23 responses

  1. mm
    09/05/2017

    If the referee had had a good game, there would be no need for this “assessment “. You seem to be trying to convince yourself as much as us that City weren’t robbed. It’s not working

  2. Leon
    09/05/2017

    Agree with all of this apart from the infamous “sun in eyes” offside given against Monreal. He looked a yard off to me. I thought so on the day, and your video proves it surely?

  3. Norman14
    09/05/2017

    I saw Mike Riley on Sky this morning and he was talking.

    Well, his lips were moving anyway!

  4. Goonermikey
    09/05/2017

    I don’t very often disagree with UA but I’m with Leon (on this occasion only). Monreal looks well offside……………….

  5. Sb
    09/05/2017

    Unsurprisingly, the monreal handball/penalty is explained away or should i say reinterpreted and the ref is given the benefit of the doubt, despite it been clear to see that monreal stretches out his arm to make contact with the ball(despite a late and feeble attempt to withdraw the arm). Why do i feel if it had happened against the team in red some people here would have been frothing at the mouth. Ref review bias, incompetence or ref review type3 fixing? 😄😄😄

    • Tony Attwood
      09/05/2017

      Sb: You ask, “Why do i feel if it had happened against the team in red some people here would have been frothing at the mouth?” I suppose the answer is because you don’t believe the validity of the work of the referee panel here with their 160 game review. Which then raises the question, why don’t you, or indeed why doesn’t anyone, replicate the work of the referee team and next season, you review the first 160 games with video evidence as the Untold team did, and then we can look at your reports and see if you (in our eyes) reveal any bias. That would be the true test.

  6. Nitram
    09/05/2017

    mm

    Are you for real?

    This site was set upon the basis of referee reviews:

    Just look down the left hand side under PAGES and the first thing you see is ‘160 games reviewed’.

    Need or not, this site reviews each and every match played by Arsenal.

    You seem to be trying to convince us he had a bad game. It’s not working.

    Untold has produced an extensive report assisted with video evidence to support them.

    I look forward to you supplying similar evidence to support your point of view.

  7. Nitram
    09/05/2017

    Typo: ‘160 games analysed’ Sorry.

  8. SamuelAkinsolaAdebosin
    09/05/2017

    Let there be no much arguments amongst the Untolders over the good referee review work done at numerous occasions by the Untold Arsenal referee review panel who are highlighting and pointing out the wrong small, big and major decisions making by referees which have swayed the outcome of PL matches against Arsenal in what is increasing becoming match fixing type whatever by Mr Riley’s Pgmol outfit. Due credit should be accorded to the referee review panel at the Untold Arsenal for the strenuous pains they go through before they come with a clean copy of the review referee review publications every week. This work is certainly not an easy work to do but hard. My kudos to the Untold Arsenal referee review panel. Please keep the good work on.

  9. OlegYch
    09/05/2017

    http://prntscr.com/f5vq0u
    a bit of geometry 101 for Leon and Goonermikey

  10. OlegYch
    09/05/2017

    Sb, “feeble attempt to withdraw the arm”??? fcking Navas kicked him in the arm with high foot

  11. Leon
    09/05/2017

    OlegYch
    So what does your geometry prove?
    That he’s inside perspective lines?
    Anymore offside and he’d be in the Sobell Centre

  12. OlegYch
    09/05/2017

    Leon, anything on the left of the middle line is closer to the goal than Monreal feet/head

  13. OlegYch
    09/05/2017

    or knee for that matter

  14. Leon
    09/05/2017

    Olegych

    Do you know what? I think you’re absolutely right.
    I was looking at the other player (Ozil I think) who was offside but not making a play, whereas Monreal came from being just onside. My fault, I was confusing the two of them.
    Sorry for doubting you Walter.
    Goonermikey take note.

  15. OlegYch
    09/05/2017

    oh that explains it

  16. Leon
    09/05/2017

    Feel free to gloat🙄

  17. Vince
    09/05/2017

    About the Monreal handball incident, surely Navas kicking Monreal arm (even if it was accidental) should be given as a foul against City, right?

  18. Nitram
    09/05/2017

    Leon

    I wondered if you had got the players mixed up.

    Well done sir for admitting your error. Easily done I can attest to that.

  19. Leon
    09/05/2017

    Nitram
    I certainly did, and not for the first time.’

  20. JP
    10/05/2017

    I agree with Vince. Walter could you elaborate? Why do you not see the kick to Monreal’s arm as a foul? I am not trying to challenge your views, I would merely like an explanation to improve my understanding of the rules.

  21. MickHazel
    10/05/2017

    I agree with Vince and JP. Navas kicking Monreals arm caused the handball, how could that possibly be construed as anything other than entirely accidental. I also disagree that his arm is in an unnatural position, given his body position and falling forward movement it is entirely natural to have your arms outstretched for balance. He is not looking up at the ball either, he is looking down.
    You could also make a good case for Navas being penalized for a high boot.
    I do not see any evidence at all to support a penalty being awarded. Could it be Walter that you are going out of your way to appear unbiased!!!

  22. finsbury
    10/05/2017

    The village idiot with another unsuccessful effort atvteolking the connect section at Untold.

    This is another helpful review following yet another accurate preview for Sunday’s match. Thank you.

    Given this reliable and observable record I think everyone can understand why the gr*t sniffing Experts have been failing to troll the comments section for so long now.

Back to top
mobile desktop