Hammer32 wrote:I am sure a mike dean apology is on the way....
Just died of holding my breath
|An archive of match day threads originally posted in the General Discussion forum.
Just died of holding my breath
Don't know if anyone has seen this yet but it's a short video featuring an American bloke who came to the match yesterday. I'm pretty sure he's on a wind up but it's funny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7EFdzF ... e=youtu.be
I found it quite funny but no where near as funny as the comments underneath
I have watched the sending off incident a lot today and it clearly was a poor decision by Dean. But what makes it worse is that surely our guy slid after the ball before Jones did? Hence, it seems to me that Jones was the one guilty of dangerous play because he must have seen his opponent already in motion?
However, my conclusion is after watching it several times over. Dean did not have that luxury but has made himself look daft because he turned away from the incident and only seemed to look back after he heard Jones squeal. That itself showed a flaw in his referreing technique.
Also, our football authorities are on the way to spoiling the sport because they make knee jerk reactions to things which Sky's cameras show up. We saw an example yesterday and West Ham suffered as a result.
Their second goal was offside. At the point the ball is played through there was three Man Utd players offside but two would not have been deemed active. This active rule is daft and was knee jerking when introduced a few years back.
Let's suppose the ball had taken a second longer to go behind the West Ham defence. Then let's suppose a West Ham defender had reacted and charged back into one of the inactive players. Finally, let's suppose the scoring shot had missed. Ok, three bits of speculation but I bet Man Utd would have been given a penalty in the scenario I describe because charging into a player deemed inactive by the offside rule still seems to be an offence.
I may have got this wrong and will stand corrected if that is the case but to me, at present, it all seems an example of the rules of the game being messed around with because of how the TV cameras show so much.
WTF - steward singing along to Man Utd chant in concourse
From 00:39 - WTF - steward singing along to Man Utd chant in concourse - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l81dv3l1VOE
Sorry - Double post
Last edited by TSmitty on Wed Jan 04, 2017 12:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sorry if this is up somewhere I didn't see it
Are we going to appeal the decision?
If it stands does his time at AFCON count or does he get to do the ban when he gets back?
In his post-match comments, Bilic thought we would appeal.
He hasn't been selected for the AfCON.
Whether a player slides first or second is immaterial. Jones got the ball first, got clattered. That's the long and short of the actual challenge.
For your second point, it's a natural instinct for a referee to look to the second passage of play for advantage even though around that time he then decided it was a red offence and blew up.
A lot has been made of Jones feigning injury. Can anyone be sure that the bloke wasn't actually hurt?
I'm with you on the substance of the rest of your argument, but not that final point
No-one - literally no-one - reacts in that way when they're really hurt. That is, to roll 3 times and hold an unrelated bodypart.
It's irrelevant whether Jones was injured or feigning - red cards aren't issued as a result of combat wounds unless FIFA have added some new rule. The challenge was a committed 50/50 by BOTH players. Jones got to the ball first so yes it's a foul. There is no malice in the challenge, no studs showing and now high foot. Sliding tackle at worst a yellow card. There were at least 3 other tackles worse than this that I saw that didn't even get yellowed. When a staunch Manc like Gary Neville even agrees its a ridiculous decision then not sure where the debate is on it being a red. Mike Dean had an ideal view of the tackle, took a minute and still made a complete hash of the decision. It's not the first time and not the last time that he will make these type of colossal mistakes. About time that officials were held responsible for the decisions and mistake in the same way that managers and players are. If Dean came out and said I got it wrong it was a mistake fair enough. Given his past track record that isn't going to happen. He ruined a decent game of football as the first 15 minutes we were looking bright and up for it.
I always dislike defences that begin "but it's a hard job...." as if this excuses a system that rewards low standards and fails to encourage excellence.
If we transpose what is happening in refereeing to another industry what we have here is a set of nuclear power workers some of whom are so bad at their jobs they are causing near meltdowns on a regular basis. Their trade union have insisted on being responsible for performance management and assure the power station owners that everyone is performing well but, no, they won’t release the appraisal reports to the power station owners.
When asked about the weekly meltdowns the union says, “well, yes Mike presses the wrong button every couple of weeks but no we won’t sack him because he’s one of our longest serving employees and he’s good friends with the union general secretary. It’s a hard job which is why we need to keep the same few people doing it”
Players learning the laws is a good idea – I would extend that to journalists and pundits too.
Last season – I can’t remember the game – David Pleat was moaning in the press room about a goal that had been disallowed where a forward had nipped in to nick the ball from a defender after a free-kick from the ‘keeper had failed to clear the box. When I pointed out to him free-kicks taken inside the box weren’t in play until they left the penalty area his response was “when did they bring that in?” – astonishing ignorance from someone who had earned a direct living from the game for many years.
(I didn’t know the answer so I could only tell him I first read the laws of the game at the age of 5 so it had been in there for at least 50 years!)
As far as I'm aware, no one has debated whether it's a red or not?
I've said it was a red card and the wrong decision, but also arguing the case that it wasn't necessarily a very poor decision.
Did he? How do you know?
From my first viewing on the TV, I thought Feghouli may be lucky to escape a red.
Did you witness the incident the very first time, at full speed from Dean's exact view?
As nearly all referees would do, to instinctively look at the next passage of play.
They aren't supposed to play an advantage if it's an automatic red, but it's instinct.
That's all well and good, but shouldn't we look at first creating the best working atmosphere for referees to operate under?
It's all well and good saying they should be held accountable and punished, so they miss a game or two.
Are we to do that for all referees when they make a mistake?
Who subjectively decides how bad a mistake is and how long they should be punished for?
Wouldn't we end up running out of referees if every disgruntled manager or club got their way and got referees punished?
How about making their job easier to start with?
Educating players and managers on the laws of the game.
Giving the referees absolute protection from players and managers, with automatic cards for ANY dissent and touchline bans for dissent from coaches.
Stopping crazy grey area directives from those in the game that create hazy rules for referees to follow.
When incidents are overanalysed, the easiest outcomes that fit ones conclusion will be found. It's called confirmation bias.
You'll look for Jones feigning injury after the fact.
You'll look for Dean looking away after the incident.
You'll look for other incidents in the game to add to the critique.
None of this is present at the time when an impartial decision was made.
But, again, you'll look for that decision maker to then be corrupt.
Last edited by rare as rockinghorse shat on Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
I understand and appreciate the point and comparison.
My points I make are less focused on it being just a difficult job, but a job where there is undue influence, pressure and certainly less objective goals than, say, your nuclear power role, where I'd imagine all roles, responsibility and regulations are pretty black and white, without any scope for decision making error based on huge pressure from others in the immediate vicinity.
Have said nuclear worker with an assistant in his own lab, he'll perform adequately, at least.
Put said worker in a room full of cameras, with the board of directors looking on, the lunch room screaming at him about which buttons to press, then his performance would suffer.
If it didn't then he'd likely be the Pierluigi Collina of Springfield.
That's without deciding whether the button was interfering with play or not.
Anyone see the red card in the Bournemouth game yesterday? Another bad decision that turned the game in Arsenals favour. Referees look frightened by every challenge at the moment, it was a yellow at worst.
We've seen many instances of players being sent off and getting to the ball first - So that argument can be discounted,imo.Jones was coming in faster and harder and with studs up - his reaction,imo, was to feign injury in order to avoid being penalised in a very dangerous area.
The more we see managers like Mourinho getting the "rub of the green" after the huge fuss he makes, the more managers will try it.The more we see players getting their rivals sent off by the constant diving and over dramatic histrionics, the more players will try it!
Last season we ended it with approx 16 decisions go against us - Leicester won the title with approx 16 decisions,incorrectly, go in their favour ! The only way these mistakes get evened up,imo, is when the manager makes a huge fuss and his players start putting the hours in perfecting their diving and play acting - We,quite obviously, do neither and I am quite proud of them for their attitude, but many times I hear myself and others round me screaming for our player to "go down" - How ****ing sad is that??
I just dont know the answer, but something really needs to be done or we will just end up watching a WWE franchise!
If there is a debateable collision and a player or players appearing injured - go to the video replay.The same could be used for an "offside goal"- In most cases they would have a decision before play is resumed.In the case of a player looking to have sustained a serious injury - make them go off and be checked over by medical staff and keep them off for five minutes, if they want to come straight back on?
What pressure was the referee under to send Feghouli off then? I didn't see any players surrounding him or gesticulating at him.
I don't see any "grey" areas in this decision so not sure why this is even in discussion.
You agree its the wrong decision but not a bad decision. Was there a worse decision this weekend?
The referee had a clear unobstructed view. You can see that clearly on the replay. He is less than 10 yards away and looking directly at the tackle. The fact he took the time to think about means he didn't make a snap decision which is great. The fact that he still got it completely wrong is a concern. If this was an isolated case then ok, but Mike Dean does this continuously...see his last televised game for reference.
On my first viewing from a worse position than Mike Dean's I didn't even think it was anything more than a 50/50 and the commentators thought that Jones had been sent off initially when the red card was brandished.
My point is , yes the referee is a no win position in modern day football but sending players off has such a huge effect (especially so early in a match) that the ref sure must air on the side of caution and give the benefit of the doubt. If a referee consistently gets such major decisions incorrect then there needs to be some sort of system to improve them. I personally believe if refs were asked to explain such decision publicly it would not only make them think twice before pulling the trigger but also give the players and public a better understanding of their reasons
one for the crap non racist joke thread
Nope, nor me, Dean just got it wrong. If that was rare for him then fair does but it isn't. He isn't up to reffing pro football.
What about the pressure of making a snap decision and the pressure from having what does and does not warrant a red card being chopped and changed?
There's others that have commented "It wasn't a red card, but I can see why the red was given".
This is my stance also.
Dean not booking Reid for a handball was a worse decision.
It wasn't as costly, but it was a far clearer decision to make and a much clearer error made.
If referees were asked to explain many of their decisions, I fear the accurate answer would be: "because that's what we're now told to do".
Gibbins said above that referees are terrified of challenges nowadays.
Let the referee referee man!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests