by Tony Attwood
John Brooks has only refereed one Arsenal match this season and for that we should give thanks, because in his one match (that being on 2 November 2024, when Arsenal lost to Newcastle) he produced a refereeing performance utterly unlike anything else that has afflicted Arsenal this season.
A refereeing performance so strange and so anti-Arsenal that we really should be giving thanks that Arsenal have only had to suffer his attention just the once this season (although more to the point we might wonder how on earth he can get away with this).
Indeed it was a refereeing performance so bonkers, that if he were to be picked again for an Arsenal match then that fact alone would be enough to suggest that either PGMO just doesn’t care about anything, or that they are most certainly out to get Arsenal.
It is also the fact that since as far as I know the media has made nothing of this particular game, which shows that it is clear that under no circumstances will they ever comment on a referee’s performance against Arsenal.
For in that one game Mr Brooks gave 18 fouls against Arsenal. One might compare this with other referees who have seen Arsenal once this season: Tony Harrington for example gave 10 fouls against Arsenal in his one game, and Samuel Barrotr gave 11. Chris Kavanagh gave 12. Even Michael Oliver who we seem to keep getting has only given an average of 12.67 fouls against Arsenal per game this season.
And yet, to repeat, John Brooks gave 18 fouls against Arsenal. And in case you think my finger must have slipped on the keyboard, yes it was 18.
This figure (in case you are doubting my sources) comes from WhoScored which is as near a definitive source as we have for refereeing behaviour given the constant and abject silence of PGMO, the organisation without a website of its own.
But that 18 fouls is only the start of this. For John Brooks’ average fouls per game per team is 11.88, and yet if I may repeat myself what he actually did was give 18 fouls against Arsenal in one game. In fact in that performance John Brooks gave more fouls than Arsenal undertook tackles!!!!
Of course that is possible final point is technically possible because grabbing a player by the neck is not considered a tackle, but is considered a foul, but this is rare. And to achieve this total of more fouls than tackles it would mean that every single Arsenal tackle was a foul!!!!!
So let us consider a few other teams that have suffered the John Brroks effect this season. After all it is possible he is not anti-Arsenal, but in fact just a grossly incompetent referee.
In each case this referee has thankfully only seen each team once. These are the games that have had the John Brooks effect
| Team | Games | Fouls | YelLLOW CARDS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arsenal | 1 | 18.00 | 4.00 |
| Newcastle U | 1 | 16.00 | 4.00 |
| Chelsea | 1 | 13.00 | 3.00 |
| Liverpool | 1 | 12.00 | 4.00 |
| Tottenham Ho | 1 | 11.00 | 3.00 |
| Wolverhampton | 1 | 11.00 | 2.00 |
| Brighton | 1 | 11.00 | 5.00 |
| Brentford | 1 | 9.00 | 1.00 |
| Everton | 1 | 8.00 | 1.00 |
| Fulham | 1 | 8.00 | 0.00 |
Now what we can also do is compare John Brooks with other referees who have overseen Arsenal games this season. And to be clear these are not my figures but from WhoScored, the one source of this data for English referees.
| Referee | Games | Fouls pg | Fouls/Tackle | Yel pg |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Oliver | 3 | 12.67 | 0.84 | 3.00 |
| Jarred Gillett | 2 | 13.50 | 0.69 | 2.50 |
| Samuel Barrott | 1 | 11.00 | 0.58 | 2.00 |
| Anthony Taylor | 1 | 14.00 | 0.82 | 2.00 |
| John Brooks | 1 | 18.00 | 1.06 | 4.00 |
| Tony Harrington | 1 | 10.00 | 0.63 | 0.00 |
| Chris Kavanagh | 1 | 12.00 | 0.71 | 3.00 |
| Robert Jones | 1 | 11.00 | 0.65 | 1.00 |
And just in case a somewhat different argument were to be put forward, for example that Arsenal are being fouled more by other sides and so are retaliating, Arsenal are actually being fouled less this season than in previous recent campaigns. This season Arsenal are fouled 10.5 times a game on average. Lst season it was 10.4 and in 2022/23 it was 11.4 times a game.
Whichever way we look at this, there is a referee out there who, according to the figures from WhoScored (which is the only source we have), just had a red mist descend over him when Arsenal take to the pitch.
Sadly there is not much we can do, other than highlight this. The press won’t touch it, and as we keep on saying PGMO simply do not have a website. Although at least we can now understand why.
I wonder whether Coote would have been suspended for derogatory remarks about Arsenal.
On another referee issue, it is sickening to have Gallagher on the media, justifying all referee decisions regardless of the circumstances; the nearest he comes to disagreement is that “it could have gone either way.” “it’s 50-50”, “I can see why he’s given it”.
It is even worse that the obnoxious Dean is paid to give live comments during matches. He delighted in the offside VAR call against Havertz, which. to say the least, was highly dubious. as the brief show of the lines on tv suggested that he was at least level with the defender. The lines were flashed for a fraction of a second only. Dean actually said that he would let the first fouls go, a bit like not giving a VAR call which would put pressure on his referee mate. I don’t recall him ever giving any latitude to an Arsenal player, rather that he couldn’t wait to book a player for the first hint of a foul.
Corrupt refereeing is getting more and more blatant. The suspension of Coote seem to be a diversionary tactic to avoid scrutiny of the main issue.
It is the myopic and biased attitude of PIGMOB referees that finally made me lose interest. I say this as a neutral fan. And as a neutral fan I have seen, over the years, the blatant bias against certain teams – one of those being Arsenal.
It really is sickening seeing teams “winning” titles by having the least amount of wrong decisions from officials.
Mike Dean is a perfect example of PIGMOB ref – he appears to have never had any interest in refereeing games fairly.
Tony,
The 18 fouls called by Brooks vs Newcastle were a joke. He seemed to always find a way to slow Arsenal down. But I see in the chart that he called 16 fouls on Newcastle, also a high number. what was going on according to Mr. Brooks? It must have been the roughest match of the season for him. It won’t be commented on by the media or looked into by the League. Business as usual.
It’s strange how talk of “sustained holding” has now entered refereeing parlance via the punditry. Remember the Saliba red card? There was certainly no “sustained holding” going on there. It wasn’t even mentioned at the time by the punditry or by their pet referee.
@John L,
Coote would have been promoted to boss of PGMOL like Riley was….
It’s interesting that the BBC now have an article on their website by their undisputed (by the BBC) expert of football, Phil McNulty which is headlined, ‘Crisis for referees and fuel for toxic fan conspiracies’. So as well as being conspiracists, we’re actual “toxic fans” now! Of course, McNulty offers no evidence in support of his bland accusation (which in itself is pretty damned toxic!).
He goes on in the article to talk about the theory of their being any bias against any club. He concludes, “The notion is misguided as any mistakes made by those who take charge of games, as with players, are because of honest human error, not ill-feeling towards – or bias against – a particular manager, player of club.” Yet again no attempt to give any evidence to support his claim or explain his 100% defence of the PGMO.
Further, McNulty claims, “The majority of sensible observers, though sometimes not those fans who choose to view decisions through the prism of their own partisanship, accept referees will make mistakes under the severest pressure.” So, unless you agree with McNulty and Howard Webb, you are not a “sensible observer”! Well that’s cleared that one up then Phil!!
McNulty goes on to say that there are mistakes…….in fact he cites one in particular……..when Arsenal escaped punishment for a clear handball against Liverpool in December 2023. He says that there are, “Mistakes, yes – but honest ones.” So just to compound things his one stab at showing their is no bias is when Arsenal benefitted and Liverpool were hard done by…….making it all the more laughable given the plethora of evidence produced by UA.
This is the most blatant piece of pro-PGMO writing I think I’ve ever seen yet makes no attempt whatsoever to explore the facts or give any sort of evidence to support this most biased of reporting. He merely compounds the theory that something is going on between the media and the PGMO. And just to clear up any argument of this theory being a conspiracy, if McNulty wants us to believe him, then as the “Chief Football Writer” for a major TV Channel, perhaps he should offer some specific analysis supported by facts, rather than a number of opinions, supported by nothing.
The Coote incident was a brilliant opportunity for the media to undertake a proper diagnosis of refereeing in this country and McNulty has merely demonstrated that the media has no intention or desire to do so.
Here’s the link:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cwy4n8499z2o
Mikey the comment did go into moderation and because I was out much of yesterday it didn’t get cleared until now. The problem we have is that each day we get a large number of posts which only exist because of their attempt to get their website publsihed on this site. It can take an hour or more each day to clear them. So yes I am sorry but comments with links do get held until I see them. I don’t knwow a way around this if the site is not to be swamped by 50 or more adverts written as comments each day.
@ Tony
Not a problem. I don’t blame you at all. 🙂
Perhaps an assessment of the Saudi PGMO paymasters that also own Manky115 (120? take yer pick) needs to be made , if it’s found that they largely benefit then that could be the basis for another charge being levelled at the great cheats of English football
@Mikey
McNulty’s reporting is, as usual, wrong. His reference to “fan conspiracies” is ridiculous. If there is a conspiracy here, it is not being perpetrated by lowly fans.
If you read McNulty’s article carefully, he manages to contradict himself whilst claiming to be a mind-reader.
I wonder why he is so supportive of PGMOL.