
Sporting success (or failure) should be objective not subjective. That is why synchronised swimming, board diving, gymnastics, ice skating/dancing etc., are not sports. They may be great to watch (for some people) but then so is ballet.
You could not imagine the IOC suggesting that the winner of the 100 metres final should be decided by a panel of judges. Why should decisions about offside, foul play, or the relative position of ball and line be made subjectively by one person in a split second?
posted on 24/5/11
Sporting success (or failure) should be objective not subjective.
--------
This is an interesting point but surely not everything can be considered objective. Was it a foul ? Is he interfering in play? etc
Of course, even now when we show replays of the ball on the line, commentators are occasionally unsure.
Ask people if they thought Luis Garcias goal was in and you'll get a host of answers even though we have the benefit of action replays.
posted on 27/5/11
metro are you always full of your own self importance or do you save it for your wummery?
Page 1 of 1