Ref Review: MU – Arsenal

22 Replies to “Ref Review: MU – Arsenal”

1. “Valencia made a run forward with Monreal alongside him. First Valencia first pushes Monreal down on the shoulder which should have been a foul. Second when Monreal stretches forward his arm in front of Valencia there was no foul contact”

   It always amazes me how two or more people can look at the same incident and see something different.

   For one, Valencia megged Monreal and turned him around.
   The fact that this wasn’t a clean meg( the ball bounces between Monreal’s legs before going through) might’ve had something to do with Monreal’s losing his footing a bit , or maybe he realized he was beaten for pace and decided to go down before Valencia makes any contact with his shoulder. In any case, both players use their arms at exactly the same time to gain advantage and they both make contact.
   Monreal goes to ground first and Valencia follows.

   For my money, Valencia dives to buy the penalty and the ref rightly doesn’t give it, but to say Monreal was fouled on the play shows lack of basic understanding of the game, willful bias, or both.

2. It’s about time match officials had sufficient “bottle” in order to deal with the likes of Rooney, aka Yesterday’s Man.
   When he’s not dissenting about being touched, he carries out a match-long irritating and distracting monologue with the referee….and gets away with it.
   A few second yellows would soon get the message to him. 😉

3. Tom,

   When the ref report week 12 gets published, the clips for this penalty decision will also be there. From four different angles Valencias pressing arm movement on Monreal was clear. And for similar arm pressing and pushing done by El Nenny and Ramsey during the match referee gave fouls.

4. “For my money, Valencia dives to buy the penalty and the ref rightly doesn’t give it, but to say Monreal was fouled on the play shows lack of basic understanding of the game, willful bias, or both.”

   Very well summarised indeed. And once again it makes you wonder: what if this had taken place at the other end? Any chance of a crystal clear penalty?

   And you are eager to hand out a second yellow to Darmian based on an ASSUMPTION “some contact was made” on Walcott. Ok, you are the bosses…

   Nothing much wrong with the rest of the stuff. I still admire the hard work you guys put in. But it would be nice if you weren’t so easily offended just because someone disagrees with you. Being industrious doesn’t mean your views are correct on every occasion. Having differing convictions shouldn’t lead to getting personal and questioning the “state” of other people.

5. Usama, an excellent review.

   Re the Valencia incident I agree with your description, with one slight addition – Valencia appeared to aim a back elbow at Monreal, this was part of the push on Monreal’s shoulder – I am not sure if this landed as a blow, or was intended as a blow or if only a push was intended – but it looked as if a blow was the intention.

   I have watched the foul by Darmian on Walcott several times, unfortunately the camera angle does not help, but the way Walcott fell is consistent with a trip from behind. Darmian had no chance of reaching the ball, but Walcott’s left ankle was available.

   As for Rooney – I agree with nicky – he should be carded every time he opens his mouth!

6. Mr. Dieter, I just read your comment is the previous article that was worthy of high intellect, wisdom, and keen eye. Here I would like to thank you for your admiration of the work done. And also thank you for the unbiased, fair and non-accusing comment.

7. Whatever the refs did in this game does not matter. The real problem is Wenger. At least ESPN is starting to report on his inabilities to manage his team. Take the blinkers off people, see the problem for what it is. If we have decent players and they are not performing, who is to blame? The commander in chief always has a sign that says “the buck stops here”. We can make excuses as much as we want, but except the truth, Wenger is not getting the best out of a good bunch of players. Its time to go.

8. Bjtgooner,

   Thanks, Yes the camera angle does not help but when Walcott was going down Darmian also kicked against his left foot. Also as Mr. Dieter the one with high intellect, wisdom, and keen eye suggested, the assumption was made due to two reasons, 1. There was no clear angle for the initial foul from behind 2. Due to that we gave the ref benefit of the doubt.

   Also if Mr. Dieter the one with high intellect, wisdom, and keen eye, had read or gone through previous reviews and reports, there are a lot of the decisions that went against us where the benefit of the doubt has given to the ref due to bad camera angles. Kindly beg your pardon, Mr Dieter for questioning your high intellect, wisdom, and keen eye.

9. pop

   I am not sure just when you decided to “pop up” and enter the discussion – but if you had been reading ESPN for any length of time you would know that they have been talking nonsense about Arsenal for a very long time.

10. I’m surprised that Valencia didn’t get a card for the dive as he deserved let alone anything else.

    How on earth anyone can dispute the idea that Darmian should have been sent off is completely beyond me. The studs up challenge is, as stated, a red card offence. To not give a yellow was so clearly bias and would have without doubt received a yellow had he not already had one……….fear of the wrath of Riley I would suggest with some certainty.

11. btgooner

    I know what you are saying as the press will talk a load of bollocks, but just trying to get the point across. We have not performed at a high level for many years. Tactically we are lacking and only one person is to blame.

12. Don’t feed the troll!

13. Walter,

    Oopsss !

14. Usama

    I suppose it would be too much to ask you to stick to footballing matters. Taking occasional swipes at someone’s arrogance does not imply you have to do it 24/7. And it certainly doesn’t take a “keen eye” to spot incidents that are replayed over and over again.

    You used to be one of the most accomplished and trustworthy contributors on this site. But in a recent turn of the events you’ve become extremely sensitive whenever anyone has the nerve to refer to coincidental inconsistencies in your (and Walter’s) verdicts.

    I’m afraid your “don’t feed the troll” comments highlight the attitude of both of you. The non-AKBs might even call you contemptuous. Who knows?

15. Goonermikey, i’d say Darmian was aiming for the ball in Jenkinson incident, but then again he should have been off before that…

16. Dieter,
    the universe is not turning around you. I was talking about another troll that had just poped up.

17. Thank you again for using your high intellect and wisdom Mr. Dieter.

18. I agree that Valencia should have had a yellow card for diving (cheating) in an attempt to get a penalty.

19. Walter

    I’m aware your comment wasn’t directed straight at me because in this case I was demoted to “another troll”. How funny is that? And you don’t need to tell me the universe is not turning around me as we all know it’s turning around poor Mr Wenger and his loyal sectarians.

    I’m looking forward to having much more football-related discussions like these now that we’re all in the same page. Why waste precious time talking about the sports when you can entertain everyone by getting personal?

    Just to make sure: a person seeing things differently = a troll. Right, I’m learning slowly.

20. Dieter,

    Alright, I have now stopped playing Sarcastaball (my apologies for being super duper politely sarcastic) and lets talk football, and about your thoughts on some decisions in this review.

    ==================================================================================

    Your comment at “dieter, 24/11/2016 at 10:47 am”

    Your question “what if this (the Valencia-Monreal Penalty) had taken place at the other end? Any chance of a crystal clear penalty?

    If this exactly had happened to of our players, it would not have been penalty. And also not a crystal clear penalty. Why? because there was just no foul contact made by the defending player, that is the most conclusive part of the incident.

    The Watmore-Cech Penalty at Sunderland, why was it deemed both by our review and the onfield ref? Because even though Cech made a very slight attempt to reach for the ball and missed, his slightest but clear and conclusive contact from the upper body wobbled and made Watmore lose his balance (who further went to exaggerate his fall, which doesn’t matter at all)

    The Dembele-Koscienly Penalty at Arsenal, why was it deemed correct both by our review and the onfield ref? Because even though it looked like that Dembele was already on his way down or just kicked the ball aside to make sure he comes in to a foul contact, Koscienly’s attempt for a standing tackle, missing the ball and a softest of trip/kick but clear and conclusive was enough for it to be a penalty.

    =============================================================================

    The second thing you discuss is that…
    “And you are eager to hand out a second yellow to Darmian based on an ASSUMPTION “some contact was made” on Walcott.”

    If you have read several other reviews and reports, (I cant link them all here because the comment goes in to moderation if you have more than one link) that on a number of offsides, penalty and fouls for various teams the broadcasts don’t show the best angles or just don’t the replays at all. So we all are at the mercy of TV companies.

    This results us in having no option but to agree with what the decision the onfield ref has made. Because there is just no conclusive proof to use/show/discuss.

    Now, in that specific Darmian foul, Walter has written above. “Darmian stuck out his right leg and because of the angles we have at our disposal we cannot be 100 % sure if Darmian made contact with the right foot of Walcott. But his leg bent in an unnatural way so we can assume some contact was made. Darmian then to make sure also kicked out against the left foot of Walcott when he was already going down. As we don’t have 100% proof that there was no contact we have to agree with the decision of the ref on the field and also with the yellow card. ”

    This was the only replay the TV showed, here it is slowed down. You can not see whether there was any foul contact or not from behind.

    https://gfycat.com/BoldElderlyAffenpinscher#?speed=0.25

21. I see the weasels have started popping out of their hiding holes and are sniping from behind their aaa screens. Wake up fools and realize that you will NEVER get support for your anti-Wengerian views on UA, particularly since you don’t support them with any factual evidence or rational arguments and also because you are too myopic to see the masthead of UA and continue to try and diss Wenger. We DO NOT blindly support Wenger and criticize his decisions as merited, based on what our reviews and referee assessments show us. That said, we NEVER just ¨pop¨ up out of the sewers and fire off a totally negative and untenable statement about Wenger or any other Arsenal member.

22. Usama

    Thank you. I believe you. Do you believe me if I tell you my mission is NOT to be a pain in your ass and that I agree with MOST of your calls? I haven’t forgotten the painful decisions which you’ve got absolutely corract – for instance Santi’s second yellow and Per’s red in the infamous Chelsea encounters last season.

    I have no differing opinions on Cech-Watmore or Kos-Dembele. Monreal-Valencia was not a penalty for me, but to claim Nacho was actually fouled is a perception I can’t share. My reasoning is that Valencia played the ball and therefore had the possession while Nacho did nothing else than “harass” the best he could. But a penalty would’ve been harsh as the Ecuadorian went down voluntarily.

    Walcott vs. Darmian; in my opinion the alleged foul on 25th minute is NOT a yellow card offense, regardless of a slight contact let alone no contact at all. My argument is that once we start dishing out cards for (almost) every foul there will be no end to it which in turn will result in nothing positive.

    omgarsenal; I hear you, but I always try to support my views with as rational arguments as I can (except for casual one- or two-liners). And I’m not looking for support. I’m merely presenting a perspective of a long-term supporter, for what it’s worth (i.e. not much). And I do think that AKBs and WOBs should be able to communicate without calling each others sewer rats, weasels or whatever you can come up with.