The 8 games that cost Arsenal the season.

48 Replies to “The 8 games that cost Arsenal the season.”

1. evens itself out over the season.. for example, lecister v arsenal i remember 90th minute leicster not given a clear penalty.

2. The article did suggest at the end that you might care to look at the page on the 160 games Dan. I guess you didn’t have time. But 1 example against around 5000 in the 160 games – yes it gave us a bit of a wry smile. You won’t be surprised to know, we’ve heard that one before.

3. It’s true some particular referees decision makings were hash or deliberately made against the Gunners to force them to drop points in some PL matches they’ve played in which Arsenal have either lost or drew during the recently concluded PL campaign that just ended last weekend.

   Nevertheless, Le Prof and the Gunners should not sit on this Mike Riley’s Pgmol appointed referee wranglers making wrangling decisions in the PL to tilt the PL title win to Mike Riley’s elect club side every season to win the PL and deny Arsenal. But sit up uprightly to counter the negativism so employed by Mike Riley’s agenda in the Premier League obviously tailored against Arsenal in their PL matches and defuse the fuse negativism against them and turn it to positivism for Arsenal as from next season PL campaign. I hope I’ve not been poetic in this my comment.

4. It’s true some particular referees decision makings overtime were hash or deliberately made against the Gunners to force them to drop points in some PL matches they’ve played in which Arsenal have either lost or drew during the recently concluded PL campaign season that just ended last weekend.

   Nevertheless, Le Prof and the Gunners should not use as an excuse for failing to win the PL by continuing to sit on this Mike Riley’s Pgmol appointed referee wranglers making wrangling decisions in the PL to tilt the PL title wins to Mike Riley’s preferred club sides to win the PL title every season and deny Arsenal consistently. But get up uprightly to defend themselves and counter the negativism so employed by Mike Riley in his agenda in the Premier League obviously tailored against Arsenal in their PL matches and defuse the fuse of his negativism against them and turn it to positivism for Arsenal as from next season PL campaign. I hope I’ve not been poetic in this my comment.

5. I wonder why oliver ddnt see it fit to give Williams d second yellow for d foul on welbck as he was d last man.y was it so difficult.he hesitated but if it were an arsenal guy he wud go by d rules.Dats my issue wit these refs. So samuel somtimes dias soo much u can do.chelc toteham livafool dey get it easier.they do get bad calls but thiers usually fair.against Boro d ref failed to give a clear fenalty to Boro why.if it wer arsenal 8 out of 10 it wud b given to d oda team

6. The only top 6 team in The EL and you’re here talking refereeing decisions when clearly the Team is deficient both in tactics and personnel.
   If every team brought forward refereeing decisions which went against them I’m sure sunderland will feel they deserve to be in the top 10.
   We weren’t good enough it’s plane and simple let’s do better and not Lay everything at the foot of refs.
   We are better than this ,this mentality of pushing the blame Somewhere is living in denial

7. Dan has destroyed the whole thrust of the argument with one incredible in depth and well constructed comment.
   What a plonker.

8. Frankly, I disagree with you. I reckon with versus Chelsea, versus West Brom, versus Crystal Palace, versus Liverpool, and versus Bournemouth. We shouldn’t have lost these! I think the coach and the players messed up their seasons; all of them safe Kos and Mustafi. But how about the matches we shouldn’t have won? Burnley with Kos ‘ hand? #LessonsForNextSeasons.

9. Even if Dan would be right we still would have won the Leicester match 1-2. So what was your point again?

10. Olanrewaju, the difference is that the material presented by Andrew and the Referees team is based on analyses which everyone can check by going through all of the videos on the 160 Matches page. You can of course disagree, but as you present no evidence, we can’t really have a debate

11. Josh, I disagree. We are using clear evidence which everyone including you can check in detail, because it is on this site.

    You choose not to check the evidence, and come to your own conclusions, as of course you can do. But just saying ” the Team is deficient ” doesn’t mean the team is deficient. It means that is your opinion, without any evidence to back it up.

    I suspect you would make a very good politician.

12. I always thought the referees have been a bit dodgy this season.

13. Apart from Jeremy Corbyn, Tony.

14. you may well be right but walcotts missed penalty against liverpool cost us a point and gave them an extra three

15. Far to many points to even pass comment on individually but the nonsense of this article is summed up by the ludicrous claim that you should have beaten WBA.
    I along with others think the claim that Fletcher was blocking Cech is nothing more than bias but then to go on to suggest you would have gone on to win the game had the goal been disallowed is ridiculous.
    Marcos goes on to suggest Williams should have been give a second yellow which is a fair shout but having looked at the tackle where Gabriel got injured I can see fully why Dermot Gallagher suggested that tackle too could quite easily have been a straight red.
    Tony as for using clear evidence you are not you are using opinion

16. The non-cards for Costa in the first quarter of the season were certainly a nonsense.

17. Poor team attitude at crucial moments, lack of tactical planning and flexibility from the coaching staff and injured personnel cost us this season. You can show all the evidence of corrupt officiating but had we been the better team we could have drawn if not win all of them matches on our own abilities. How come the last five matches of the season we went beating teams. Heck we scored two on the last day with ten men for more than three fourths of the game. So rather than blame something that’s not going to change, we can focus on things that the team can do better to win regardless of the ref decisions. And that is team attitude, player selection and tactical planning.

18. Isn’t arsenal the only team to have scored two handball goals this season? Isn’t arsenal the team that beat Southampton and Burnley in the dying minutes with dodgy penalty decisions? Wasn’t a ball to hand legit goal disallowed against Bournemouth? Of course I don’t agree with your super biased ref reviews

19. Not forgetting Chelsea’s vital first goal at Stamford Bridge this season came from their player knocking Bellerin out with his elbow….as it was us at the Bridge, would guess Atkinson?
    Who knows what would have happened in that game if alonso had been red carded and the goal not stood.
    But alas, the club do nothing

20. Immediately after bellerin had had given a clear 2handed push in the back of Diego Costa causing him to miscue his header on top the bar and should have earned Chelsea a penalty and bellerin a card

21. Mandy
    And that’s the point. If you disregard an incident, disregard a goal the direction changes so you hand no idea how things would pan out. As it happens I have still yet to see any mainstream reports or opinions from those qualified to suggest it was a foul.
    Who knows if the ref had blown for the Bellerin push on Costa just before the incident perhaps the resultant penalty had been missed perhaps not but what if Bellerin was sent of for denying a goalscoring opportunity on and got sent off and Chelsea go on to win 4-0 .
    This is why this sort of article is a nonesense because you don’t just replay the incident you replay what followed thereafter.

22. I’d just add my humble opinion on the Bournemouth game. I actually think we got a point instead of losing two as Mustafi should have been booked for breaking the dangerous attack (the one Bournemouth got their penalty from). He fouled the Bournemouth player in the build-up of the attack but wasn’t shown a yellow card. He later got a card for persistent fouling.

    I’ll add video later.

23. Mike T – I think the point that is made overall is that there are so many incidents, that even if some of them are wrongly judged, the overall impact is still highly likely to be affecting results. You are right, not every option is taken into account, and that of course includes the psychological impact on Arsenal players of seeing these incidents happen.

    But you are not convinced, fair enough. Not really much further we can go with that.

24. Very true Mike T, nobody can know for certain what would have happened, but overall, this team have been through it this…and many other seasons, annd certain refs crop up time and time again.
    On another note,I am still staggered that we have attained the relatively rare feat of conceding 10 penalties in the league this season, very very few of even the dirtiest, most desperate most cynical teams reach double figures…ok Hull did as well this year, but its pretty rare.
    But , as I keep reiterating, this club, its ownership, manager, players or whoever seem a very soft touch for refs out to do us…and as we can see, it has firmly spread to the refs of europe.
    Pep met with Mike Riley..http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/manchester-city-news-pep-guardiola-mike-riley-meeting-victims-kyle-walker-foul-a7540566.html
    not sure it did him any good, but at least he tried.

25. This is the awesome message I have read till date its really eyeopener

    -A boat is docked in a tiny Mexican fishing village.

    A tourist complimented the local fishermen on the quality of their fish and asked how long it took to catch them.

    “Not very long.” they answered in unison.

    “Why didn’t you stay out longer and catch more?”

    The fishermen explained that their small catches were sufficient to meet their needs and those of their families.

    “But what do you do with the rest of your time?”

    “We sleep late, fish a little, play with our children, and take siestas with our wives. In the evenings, we go into the village to see our friends, have a few drinks, play the guitar, and sing a few songs.

    We have a full life.”
    The tourist interrupted,

    “I am an MBA from Harvard and I can help you!
    You should start by fishing longer every day.
    You can then sell the extra fish you catch.
    With the extra revenue, you can buy a bigger boat.”

    “And after that?”

    “With the extra money the larger boat will bring, you can buy a second one and a third one and so on until you have an entire fleet of trawlers.
    Instead of selling your fish to a middle man, you can then negotiate directly with the processing plants and maybe even open your own plant.

    You can then leave this little village and move to Mexico City , Los Angeles , or even New York City !

    From there you can direct your huge new enterprise.”

    “How long would that take?”

    “Twenty, perhaps twenty-five years.” replied the tourist.

    “And after that?”

    “Afterwards? Well my friend, that’s when it gets really interesting,” answered the tourist, laughing. “When your business gets really big, you can start buying and selling stocks and make millions!”

    “Millions? Really? And after that?” asked the fishermen.

    “After that you’ll be able to retire, live in a tiny village near the coast, sleep late, play with your children, catch a few fish, take a siesta with your wife and spend your evenings drinking and enjoying your friends.”

    “With all due respect sir, but that’s exactly what we are doing now. So what’s the point wasting twenty-five years?” asked the Mexicans.

    And the moral of this story is:

    Know where you’re going in life, you may already be there! Many times in life, money is not everything.

    “Live your life before life becomes lifeless”.

26. Great observations Andrew with all the proof attached.
    Then come the refuters with their hot air !
    Does anyone of the regulars here think they truly ought to get a life or at least have their heads shrunk ?

27. *NUGGETS FOR NOBLES*

    1. Take risks in your life. If you win, you can lead; if you lose, you can guide.

    2. People are not what they say but what they do; so judge them not from their words but from their actions.

    3. When someone hurts you, don’t feel bad because it’s a law of nature that the tree that bears the sweetest fruits gets maximum number of stones.

    4. Take whatever you can from your life because when life starts taking from you, it takes even your last breath.

    5. In this world, people will always throw stones on the path of your success. It depends on what you make from them – a wall or a bridge.

    6. Challenges make life interesting; overcoming them make life meaningful.

    7. There is no joy in victory without running the risk of defeat.

    8. A path without obstacles leads nowhere.

    9. Past is a nice place to visit but certainly not a good place to stay.

    10. You can’t have a better tomorrow if you are thinking about yesterday all the time.

    11. If what you did yesterday still looks big to you, then you haven’t done much today.

    12. If you don’t build your dreams, someone else will hire you to build theirs.

    13. If you don’t climb the mountain; you can’t view the plain.

    14. Don’t leave it idle – use your brain.

    15. You are not paid for having brain, you are only rewarded for using it intelligently.

    16. It is not what you don’t have that limits you; it is what you have but don’t know how to use.

    17. What you fail to learn might teach you a lesson.

    18. The difference between a corrupt person and an honest person is: The corrupt person has a price while the honest person has a value.

    19. If you succeed in cheating someone, don’t think that the person is a fool…… Realize that the person trusted you much more than you deserved.

    20. Honesty is an expensive gift; don’t expect it from cheap people.

28. You can say that certain decisions went against Arsenal but you can’t go around attributing hypothetical goals. It’s like when people say that “X could have had a hat-trick” when he missed three goalscoring chances because as soon as the first goes in, the pattern of play changes totally. And didn’t Walcott do a studs up lunge on Fernandinho and escape a red card?

29. If nobody says anything, people will think nothing is wrong.

30. Wow.
    That dirty bastard Walcott did a studs up challenge on Fernandinho and didn’t get punished.
    It does even itself out in the end!

31. It is rather strange people bring up a match where we didn’t contest the final result yet use this to undermine the findings of the matches mentioned?????? Look it up folks Chelsea – Arsenal is not in the list from Andrew.
    But as it is discussed: there was no two hands push from Bellerin. Look at the review and show me where Bellerin used two hands to push Costa.
    And if you say that a defender making contact with a striker is a penalty, fine by me. Then maybe I could ad for this season some 25 penalties in our favour where defenders made contact with Giroud to try to deny him making clean contact with a cross.

    Rather funny also to think that Bellerin making contact with Costa was deemed a “penalty foul” by some and yet the elbow from Alonso making contact with the head of Bellerin is judged not to be a foul by the same people….oh well….

32. I would add another match…the complete travesty of refereeing in the Bayern game that did so much to undermine confidence. Yes, we shot ourselves in the foot, and we were never going to overturn the first leg, but that thing in black at the Emirates just rubbed it in

33. Walter

    There is absolutely no doubt that Bellerin put hands on Costas back in fact he did it again on Sunday this time on Lukaku. You choose not to have seen it or may not have seen the replays but in the Sky coverage at 14.29 and whilst play was halted they showed the incident from various angles including one from the camera behind the goal.
    As for bringing it up suggest you look at the postings you will see it was Mandy that first mentioned it. At 3.11 I responded at 3.59 but the whole context of the comment was had that been given how can you even guess what would have happened from that point on ? You can’t and that’s why all this you should have had another six or however many points is just total nonesense

34. Ajay – we don’t blame the refs for our losses. We blame them for cheating & game management. You need to be able to watch the technicality of the game. Too many experts talk of tactics but few actually see the the ‘whistle’ used as tactics. If officials are fair, then there is no issue. The problem is there are cheats officiating. They have selective vision & inconsistency between team decisions. One instance is a foul while the same instance on a subsequent occasion is not. One player gets a yellow or a red while another gets a talking to.

    There are far too many people thinking that the game is perfect. It isn’t. It is being abused by a group of corrupt people to enhance their position of wealth, while allowing illegal excesses by others.

35. Menace- There are a lot of decisions that are not called for us. The last game of the season against Everton where Williams should have been given another yellow on two occasions just went under the radar as warnings. It’s infuriating to see that. But we scored from open play and so the referee’s indiscretions amounted to nothing. The above games mentioned did have incorrect decisions but if our over all scoring had been better it wouldn’t have mattered what the referee did. We may not have been able to win them all but had we drawn three of those games we lost we would have at least had the chance of finishing third or fourth.

36. @ Menace -25/05/2017 at 10:55 pm – I do believe that if a person is able to watch the game all on his own, without the’ benefit’ of those expert (read biased) commentary ; or the stupid comments of drunken friends and others , he would be able to appreciate the game more.

    More so if proper and relevant replays are shown repeatedly; or if possible tape the game and replay again and again, to see in slow motion the contentious incidents.

    Emptying your mind of all negative influences , prejudices , fears and biases , will heighten your sense of perception and appreciation . Try not to unnecessarily, pre think or over think it , but just enjoy the moment as best as you can.

    Don’t preformulate your comments,criticisms,abuses(or some in cases ,jokes!) that are to be posted on UA , until the game is well and over and you have had time to ‘take a moment ‘.

    Don’t waste your time thinking or unduly worrying about next season , the club , the owners , the board , the manager and the players .They all KNOW how to take care of themselves.

    And with that ,have a great smashing time in cheering our boys in the FA Cup.
    For me personally this final is so without stress or apprehension of any kind.
    Up the Gunners !

37. Mike T – in relation to the total nonsense – less than 1% of the key issues dealt with in the 160 games have been questioned. Even if all of those were wrongly interpreted, which I don’t think, that would still leave a lot right. The only way you can win this argument is to get a group of people together and do your own analysis of the first 160 games of next season and publish them as we did so we can see your figures and how you work it out.

38. Tony
    I don’t doubt the sincerity of the reviews I question the interpretation of the incidents. Indeed as I have pointed out on many occasions the majority of the descions in football are in the opinion of the referee.

    When I refer to nonesense I am talking about how Andrew and indeed others say words to the effect ” if that descion had been given then instead of losing 3-1 Arsenal would have gone on to win 2-1. My point is such statements have no validity they aren’t facts as requested in previous threads they are quite simply a biased view.

39. Mike T, having hands on a player is not a foul. Remember it is after all a contact sport. Plant your elbow against the head of a player leading to concussion is however a foul. You still seem to think it was a valid goal (or you don’t but want to divert the attention from the nasty foul from Alonso) yet Bellerin touching Costa with his hands is a foul for you? Strange.

40. Oh the replays of the incident are in the Chelsea review and we even had an outside link showing that Bellerin did not use both his hands to push Costa (as being said by some) but that link has gone down. But the link was still in one of the original articles.

    But if this would have been a penalty then each cross in the penalty area would result in a penalty. Fine for me if you want it that way. But this is not how it is played. I think Chelsea might have been on the receiving end of a few penalties if each defender using his arm on a striker would be a penalty.

41. Anyway if we should believe the pundits Bellerin should have been send off for touching Costa with his arm, be banned for 7 weeks for use of excessive force. Poor Costa was almost pushed outside the stadium in to the river Thames. That was the force used by Bellerin. The poor lad got catapulted over the stands.

    Mike T, I thought by now that you would know (you seem sensible after all) that punditism in England is about choosing the winning side. Unless the winning side is Arsenal 😉

    We had one cup final (against Hull) where the ref should have given 4 (four) penalties in favour of Arsenal. Not one pundit mentioned it. Not one! Oh it didn’t matter as we won? Like hell it did matter as we would have won 6-2 maybe. But now had to play extra time to win it. Then it would have been settled in normal time.

    I think the review is still on this site somewhere.

42. Mike T, I do agree that these comments are an extrapolation of the facts, but I don’t agree t hey are nonsense. I’d say they are a perfectly valid extrapolation of the facts, but there are other ways of extrapolating, and of course it is up to anyone interested to do their own analysis and their own extrapolation.

    But that extrapolation is not what the analyses of the 160 games was intended to be about. It was to challenge the assertion by the PGMO that 99% of referee decisions are correct. I think we have shown the only way that can be true is if every decision (including such minor things as “was the ball on the penalty spot when the penalty was kicked? Yes! One decision right”). And that is what we set out to show.

    Where I differ from some commentators (and I think here we are agreeing) is that even if one feels the extrapolation is not reasonable, that does not affect the actual analysis of each game. There again it can be said that incident x or y has not been properly reflected in the report, and that may well be the case – I can’t say because I was not part of the team that did the 160 games. But I would argue that to overthrow the whole analysis one would have to go through say 10% of the events – selected totally at random from across the 160 games, and show there was a sizeable error rating in the conclusions drawn.

43. Tony/ Walter

    At this point best we agree to disagree.

    From reading your previous posts I think you are both, like me at Wembley tomorrow.

    I won’t wish Arsenal well tomorrow or wish you good luck for the game nor would I suspect that you will wish me the same but all things being well we along with everyone who is at Wembley will get home safe and win or loose hopefully we can continue to debate, argue, agree ( delete as appropriate) following the game.

44. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Nd08Vu8x9As

    How can someone who claims to do the ref reviews claim not to see the blatant bellerin push on costa? Smh. Well it’s on 7-8 sec of the video above

45. The final question that I don’t see answered by those claiming a definite penalty foul from Bellerin on Costa is: Is every arm in the back of a striker a penalty foul: yes or no? Please answer that question. If you think the arm in the back of Bellerin is a penalty foul and thus say yes, then how many penalties in each match should be given according to you?

46. And I will say it again all this talk about an incident in a match where our referee review had its remarks about a bad ref but didn’t mention it in this article. Maybe people are trying to divert attention away from the real subject: the low quality in PL refereeing standards

47. Walter

    You really are spectacularly missing my point and falling back to your default argument.

    My comments aren’t about the standard of referring being it good or poor I am trying to get over the point that you can’t ignore a call that’s been made, be it right or be it wrong and the say had that descion been reversed the game would have played out this way or that way and then seek solace or indeed reach a conclusion as to a fictional result

48. Mike T I’ll reply on Walter’s behalf as I know he has left Belgium very early to get to Wembley.

    I think we have done this point to death. Of course no one can foretell the alternative future if different things had happened in the past. That part of the process is self-evidently a projection. The commentaries don’t make this point overtly because I thought it was self-evident.