Rooney/Man U just don't get it

[strange6]

I see Man utd are still moaning about his ban and how the FA are inconsistent blah, blah, blah. Well, how are they inconsistent? he wasn't banned for swearing per se; what he was banned for was delibertaely going up to a LIVE TV camera and deliberatly swearing into it. Now, how many times have you known a footballer doing that? If you ask me, he was damn lucky not to be banned for at least triple that.

 

[junglejames]

Its perhaps a harsh outcome, but by the looks of it, they are making an example, to try and deter other footballers doing the same.

Your right though, Man Us argument is flawed, because you hardly ever see exactly what Rooney did. But, they want to appeal, and you need an excuse if your going to appeal, so this is theres, no matter how flawed it is. They possibly know its flawed, but its all they can think of for the appeal.

 

[SS4]

I agree, I'd have banned him for the rest of the season. You can't blame Man Utd for trying though, they get a lot of favours off match officials and the FA (every fan except man u ones know this)
Professional football needs to get it's act together regarding discipline, especially at the top starting with a straight red card for diving

What they (and other clubs) sometimes do is appeal, knowing they'll never win, so they can play in an important game at the weekend

 

[passmore]

I agree, I'd have banned him for the rest of the season. You can't blame Man Utd for trying though, they get a lot of favours off match officials and the FA (every fan except man u ones know this)

Professional football needs to get it's act together regarding discipline, especially at the top starting with a straight red card for diving

The only way it can get its act together is for the FA and its officials, referees et al, to acknowledge that they make mistakes from time to time, instead of sweeping them under the carpet with the excuse 'goal line technology just isn't going to happen'.

 

[SS4]

The only way it can get its act together is for the FA and its officials, referees et al, to acknowledge that they make mistakes from time to time, instead of sweeping them under the carpet with the excuse 'goal line technology just isn't going to happen'.

Isn't that FIFA's decision? (Who I believe get an unduly harsh press in England but justified in this case)

I agree, with the amount of money in football there is no excuse not to have it. It wouldn't surprise me if the "big 4" were lobbying behind closed doors not to have it introduced since they tend to get dodgy decisions in their favour more than the other 16 clubs in the EPL. Of course I have no evidence so it's speculation

That being said it's important to limit it to goal/no goal, penalty or no penalty and red card incidents.

 

[strange6]

I agree, I'd have banned him for the rest of the season. You can't blame Man Utd for trying though, they get a lot of favours off match officials and the FA (every fan except man u ones know this)
Professional football needs to get it's act together regarding discipline, especially at the top starting with a straight red card for diving

What they (and other clubs) sometimes do is appeal, knowing they'll never win, so they can play in an important game at the weekend

Couldn't agree more with you.

 

[Ivo]

It's not just the "Big 4" (which remember is a far more distorted name than it was in ~2006) that get all these decisions though, although I will readily admit that they seem to get an unfair proportion of good ones. Sometimes the FA are inconsistent, and unreasonably light on some clubs. The team I support (guess from the information I'm providing) seems to get quite a raw deal by PL standards, but still a decent one when compared to the likes of Plymouth (10 point deduction for intent to enter administration? Don't they usually wait?), and especially from one Mr Clattenburg and even more so from the same "gentleman" when playing against the enemy from across Stanley Park. And we always seemed to get a raw deal from Rafa Benitez

If the FA followed the hardline stance employed by the Conference, Rooney would be banned for the rest of the season, United given a 3 point penalty and Fergie told to not even bother turning up period for his touchline ban (as opposed to "sit in the stands"). Not to mention a certain bunch of cheating t***s from East London who would have been relegated in 2007 Sorry, I hate West Ham with a passion

Lastly, you have to admit that - as much as United do complain too easily - they do get seem to suffer when a certain Mr Atkinson is refereeing.

 

[mumrar]

Lastly, you have to admit that - as much as United do complain too easily - they do get seem to suffer when a certain Mr Atkinson is refereeing.

But don't seem to when Agent Howard Webb is in charge

 

[Oswyntail]

There are two separate areas here, player/club behaviour and official mistakes. The second one is easy, in that it is actually very likely to even itself out over a season - and if anyone thinks an official is biased, they should put their money where their mouth is and take them to court.
Player/club behaviour is, IMHO, more serious. Too many managers use the old Millwall "everyone hates us" as a major motivational tool. Ferguson seems to have little else in his armoury, and, while it is effective he is not going to change. And we see that nice restrained Mr Terry using the same approach at Chelsea (OK, so he ain't the manager, but what does that say about how the club is playing?). And this will inevitably lead to over-pumped players, driven by anger and hate - and swearing at cameras, referees and anyone who passes. Other managers this season have made the same observation, warning that they are sending players out so pumped-up that serious injury will happen. IMHO, the only answer must be to punish the club, not the player. Even Rooney is not indispensable, but something like a 30-point deduction, or removal of consideration for European competition for the next three seasons would hurt. Impose something like that after, say, three club offences and the managers would have to do what they are supposedly already doing, manage their players.

 

[Madge Wildfire]

I dont think the officials are biased in a direct sense, but its just that during a home game at (say) Old Trafford, if the crowd see what they think is a handball in the penalty area, then 55-60000 voices will suddenly shout "handball". Referees who may not have had a full view of the incident might be swayed thinking they have missed something.

If the same offence happened in the opposition penalty area a few minutes later there might be a few hundred shouts from the away supporters but they would be drowned out by the general din, and referees might be of the opinion that nothing had happened.

Not a very good explanation, maybe, but I hope you understand what I am getting at.

The problem with Ferguson v the FA is that he is a bully and the FA are simply just frightened of him. So, no one will come out and tell him to shut up or be confined to the stands for an entire season.

 

[Greenback]

Referees are not biased, but they are capable of being influenced by outside factors, whether this be the crowd, the reputation of some players, and many other things. They are only human!

To be honest though, it's a bit late to try and improve things now. Players have been showing too much dissent for about forty odd years! They should have taken a leaf out of rugby union's law book years ago. Only the captian is allowed to approach the referee, and too much back chat means a 10 minute sin binning. Not to mention the consistent use of the additional 10 metre rule when a penalty is awarded. I seem to remember that this can be used for free kicks in football, but rarely is.

There is a lot more respect for the referee in rugby. Mistakes ar emade, but questions are asked not about bias, but about experience, and different interpretations of the laws of the game in different countries.

As for Rooney, he is not a very nice man really, is he?

 

[strange6]

Referees are not biased, but they are capable of being influenced by outside factors, whether this be the crowd, the reputation of some players, and many other things. They are only human!

To be honest though, it's a bit late to try and improve things now. Players have been showing too much dissent for about forty odd years! They should have taken a leaf out of rugby union's law book years ago. Only the captian is allowed to approach the referee, and too much back chat means a 10 minute sin binning. Not to mention the consistent use of the additional 10 metre rule when a penalty is awarded. I seem to remember that this can be used for free kicks in football, but rarely is.

There is a lot more respect for the referee in rugby. Mistakes ar emade, but questions are asked not about bias, but about experience, and different interpretations of the laws of the game in different countries.

As for Rooney, he is not a very nice man really, is he?

Couldn't agree more. Both rugby codes show the ultimate respect to the referee, even when a bad decision has been made. Full credit to them

 

[Greenback]

You can still occasionally hear the referee being called 'sir' on the rugby field!

 

[passmore]

Referees are not biased, but they are capable of being influenced by outside factors, whether this be the crowd, the reputation of some players, and many other things. They are only human!

To be honest though, it's a bit late to try and improve things now. Players have been showing too much dissent for about forty odd years! They should have taken a leaf out of rugby union's law book years ago. Only the captian is allowed to approach the referee, and too much back chat means a 10 minute sin binning. Not to mention the consistent use of the additional 10 metre rule when a penalty is awarded. I seem to remember that this can be used for free kicks in football, but rarely is.

There is a lot more respect for the referee in rugby. Mistakes ar emade, but questions are asked not about bias, but about experience, and different interpretations of the laws of the game in different countries.

As for Rooney, he is not a very nice man really, is he?

If referees are only human, they are bound to make mistakes. Unfortunately, in a game such a football, such decisions have to be made on the spot and in a split second. This is why time and time again people have suggested to the FA and its officials on the use of goal line technology. Not as an impediment or a way of undermining their decisions, but as an assistance to their crucial decision-making.
When the FA starts running campaigns such as 'Respect', you really have to ask yourself: why should we respect football refs anymore than rugby refs? They are, after all, both human.

 

[Greenback]

Technology has been brought in to assist referees in rugby union. Mistakes are still made though, as seen by the Welsh try against Ireland.

 

[Ivo]

Technology has been brought in to assist referees in rugby union. Mistakes are still made though, as seen by the Welsh try against Ireland.

I wish I could say the same about our "Try" against South Africa in 2007...

On the other hand, FIFA are just stubborn. If Lampard's "goal" against Germany isn't enough to provoke goal-line technology, nothing will.

 

[Greenback]

I am sceptical about goal line technology. I think it should be trialled first, but it may be a good thing - I'm just not sure!

 

[SS4]

Technology is important but discipline needs to return first along with consistent application of the rules (last man = red card, dissent = yellow)
Even the most obvious of obvious penalties earns the ref a tirade of appeals from the defenders. Technology or otherwise it is raised into everyone who plays football that the ref is in charge and what he says goes

A trial of goal line technology is a good idea although I still think we need strict bounds on what it can be used for

 

[passmore]

Technology is important but discipline needs to return first along with consistent application of the rules (last man = red card, dissent = yellow)
Even the most obvious of obvious penalties earns the ref a tirade of appeals from the defenders. Technology or otherwise it is raised into everyone who plays football that the ref is in charge and what he says goes

A trial of goal line technology is a good idea although I still think we need strict bounds on what it can be used for

I agree, but discipline can only come out of a game which has a fair application of the rules by the refs. I agree that it is nearly nigh-on impossible to get every decision correct as football is much more fluid and fast than rugby, but if a penalty turns out to be a dive thanks to television replays on MOTD, then it can only serve to continue to undermine referees and officials and decrease the chance of discipline returning to the game.
I still stand by my opinion of goal line technology. If after-match television replays can show a wrong decision, then surely goal-line technology can as well?

 

[Oswyntail]

I agree, but discipline can only come out of a game which has a fair application of the rules by the refs. I agree that it is nearly nigh-on impossible to get every decision correct as football is much more fluid and fast than rugby, but if a penalty turns out to be a dive thanks to television replays on MOTD, then it can only serve to continue to undermine referees and officials and decrease the chance of discipline returning to the game.
I still stand by my opinion of goal line technology. If after-match television replays can show a wrong decision, then surely goal-line technology can as well?

But it can't, not infallibly. Otherwise there would be no discussion by the "experts". Even fairly simple decisions like offside are subjective. "Diving" is also not as cut and dried as it seems - an athlete running at speed is far less stable, and able to stay upright, than a standing one, and the amount of interference required to tip them over is minute.Ok, there are some bloomers like goals "scored" in the side netting, but the vast, vast majority of disputed decisions would remain disputable. So, a "fair application of the rules by the refs" must take into account of the referees fallibility - and the players must accept that. Trying to make the referee change his mind should be seen as ridiculous - as it is in rugby - and punished as any other lack of discipline would be. The players have to learn to accept the authority of the officials and rules , because, if that does not happen, there is no game. The only time a referee should be called into question is for blatant, major bias in favour of one team - not the "he always gives penalties against us" so much as "he al3ways disallows our goals" and that never happens.