Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News

Archives

March 2017
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Ref Review: Stoke – Arsenal: who is that voice whispering in my ear….?

By Usama & Walter

STOKE CTIY vs. ARSENAL

  • COMPETITION: English Premier League
  • MATCH NO. 22
  • DATE: 17th January 2016
  • VENUE: Britannia Stadium (Stoke-on-Trent, England)
  • MATCH OFFICIALS:
REFEREE: Craig Pawson
1st LINESMAN: David Bryan
2nd LINESMAN: Simon Long
4th OFFICIAL: Mike Dean

First Half

Fouls, Advantages, Cards, and Penalties

Time Foul by Foul For Description & Decision Points
01:10 Philipp Wollscheid (Stoke) Theo Walcott (Arsenal) Walcott was trying to run past Wollscheid when Wollscheid clearly stopped Walcott by pushing him back and holding his face to stop his run. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Wollscheid for deliberately preventing the opponent from getting to the ball, but no card was given. Theo was also going past the last man although there was a defender still in the middle but this was a very promising attack that could have leaded to a very dangerous attack.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST WOLLSCHEID.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

02:38 Mathieu Flamini (Arsenal) Joselu (Stoke)

 

Flamini tried to slide in from the side in to Joselu with his feet pulled back. Flamini’s forward momentum caught Joselu, tripping him inside the Stoke’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)
03:36 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Shawcross jumped in the back of Giroud and caught Giroud in the face with his left hand inside the Arsenal’s half. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
04:57 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Campbell was trying to receive the ball inside the Stoke’s half when Pieters grabbed both of Campbell’s hands and kept pulling him back. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
07:25 Aaron Ramsey (Arsenal) Joselu (Stoke)

 

Ramsey tripped Joselu from behind inside the Arsenal’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)

 

08:06 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Pieters pulled Campbell from behind and then shoved him down inside the center of the field. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
08:25 Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Jon Walters (Stoke) Monreal pushed Walters in the back inside the Stoke’s half.

CORRECT FOULF FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)

 

10:38 Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Glenn Whelan (Stoke) Both players were trying to jump for the header inside the center of field. Whelan jumped first with Giroud running from the back. Giroud saw Whelan jumping and stopped his run and tried to avoid any collision with Whelan. But then the referee gave a foul against Giroud. This should not have been a foul against Arsenal because Giroud did not made any foul contact.

WRONG FOUL AGAINST ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
12:51 Mertesacker intercepted an offside pass from Stoke and continued playing forward. The referee correctly the advantage for the offside.

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR ARSENAL.

1 (ADVANTAGE)
13:45 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Shawcross held Giroud by shoulders using both of his hands and pulled him back slightly, then his easily kicked the ball away. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
16:01 Joselu (Stoke)

 

Theo Walcott (Arsenal) Joselu tripped Walcott from behind inside the Stoke’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
17:28 Glen Johnson (Stoke) Aaron Ramsey (Arsenal) Ramsey turned with the ball inside the Arsenal’s half when Johnson ran in to Ramsey and made collision with Ramsey’s right leg.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
18:07 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Both players were trying to reach out for the loose ball inside the Stoke’s half when Giroud got ahead of Shawcross, and Shawcross fell on Giroud’s legs. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
23:03 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Shawcross trips Giroud from behind inside the center of the field. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Shawcross for the 4th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. But no yellow card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management.

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST SHAWCROSS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

26:18 Glen Johnson (Stoke) Alex Oxlade Chamberlain (Arsenal) Chamberlain intercepted the ball from Johnson inside the Stoke’s half and started to run forward when Johnson made a late sliding tackle from behind and brought Chamberlain down thereby stopping his run. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Johnson for deliberately preventing the opponent from getting to the ball, but no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST JOHNSON.

-1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

30:57 Bojan Krkic (Stoke)   Bellerin tries to keep the ball in play inside the Arsenal’s half when Bojan clearly slaps the ball away from him. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Bojan for committing a deliberate handball. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 121

Handling the Ball

Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration:

• The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)

• The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

• The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement

• Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement

• Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement

 

Disciplinary sanctions

There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player:

• Deliberately handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession

• Attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball

 

A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.

 

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST BOJAN.

-1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

33:22 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Pieters was trying to shield the ball from Campbell for a goal kick. While shielding the ball Pieters kept on holding and pulling Campbell by shirt. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 124

Impeding the progress of an opponent

Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept within playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.

 

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
35:53 Mathieu Flamini (Arsenal) Bojan Krkic (Stoke) Just as Bojan passed the ball inside the Arsenal’s half, Flamini’s slightly charges in to Bojan. But Stoke kept attacking forward.

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR STOKE.

1 (ADVANTAGE)
35:59 Bojan Krkic (Stoke) Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Bojan rushed in to Monreal and trips him from the front inside the Arsenal’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
40:19 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Pieters tripped Campbell from behind inside the Stoke’s half. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Pieters for the 4th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. But no yellow card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management.

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST PIETERS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

41:11 Joselu (Stoke)

 

Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) While challenging Joselu caught Koscienly in the face with a trailing arm.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
43:12 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Both players were trying to reach out for the ball inside the Arsenal’s half. When Arnautovic came in with a swiping sliding tackle from the side on Campbell and brought him down in a reckless manner. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Arnautovic for committing a reckless tackle on Campbell. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 119

Careless, Reckless, Using Excessive Force

“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.

• A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST ARNAUTOVIC.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

43:42 Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Philipp Wollscheid (Stoke) Both players were trying to head the ball inside the Stoke’s half. Both players had one arm around each other’s body in a cross manner. Both players missed the ball and failed to head it. But the referee gave a foul against Arsenal. This should not have been a foul against Arsenal because there was no foul contact Giroud on Wollscheid. The play should have carried on.

WRONG FOUL AGAINST ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)

 

43:50 Olivier Giroud (Arsenal)   Giroud clearly protested and showed dissent against the referee’s decision by verbally and by actions. This should have been a yellow card against Giroud but no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 126

Showing Dissent by Word or Action

A player who is guilty of dissent by protesting (verbally or non-verbally) against a referee’s decision must be cautioned.

The captain of a team has no special status or privileges under the Laws of the Game but he has a degree of responsibility for the behaviour of his team.

 

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST GIROUD FOR DISSENT.

-2 (YELLOW CARD)
45:36 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Hector Bellerin (Arsenal) Arnautovic was pulling Bellerin’s arms but Bellerin kept moving forward.

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR ARSENAL.

1 (ADVANTAGE)
 
Number of Correct Fouls for Arsenal – 8

Number of Correct Fouls for Stoke – 3

Total Number of Correct Fouls – 11 [11 points]

 

Number of Incorrect Fouls against Arsenal – 10

Number of Incorrect Fouls against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Fouls – 10 [10 points]

 

Number of Correct Advantages for Arsenal – 2

Number of Correct Advantages for Stoke – 1

Total Number of Correct Advantages – 3 [3 points]

 

Number of Incorrect Advantages against Arsenal – 0

Number of Incorrect Advantages against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Advantages – 0

Number of Correct Yellow Cards for Arsenal – 0

Number of Correct Yellow Cards for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Yellow Cards – 0

Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards against Arsenal – 6

Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards against Stoke – 1

Total Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards – 7 [14 points]

 

Offsides

Time Player Offside Defending Player Description & Decision Points
04:14 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Hector Bellerin (Arsenal) Arnautovic was in offside position. Assistant Ref David Bryan made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
07:45 Joselu (Stoke)

 

Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) Joselu was slightly in offside position. Assistant Ref David Bryan made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
12:51 Jon Walters (Stoke) Per Mertesacker (Arsenal) Walters was slightly in offside position. Assistant Ref David Bryan made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
32:56 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Per Mertesacker (Arsenal) Arnautovic was in offside position. Assistant Ref David Bryan made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
Number of Correct Offsides for Arsenal – 4

Number of Correct Offsides for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Offsides – 4 [4 points]

Number of Incorrect Offsides against Arsenal – 0

Number of Incorrect Offsides against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Offsides – 0

 

 

First Half Referee Report

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Arsenal – 8+2+4 = 14

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Stoke – 3+1 = 4

Total Number of Correct Decisions = 14 + 4 = 18

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Arsenal – 8+2+4 = 14

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Stoke – 3+1 = 4

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) = 14 + 4 = 18

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Arsenal – 10+6 = 16

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Stoke – 1

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions = 16 + 1 = 17

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Arsenal – 10+12 = 22

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Stoke – 2

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) = 22 + 2 = 24

 

 

 

First Half Correct Decision Percentage = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) = 18/(18+17) = 51.4%

 

 

First Half Correct Decision Percentage (WEIGHTED) = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) = 18/(18+24) = 42.8%

 

Second Half

Fouls, Advantages, Cards, and Penalties

Time Foul by Foul For Description & Decision Points
46:53 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Shawcross grabs Giroud by the arms and shoulders, pulls him away slightly and kicks the ball away. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Shawcross for the 5th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. But no yellow card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management.

 

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD FOR THE SECOND TIME AGAINST SHAWCROSS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

-1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

48:02 Mathieu Flamini (Arsenal) Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Both players were trying to reach out for the ball inside the Arsenal’s half. When Flamini came in with a swiping sliding tackle from the side on Arnautovic and brought him down in a reckless manner. The referee correctly played an advantage.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Flamini for committing a reckless tackle on Arnautovic. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 119

Careless, Reckless, Using Excessive Force

“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.

• A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned

 

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR STOKE.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST FLAMINI FOR RECKLESS FOUL.

1 (ADVANTAGE)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

48:44 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Petr Cech (Arsenal) Cech tried to catch the ball from the corner when Shawcross jumped on Cech and pulled him down by the shoulders. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Shawcross for the 6th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. But no yellow card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management.

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD FOR THE THIRD TIME AGAINST SHAWCROSS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

50:11 Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Glenn Whelan (Stoke) Monreal tried to pull Whelan from behind but he kept running forward.

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR STOKE.

1 (ADVANTAGE)
50:19 Philipp Wollscheid (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Giroud was trying to receive a pass from Monreal inside the Stoke’s penalty area. Wollscheid came from the side grabbed Giroud with both hands, pulled him away from the path of pass and threw him down. This should have been a penalty for Arsenal but no penalty was given.

NO PENALTY FOR ARSENAL.

-3 (PENALTY)
50:24 Joselu (Stoke) Alex Oxlade Chamberlain (Arsenal) Joselu pushed Chamberlain in the back but Chamberlain recovered.

CORRECT ADVANTAGE PLAYED FOR ARSENAL.

1 (ADVANTAGE)
50:45 Mathieu Flamini (Arsenal) Erik Pieters (Stoke) Flamini mistimed his tackle and brought down Pieters from behind inside the Arsenal’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)
51:49 Philipp Wollscheid (Stoke) Theo Walcott (Arsenal) Ramsey made a through pass and Walcott was trying to receive it just outside the Stoke’s penalty area when Wollscheid came in late and used to his left hand to keep pulling Walcott away from the ball. And when Walcott got inside the Stoke’s penalty box Wollscheid’s foot hits the back of Walcott’s right ankle, thus bringing him down inside the Stoke’s penalty area. This should have been a penalty for Arsenal but no penalty was given.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Wollscheid for deliberately preventing the opponent from getting to the ball, which means that by now Wollscheid should have been sent off. But no cards were given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

NO PENALTY FOR ARSENAL.

NO SECOND YELLOW CARD AGAINST WOLLSCHEID FOR TACTICAL FOUL.

NO RED CARD AGAINST WOLLSCHEID.

-1 (PENALTY)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

53:44 Glen Johnson (Stoke) Theo Walcott (Arsenal) Johnson pushed Walcott twice in the back from behind and brought him down inside the Arsenal’s half. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
55:35 Jon Walters (Stoke) Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Monreal was trying to run past Walters when Walters’ trailing arm caught Monreal in the face. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

-1 (FOUL)
57:47 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Olivier Giroud (Arsenal) Just as Giroud received the ball inside the Stoke’s half, Shawcross came from behind and grabbed Giroud’s right arm and pulled him from the shirt. Then he used both hands to pull away from the ball again. Finally he stuck out his leg and tripped Giroud, with Shawcross falling on Giroud’s leg. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a second yellow card against Shawcross for deliberately preventing the opponent from getting to the ball and committing a reckless foul, thus he Shawcross should have been sent off by now. But no cards were given by the referee.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO SECOND YELLOW CARD AGAINST SHAWCROSS FOR TACTICAL FOUL.

NO RED CARD AGAINST SHAWCROSS.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

59:38 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Pieters charges from behind and pushed Campbell down inside the Arsenal’s half. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Pieters for the 5th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. But no yellow card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management.

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD FOR THE SECOND TIME AGAINST PIETERS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

60:57 Glen Whelan (Stoke) Theo Walcott (Arsenal) Whelan tripped Walcott from behind inside the center of the field.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
61:26 Hector Bellerin (Arsenal) Erik Pieters (Stoke) Both players were trying to reach out for the ball near the corner flag inside the Stoke’s half. Pieters got to the ball first and roll his right foot on the ground to himself down. This was a clear dive from Pieters. Bellerin made no contact at all. This should not have been a foul against Arsenal.

 

This also should have been a second yellow card against Pieters for diving. This was a clear act of simulation. This means that by now Pieters should have been sent off. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

• Attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)

 

WRONG FOUL AGAINST ARSENAL.

NO SECOND YELLOW CARD AGAINST PIETERS FOR DIVING.

NO RED CARD AGAINST PIETERS.

-1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

70:56 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Campbell was trying to control the bouncing ball inside the Stoke’s half when Pieters grabbed Campbell’s neck with both hands and threw him on the ground. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a third yellow card against Pieters for committing a reckless foul and he should have been sent off by now. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO THIRD YELLOW CARD AGAINST PIETERS.

NO RED CARD AGAINST PIETERS.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

74:10 Hector Bellerin (Arsenal) Mame Diouf (Stoke) Bellerin jumped in the back of Diouf inside the Stoke’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)
75:31 Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) Glen Johnson (Stoke) Koscienly jumped in the back of Johnson inside the Stoke’s penalty area.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)
76:19 Glenn Whelan (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Arsenal were moving quickly on the counter attack inside the Stoke’s half when Whelan pushed and tripped Campbell from behind. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Whelan for committing a tactical and attack breaking foul. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST WHELAN.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

79:42 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Campbell was trying to receive the ball inside the center of the field when Pieters came from and charged in to Campbell throwing him in to the ground. The referee correctly gave a foul.

 

But this also should have been a yellow card against Pieters for the 6th foul in this match. This was a clear act of persistent fouling. And he should have been sent off by now. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 127

Persistent Infringement

Referees should be alert at all times to players who persistently infringe the Laws. In particular, they must be aware that, even if a player commits a number of different offences, he must still be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws.

 

There is no specific number of infringements which constitutes “persistence” or the presence of a pattern – this is entirely a matter of judgement and must be determined in the context of effective game management

 

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD FOR THIRD TIME AGAINST PIETERS FOR PERSISTENT FOULING.

NO RED CARD AGAINST PIETERS.

1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

88:25 Joselu (Stoke)   Just as Joselu passed the ball and he threw himself to the ground as he saw Flamini coming within touching distance. Flamini made no foul contact.

 

This should have been a yellow card against Joselu for diving. This was a clear act of simulation. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

• Attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)

 

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST JOSELU FOR DIVING.

-2 (YELLOW CARD)
90:38 Erik Pieters (Stoke) Joel Campbell (Arsenal) Campbell was trying to receive the pass inside Stoke’s half when Pieters rammed his arm in to the back of Campbell. This should have been a foul for Arsenal but no foul was given.

 

This also should have been a yellow card against Pieters for committing a reckless foul and he should have been sent off by now. But no card was given.

 

LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT PAGE 125

Cautions for Unsporting Behaviour

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:

• Commits in a reckless manner one of the seven offences that incur a direct free kick

• Commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack

• Holds an opponent for the tactical purpose of pulling the opponent away from the ball or preventing the opponent from getting to the ball

 

NO FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

NO YELLOW CARD AGAINST PIETERS FOR RECKLESS FOUL.

NO RED CARD AGAINST PIETERS.

-1 (FOUL)

-2 (YELLOW CARD)

-3 (RED CARD)

91:15 Calum Chambers (Arsenal) Charlie Adam (Stoke) Chambers jumped in the back of Adam inside the center of the field.

CORRECT FOUL FOR STOKE.

1 (FOUL)
92:53 Jon Walters (Stoke) Per Mertesacker (Arsenal) Walters jumped in the back of Mertesacker inside the Arsenal’s half.

CORRECT FOUL FOR ARSENAL.

1 (FOUL)
 
Number of Correct Fouls for Arsenal – 8

Number of Correct Fouls for Stoke – 4

Total Number of Correct Fouls – 12 [12 points]

 

Number of Incorrect Fouls against Arsenal – 5

Number of Incorrect Fouls against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Fouls – 5 [5 points]

Number of Correct Advantages for Arsenal – 1

Number of Correct Advantages for Stoke – 2

Total Number of Correct Advantages – 3 [3 points]

 

Number of Incorrect Advantages against Arsenal – 0

Number of Incorrect Advantages against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Advantages – 0

Number of Correct Yellow Cards for Arsenal – 0

Number of Correct Yellow Cards for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Yellow Cards – 0

 

Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards against Arsenal – 11

Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards against Stoke – 1

Total Number of Incorrect Yellow Cards – 12 [24 points]

Number of Correct Red Cards for Arsenal – 0

Number of Correct Red Cards for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Red Cards – 0

 

Number of Incorrect Red Cards against Arsenal – 6

Number of Incorrect Red Cards against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Red Cards – 6 [18 points]

Number of Correct Penalties for Arsenal – 0

Number of Correct Penalties for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Penalties – 0

 

Number of Incorrect Penalties against Arsenal – 2

Number of Incorrect Penalties against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Penalties – 2 [6 points]

Offsides

Time Player Offside Defending Player Description & Decision Points
47:28 Joselu (Stoke) Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) No replay or correct angle shown. Assumed correct. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
54:36 Jon Walters (Stoke) Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Walters was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
56:37 Ryan Shawcross (Stoke) Aaron Ramsey (Arsenal) Shawcross was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
68:01 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) Arnautovic was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
85:31 Marko Arnautovic (Stoke) Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) Arnautovic was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
90:46

 

Jon Walters (Stoke) Nacho Monreal (Arsenal) Walters was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
91:42 Jon Walters (Stoke) Laurent Koscienly (Arsenal) Walters was in an offside position. Assistant Ref Simon Long made the call.

CORRECT OFFSIDE FOR ARSENAL.

1 (OFFSIDE)
Number of Correct Offsides for Arsenal – 7

Number of Correct Offsides for Stoke – 0

Total Number of Correct Offsides – 7 [7 points]

Number of Incorrect Offsides against Arsenal – 0

Number of Incorrect Offsides against Stoke – 0

Total Number of Incorrect Offsides – 0

Second Half Referee Report

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Arsenal – 8+1+7 = 16

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Stoke – 4+2 = 6

Total Number of Correct Decisions = 16 + 6 = 22

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Arsenal – 8+1+7 = 16

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Stoke – 4+2 = 6

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) = 16 + 6 = 22

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Arsenal – 5+11+6+2 = 24

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Stoke – 1

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions = 24 + 1 = 25

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Arsenal – 5+22+18+6 = 51

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Stoke – 2

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) = 51 + 2 = 53

 

 

 

Second Half Correct Decision Percentage = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) = 22/(22+25) = 46.8%

 

 

Second Half Correct Decision Percentage (WEIGHTED) = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) = 22/(22+53) = 29.3%

Full Time (1st Half + 2nd Half) Referee Report

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Arsenal – 14+16 = 30

Total Number of Correct Decisions for Stoke – 4+6 = 10

Total Number of Correct Decisions = 30 + 10 = 40

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Arsenal – 14+16 = 30

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) for Stoke – 4+6 = 10

Total Number of Correct Decisions (Weighted) = 30 + 10 = 40

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Arsenal – 16+24 = 40

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions against Stoke – 1+1 = 2

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions = 40 + 2 = 42

 

AFTER POINTS HAVE BEEN WEIGHTED

 

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Arsenal – 22+51 = 73

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) against Stoke – 2+2= 4

Total Number of Incorrect Decisions (Weighted) = 73 + 4 = 77

 

 

 

Full Match Correct Decision Percentage = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) = 40/(40+42) = 48.7%

 

 

Full Match Correct Decision Percentage (WEIGHTED) = Total Correct Decisions / Total Decisions (Correct + Incorrect) =  40/(40+77) = 34.1%

APPENDIX

Key Decisions in the Match Points
Advantage 1
Foul 1
Incorrect Corner 1
Incorrect Goal Kick 1
Incorrect Throw-in 1
Other (Ref Positioning, Injuries, Time Wasting, etc.) 1
Offside 1
Yellow Card 2
Red Card 3
Goal 3
Penalty 3

 

NOTE: FOR ANY WRONG DECISION MADE THERE WILL BE NEGATIVE POINTS AWARDED FOR THAT SPECIFIC KIND OF EVENT.

NOTE: ANY INCORRECT OR WRONG DECISION/NON-DECISION WILL BE HIGHLIGHTED WITH A RED COLOUR.

NOTE: ANY DECISION THAT INVOLVES DOUBT IS HIGHLIGHTED AS BLUE IN COLOR.

NOTE: The word ‘FOR’ is used to show IN FAVOR OF.

BELOW IS THE LINK FOR THE “FIFA LAWS OF THE GAME 2015/2016”. ANY LAW OF THE GAME IS DIRECTLY REFERENCED FROM THIS DOCUMENT.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/Document/FootballDevelopment/Refereeing/02/36/01/11/LawsofthegamewebEN_Neutral.pdf

How do you start summarizing such a referee performance? To be honest I am scratching my head a bit as this was unbelievable. Let me start with the good thing: we had two excellent assistants who did their job in a great way getting all the offside decisions correct and there were a few of them. 11 in total I think.  But on to the ref….

Referee Pawson had a shocking match. And I really wonder if he had for 90 minutes a little voice in his head telling him what to do and telling him what not to do.

It started from the word go in fact. Theo played the ball past Wollsheid and would have been away and certainly with his speed on goal but Wolsheid blocked him with his arms. A clear foul and stopping of a very promising attack is always a yellow card. The ref left the card in his pocket. Or looking back… I wonder if he had brought his cards to this match….

What then followed was a push and shove contest that went unpunished most of the time. Giroud was pulled and pushed without fouls being called. When Giroud came just close to a Stoke player the ref blew his whistle. Even when Giroud clearly didn’t jump for the ball as he saw he couldn’t reach it and was only going to bump in Whelan…still the ref called the foul. Whisper, whisper in my ear….

As a result the Stoke players could keep on pushing and shoving unpunished. Shortly before the half hour mark Oxlade-Chamberlain won the ball from Johnson who started a sliding tackle touching Oxlade-Chamberlain. A clear foul and as Oxlade-Chamberlain would have been on a  1v1 with Shawcross after that a promising attack. Ref Pawson pointed to the ball indicating it was Johnson who played it…. rubbish Mr. Pawson. Completely rubbish.

Shawcross and Pieters continued their pulling and shoving (unpunished) and made 4-5 fouls each. Nothing given. And a nice way out for the ref so he didn’t have to give yellow cards for persisting fouling.

Mind you he also let Giroud off the hook when he openly protested a (wrong) decision against him. Leave it to us Olivier. We will nail him on the wall when needed.

The first half score was 51.4% and when we put weight on it, the score goes down to 42.8%.

On to the second half and more of the same. More grabbing and holding and fouling from Shawcross and Pieters going unpunished. Flamini trying to even things out coming in reckless against Arnautovic and the ref gave advantage but then didn’t book him when the ball went out. Very poor again.

The the ref came to the real match deciding decisions. Giroud got a ball and Wolsheid had his arms around in inside the penalty area. No foul whispered a little voice in the ear of the ref. One penalty ignored.

Hardly a minute later Walcott in almost the same position as Giroud earlier with Wolsheid. Wolsheid pulled Theo when outside the penalty area but then hit the right ankle of Theo well inside the Stoke penalty area and bringing Theo down. That was a penalty. Again. But again a little voice in his ear whispered: just shake your head for a “no” like I would do. And so he shook his headlike I have seen it being done by a certain ref in the past some umpteen times when it was about giving Arsenal a penalty.  Two penalties not given. And of course no further punishment in the form of yellow and red cards.

Followed more unpunished pushing and shoving from most Stoke defenders. Just after one hour of playing Bellerin got in to a promising position on the flank going past a Stoke player. Pieters came in and threw himself to the ground in a pathetic way dragging his own feet over the grass…. but hey ho probably a little voice whispered: “blow a foul, quickly blow a foul” and Pawson obliged. A pathetic dive and again should have been play on as Bellerin had the ball free to enter the Stoke penalty area from the goal line on and then a yellow card. But again… nothing.

What followed was (I know it is getting boring) was more unpunished pushing and shoving from Stoke players. And as a result still no yellow cards for persistent fouling.  It was as if Dean was at the whistle. Well he was close to it and had his mouth close to the ear of the ref.

The score in the second half was 46.8% and when we put weight on it the score drops to a jaw dropping 29.3%.

The full time score was 48.7% and when we put weight on it, the score goes down to 34.1%. Totally unacceptable.

We have counted the amazing amount of 42 wrong decisions or non-decisions from the ref in this match. Let that sink in …42 wrong decisions in 90 minutes. And of those 42 we had 2 that went against Stoke and 40 that went against Arsenal.

An amazing amount of fouls and no yellow cards given…. it takes some doing….

Was Mr. Pawson under the influence of the Stoke crowd…. or was he under the influence of the little bird inside his ear…. On days like this one can only dream of the talk between the officials being recorded ….and made public.

Posts

The Untold Books

Woolwich Arsenal the club that changed football, is now available on Kindle at £9.99.  For more details and to buy a copy please click here or go to Amazon Kindle and search Kindle for Woolwich Arsenal.

  • Arsenal: The Long Sleep 1953-1970.  By John Sowman.  Introduction by Bob Wilson.  Kindle edition available now, paperback version within a few days.  Watch out also for Bob Wilson’s article for Untold in a few days time.

 

 

44 comments to Ref Review: Stoke – Arsenal: who is that voice whispering in my ear….?

  • Pete

    A classic example of northern refereeing style = weak and letting everything go. Stoke knew what they could get away with. Sadly, no one had passed Arsenal a copy of the revised rules. Or was it one rule for Stoke and one for Arsenal?

  • Usama Zaka

    This match against Stoke can be considered to be one of near perfect examples of Football in Hell.

    1. Poorest of pitches.
    2. Extreme cold conditions.
    3. Pro wrestling, mixed martial arts and street fighting foul tactics.
    4. A crowd where each person curses and boos you to death.
    5. Two utterly corrupt, incompetent and stubborn refs. (Dean and Pawson)

    Yet our team somehow managed to attack, defend and play their way in a fair and sporting manner without complaining. I still cant believe how we came out without any injuries (thankfully everyone is looking fitter than ever now)

  • Al

    When Walcott got fouled in the opening minutes of the match i observed the ref talking into his mouthpiece, while signalling for the offender, who was about 20 yards away, to come to him to…, give him a talking to. I thought that was odd, and that’s why I clearly remembered it. The only other time i think i saw anything close to that in football was when Marriner wrongly sent Gibbs off. Weird.

  • bjtgooner

    Again a great and detailed match report. Well done Walter and Usama.

    Stoke looked as if they were under orders to disrupt by cheating at every opportunity. They are a total disgrace to football – their disgrace is exceeded only by that of the Clones of Riley and the media who protect them and indeed by some of the Stoke Orcs (sorry – fans).

    It looks as if the message has gone out from the PGMO – it is ok to do Arsenal down by any means – legal or otherwise. Riley must go!!

  • Al

    I didn’t even have the energy to go through this review, when I looked at it is thought wow, did Walter or Usama spill their ketchup on this one. Disgusting.

    What it tells me is, to win this thing, it’s going to take blood, sweat and tears.

  • Usama Zaka

    Looks like we have a PGMO agent roaming around here, disliking the truth. 🙂

  • Al

    Many typos in my posts; meant when I looked at the review i thought ‘wow, did Walter or Usama spill their ketchup on this one..’

    Looks like Pawson might be here already reading this review, judging by the dislikes that are being clicked.

  • Thanks Walter & Usama for such a comprehensive report.

    Never seen such a low score

    Major question is what can be done about the officiating

  • Al

    Who is the ref for our fixture vs Chelsea BTW?

  • WalterBroeckx

    Al, it will be Clattenburg

  • Andrew Crawshaw

    Clattenberg got 42% in bis previous game this year when he single ha deadly gave West Brom their 2-1 win. Don’t expect a wonderfully refereed game.

  • Arvind

    Wow. Just wow. This is just terrible. Yeah Clattenburg, I used to have hope for – not anymore I guess. Sad.

    Offtopic: Gord brought this up on the Adebayor post that I commented on but I wanted to highlight it again.


    Indeed Gord. Thanks for bringing that up :). I am so so happy Theo and Arsenal have always found a solution. And I sincerely hope he retires with us… in 6 7 years or so. Scoring lots and lots of goals :). Not once has he ever ever behaved badly, even during all those contract negotiations that were blown up by the AAA.

    To anyone who has followed Theo and is reading? THIS is what professionalism is. That is how you deal with your contracts. You can still make a huge amount of money, do it the right way. Of course, sadly… outside Untold and a few others (relatively speaking in footballs universe) think this is vital. As long as we can boast about how much we spent in the bar in front of our ‘mates’ :rollseyes

  • Andrew Crawshaw

    In my ref preview for this game I had the following as item 4 in my conclusions

    Stoke v Arsenal games always tend to be feisty given the history between us and usually demand firm refereeing. I am hoping that Mr Pawson shows he can be such a referee and that the presence of Mr Dean is not malevolent. I am quite sure that Mr Dean will be there to ‘guide’ Mr Pawson’s career progress which is bound to be bad news for us.

    I think the evidence of guidance was obvious from the first minute and plain for everyone to see. The fact that we got a point and no injuries is little short of miraculous..

  • Al

    Thanks Walter. Let’s hope the bad blood between him and chelski will prevail over the desire to screw us.

  • bjtgooner

    Andrew

    I fully agree with your comments @ 8.42 pm. They show just how low our hopes and expectations of fair refereeing have become – we recognise it – Stoke, Liverpool, WBA etc all equally recognise the PGMO bias – and are happy, indeed more than happy, to take advantage of it.

    Chelsea, unless I am mistaken, will be another group of diving, pushing, pulling, tripping, fouling, thugs hoping to take advantage of a very sympathetic PGMO.

    There is something very evil going on between the PGMO, FA and the media protectors!

  • was pawson afraid of the 4th official

  • Pat

    Weighted score of 32.1 per cent. 42 wrong decisions, 40 against Arsenal, 2 in favour.

    Now if the press were really worried about what’s going wrong in sport, these would be banner headlines.

    Come on, journalists, let’s have some investigative journalism about what’s going on in football in your own back yard, not eight year old stories about tennis.

    Thanks again to Usama and Walter for providing the evidence.

  • Pat

    Great title, by the way. Worthy of an ironic laugh.

  • topanlesmana

    Ha. I knew it. I’m not surprised at all by this Ref Review of Stoke-Arsenal match. Anybody with a conscience would be able to see that clearly. The problem is for some time winning has become more important than fair play that a club like Stoke will use every possible way to win every game, even by breaking opponents players’ legs the way they did it to Ramsey. What a shame, really. A shame on football and humanity.

  • Va Cong

    They all know guys its part of the circle of money, they just don’t want to shit on their front doors it was like the banks and the bogus mortgages a few years back.

    I just watched the big short movie everyone in the corrupt bubble is keeping it intact for their own benefits. Like Wenger said is this all sustainable? Is he waiting for the truth to come out when the bubble bursts?

  • Va Cong

    I didn’t watch the match, I’m glad I didn’t know I wouldn’t have a TV left! Beautifully written as ever Usama & Walter!

  • Nath

    This is a joke, I’m sure all you fans were there watching the game? Clearly not…

    We gave as much as stoke, typical fans with their blinkers on. Stoke play pretty nice football nowadays, but on the day both teams were scrappy!

  • para

    Interesting excerpt(translated from German) from an interview with Granit Xhaka:

    “The whole talk on the fields, this trash talk, that is a nursery. The problem is simply the “late” kicks, an elbow or even spitting. Those are things that has nothing to do with football. As i was playing with torn ligaments it was extreme. They knew this and sent 2 or 3 kicks extra on my foot. Then it is difficult to stay calm. It’s not that i am a robot.”

    I always knew that players do this, that is, target an injury, but have never heard any player actually say that it is done.

  • Brickfields Gunners

    Nice work , guys . Its just as I saw the game – no fouls or cards awarded for all that persistent over the top ‘gamemanship ‘ . Glad we survived that ordeal unscathed.

    It will be among the very top in ‘ Riley’s believe it or not ‘ You Tube clips !

  • Nath, I do love comments like this. We go through a huge number of incidents, charting each one in detail, referring back to the rules looking in detail throughout. And then in 40 words, and most importantly without a single scrap of evidence, you say we not watching the game. Day after day, week after week, we publish evidence, not just on referees but on many other issues like injuries, transfers, the advisability of sacking managers, corruption, child trafficking in football… and then taking one of these topics you tell us in 40 words without any evidence to support you 40 words that “this is a joke”.

    I think that says something, but not quite what you meant to say.

  • nick stoke fan

    have to say I agree with nath. I’m sure there aren’t any matches where arsenal haven’t been robbed by the footballing establishment in one form or another. you are partial, and even though your analysis is more detailed, it’s still biased. honestly, where d’you find the time to do this stuff!

  • Nick – a little evidence – or better still a lot of evidence – to support your point would be welcome.

    As for where do we find the time – there are a lot of people involved, and we are making significant progress behind the scenes, so we make time.

  • Rich

    I believe PGMO are capable of almost anything, but if Dean was literally talking him through it, wouldn’t that be visible to the Arsenal bench?

    I’d have thought someone would pick up on it fairly quickly, then wouldn’t they be able to go stand by him for a bit?

    As it happens, I’ve no memories of the camera picking out Dean on the day, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Wenger has, understandably, reached a stage where he wouldn’t say a word to him.

    Still, though, my impression is that the 4th official is always visible to the bench, so if he was constantly talking into a mike, even if shielding his mouth while doing so, that would be noticeable to our staff. Wenger and Bould’s eyes will be on the action but someone else should’ve kept an eye on him.

    Whatever the cause, the abandonment of the concept of keeping count of fouls was pathetic, and clearly made things much harder for us.

    It might be among the simplest and least controversial things a ref has to do : with clear, deliberate fouls, even if unworthy of a booking themselves, you have a word after two or three, and book after four or five.

    It’s far less debatable than letting someone get away with a one-off challenge that really should have been a yellow, because it is so obvious that a large advantage has been gained by making lots of small fouls.

    Don’t recall Shawcross falling on Giroud’s leg, to be honest, but since I saw the injury which screwed Vidic’s knee (Basel) I’ve been aware of how dangerous it can be when someone falls into you when you’ve no reason to think they will. Most horrific injury I saw this year was when a Mexican player took a stupid dive after a shove in the back right onto a Honduran players leg in front of him, with catastrophic results.

    I’ve seen quite a few situations which make me think it’s a deliberate thing from players or even teams to do this, same as giving a push in the back when a player is close to an onrushing keeper or the shove when the ball is out of play. Sadly, I think some teams work on these things. No idea if Shawcross one comes into that category, but it wouldn’t surprise me.

  • Mandy Dodd

    looking back over the last two games, we had a ref at Liverpool, rumoured to be a boyhood liverpool fan, and once even an Anfield ball boy. I did not see much with my untrained eye, but the review says his performance was one of some sort of bias or incompetence.
    Then, we get this lamentable idiot doing the Stoke game. No cards, despite what Stoke were doing.
    Our players deserve immense credit for staying at the top in the face of these morons officiating our games.
    There is clearly an agenda against our club, manager or the way they choose to approach the game. should we win this title this year in the face of this, with Riley as head of refs, surely this will count as Wengers finest achievement among many.
    Next weekend we face Chelsea. Our team are currently better than Chelsea at football, but Chelsea are better than our players at Northern rules. My hunch is that the ref will try to level the playing field in Chelsea’s favour.
    Seems Chelsea and Spurs have cottoned onto the way they want the game played in this country despite their geographical disposition.
    Wenger , to his immense credit, but possible cost rejects the ways of the English game….do we have players good enough to overcome this?

  • Mandy Dodd

    Rich, Dean may or may not have been chattering to the weak and inadequate ref in the middle, but in reality, he wouldnt have to during the game.
    Dean would be higher up in the PGMOL food chain, he would just have to say a few words before the game.
    Dean should never be on the same pitch as Arsenal in any capacity, anyone who puts him there does so knowing his clear bias.

  • Gord

    OT: BBC Mythbusting

    On The BBC Sport/Football page, we see “Mythybusting: Is Diego Costa a Dirty Player?”.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35061044

    The lead is:
    > In a new series, we analyse popular myths to assess whether they are based on fact – or fiction. Do they stand up to scrutiny, or are they nothing more than tired cliches?

    I have my own myth: “The BBC is Still a High Integrity News Organization”.

    In the second section of the article, we have:
    > Does the myth stack up?

    > This is a tricky one to prove or disprove.

    > Does being dirty mean being caught by the officials – and shown a card – or is it more about cynical, off-the-ball incidents which might be missed by referees?

    > Since the latter are not recorded by statisticians, we can only really judge Costa on those offences he is penalised for.

    I will suggest that it is _NOT_ a tricky one to prove or disapprove, but rather it is difficult to prove or disprove if the whorenalit does not want to do any work or spend significant time/money doing research.

    But, it is the third sentence above which completely busts our myth. It is certainly possible to judge Costa on _ALL_ controversial incidents caught on video. In fact, the BBC probably has access to video that never makes it into the TV broadcast, and hence has even more video evidence to look through.

    Reviewing video evidence is what Walter does for Untold, among many other things. The BBC could do the same (or better). They could ask the PGMO mouthpiece (Webb), or oyu could if he was still being the mouthpiece. I gather he went to Saudi Arabia to run their FA (and maybe do FA as well). Or, you could ask the critic Hacket, or the promoter Poll. Or you could ask top level referees.

    However the evidence is reviewed, you don’t want the reviewers (who are referees) collaborating. Each has to be working on their own, and after all the work is done, summarization can start.

    That would be the best way. There is a half-assed way which the BBC didn’t even attempt, which would most certainly fit their time/money/effort budget. Look at how many incidents get discussed in the fan blogs and forums. Look at the volume on twitter. There might be other avenues as well.

    Sure, you could consider asking the muppets about it, but that will provide a highly biased estimate of things. Mentioning opinions of the muppets in an article only makes sense, if it backs up the popular observations. But to have (for example) Alan Shearer say that Diego Costa is a saint, isn’t useful.

    How many injuries are attributable to actions by Costa?

    There are lots of things the BBC could have done. Instead, they chose to only examine what the biased/incompetent PGMO employees of the day have been told to flag in their games.

    They did come to what I think is the correct conclusion; that Costa is dirty. But they make it sound like it is only by a very narrow margin that he could be regarded as dirty.

    And now that the work is done and published, they are asking twits to write into twitters and send the twits at the BBC twits about this topic.

  • Gord

    Oh, my verdict? The BBC is no longer a high integrity news organization. The myth is busted.

  • nick stoke fan

    well, no evidence from me beyond the wisdom of crowds. no one outside of this forum considers the match on sunday anything other than an even contest between 2 good teams. there are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics. your analysis falls in the stats category.

  • Nick the problem is that you make assertions to justify your assertions. “No one outside of this forum…” so how do you know that? You may have realised that the writers on this site include refs and retired refs, who, it doesn’t take much imagination to realise, are somewhat in touch with what is going on in the world of refereeing.

    Oh, and you might have done us the courtesy to read the article about the validity of statistics (which actually quoted and examined the origins of that quaint saying.)

    Do you really think we would get over 6 million page views in a year if we were totally out on our own? Do you think the BBC would have interviewed two of our researchers for a programme if we were just making numbers up? Do you think that PGMO would respond to one of our analyses by briefing the Daily Telegraph the next day and getting them to publish a rebuttal? It goes on and on, but no, someone you have looked into the mind of every football fan who doesn’t read Untold and found that none of them think there is a problem.

    Good telepathy that – you might actually want to use it to make your fortune, rather than arguing with us.

  • Dazza64

    Tony,

    The Shakespeare quote today is most apt when applied to our visiting Stoke fans!!

  • Rantetta

    Here’s saint linekar tilting the perception of Mr Wenger (I think following a match in which we were, as always, robbed at Stoke). Note: comments have been removed:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LWO0mtwpjO8

  • nick stoke fan

    my assertion is: you are no more objective than i am. you are the subject of a paranoid delusion, and your “evidence” is used to support your assertion that hidden forces are out to get you.

    “I believe the target of anything in life should be to do it so well that it becomes an art.” A Wenger

    it’s ironic that your “evidence” based approach to rationalise your team’s failings.

  • Yes Nick I know that is your assertion – that is what you have been saying throughout.

  • omgarsenal

    I like Clattenberg but must admit that after his sanctioning by the PIGMOB for driving to some concert after a game he did, it seems he got the message loud and clear from Riley: tow the line or forget your career. As a retired professional referee, I heard that line (in varied forms)throughout my career in one manner or another. It is always there and along with the necessity to kiss ass to advance your career in officiating, represent the two biggest banes in becoming a fair referee.
    I watched Chelsea recently and they play decent Football when attacking but are poor in defense. Their midfield is not as strong as ours and while Fabregas seems to be getting back to his best, the remainder seem 2nd rate, especially John Terry. They are very slow in defense and there is little collaboration between their back four and their midfielders.
    IF our back 4 and midfield play well, we can take them, I am convinced….provided the PIGMOB don’t actively intervene like they did at Stamford Bridge with Dean.

  • Gord

    Followup on the Mythbusting

    The BBC has done another thing to lessen their integrity, but more on that in a bit.

    In the rambling page that constitutes today’s idiot commenting on the medja news, there is a note of the first radio commentary of a “Live” goal, that being by Charlie Buchan, who at the time was Captain of Arsenal. Arsenal 1 – 1 Sheffield United; January 22, 1927.

    Anyway, back to the lack of integrity. The article says this is the first in a new series. And they get off completely on the wrong foot. There is no need to introduce the article by which team Diego Costa is likely to be playing against. Doing so automatically biases any selection which may take place in sampling.

    So, at 12:05 BBC Muppet Time, the BBC in their running commentary by muppets about what medja write, bring up this article looking for feedback. This feedback should be biased by the mention of Arsenal in the article. Arsenal has nothing to do with Diego Costa being dirty, it should not have been mentioned.

    In almost 8 hours of “coverage” after mentioning this world shattering article, nobody wrote in. Or at least, they didn’t mention any twits about this. Which surprised me.

  • John

    Nick
    One thing you have to realise on this forum is that whenever we lose or play badly its either because of
    1.The referee
    2.Opposing players constantly attacking ours.
    3.Opposing managers
    4.Pundits
    5.The press
    6.The oil rich clubs
    It is never the fault of any of our players and MOST DEFINITELY not the managers fault.

  • Mick

    John
    Showing your true colours again. Pathetic.

  • John

    Mick
    Sorry but its true.

  • WalterBroeckx

    omgarsenal, no matter what we say about how the referee world works in reality… they will not take notice.
    A bit like FIFA watchers saying something is wrong at FIFA but nobody took notice.

    Oh well….