11 responses

  1. Red Rupert
    04/06/2012

    .

    Very good – everyone knows refs are homers. It’s easier to get a pen at OT for a visiting side than half the PL. Such a lazy load of shite you could be a journo – now try United at Anfailed or Newcastle or Stoke etc etc etc. Very selective, unoriginal and predictable when it has been well publicised all over the place that (oddly enough) after l’arse, United suffered more than any other side in the PL for incorrect ref decisions….yet oddly enough, United’s best season in years for pens. You need to do a bit more work on this instead of trying to popularize myths. Oik approved!
  2. WalterBroeckx
    04/06/2012

    Hi Red Rupert,
    I hope you have read the whole article also the opening lines? If not, please do. I will wait a minute.

    Okay, clicked on the link? Untold Ref Reviews …(that one) and then start counting. And if you have counted correct you should have seen that our team of referees have reviewed United 30 times this season. And I think still a few games to come involving United.

  3. Alex
    04/06/2012

    Are you actually a qualified ref? You seem to state these as facts but in fact whether it was a foul or not is your (rather biased) opinion. Interesting how you use emotive words only when referring to fouls by Mr. Rooney.
    Try offering some balance and perspective, I really can’t take you seriously.

  4. WalterBroeckx
    04/06/2012

    And to continue

    I think we did you at Anfield. And at Newcastle (Webb was the ref) and we did you at Stoke. Was it this season that they didn’t give a penalty on Chicarito and a red card for the defender? Walton was the ref I think. Stoke who for some strange reason is seems to be the darling of the referees.

    And about the other website I think you refer to debatable decisions? They do a great job in fact. They also come up with Stoke being the darling of the refs. If you could explain that would be great as we cannot understand it to be honest.

    But back to debatable decisions and their great job. They do have one big failure in the way they work. They only base themselves on the highlights that are shown in MOTD. And as we (I don’t know for you) know those are “debatable” a bit. We have noticed some slight bias in the way they sometimes show games. And in the way they show some incidents. And they use a panel of football supporters who decide the important decisions.

    And I have noticed them using all kind of excuses to judge decisions. It doesn’t matter if it was difficult to see if a ball passed the goal line or not. The only thing that matters over here is: did it pass or not. (I’m not wanting to sound over critical on the debatable decisions as I like what they do)

    We work different. Our referees (yes a real referees) looks from the first till the last second of each game and judges all decisions or non decisions. One review takes about 2 hours (for an easy one) up to 3 hours (for a more difficult one).

    If all goes well we should have done around 150 games at the end of next week. And then we will publish all and everything about each club and each referee in a series that will take a few weeks I guess.

    I don’t know of any other survey on PL refs of that seize ever been done before.

    Now say again: who do you think again should do a bit more work?

  5. WalterBroeckx
    04/06/2012

    Oh sorry Red Rupert, just noticed one of the United reviews is still not published. So you should have counted 29 games. My mistake.

  6. WalterBroeckx
    04/06/2012

    Alex, also qualified refs have emotions you know. 😉

    That means ‘yes’ to your question.

    But do try to read other reviews concerning other teams and you will see that after a review emotions can be introduced. Also referee reviewers (who are all referees themselves) are human. Human with emotions and stuff you know…

  7. Matt Clarke
    04/06/2012

    @RR:
    “You need to do a bit more work on this instead of trying to popularize myths.”

    I trust that this was a reflection on your own post.

  8. Dino
    04/06/2012

    I don’t think it’s so much OTraff as it is Fergie. We all know OT is a quiet stadium with prawn fans. The most intimidating thing about OT is the camera flashes in the crowd from plastic fans from India and China. The refs are scared of Fergies PR machine that chews up professional reputations of decent people and harms careers if things don’t go Fergies way. The FA should stop being so weak in every situation facing them. Graham Taylor needs sacked also, joke of a man.

  9. Eddy
    04/06/2012

    Interesting that,despite all the evidence pointing to the contrary,some people will take the easy route and ignore hard facts in preference claiming some preconceived notion of bias against a team.It doesn’t seem to be in the powers that be interest to address a situation where one team is favoured year in year out in the balance of match changing decisions(Carrick’s foul against Fulham being a prime example).Well done for your continued hard work.

  10. WalterBroeckx
    04/06/2012

    Alex, if you are still with us: you do have a point in a way. We had a period when we were very sec in our comments. Even sometimes we didn’t comment at all on a foul or card. Just said: correct of not correct.

    But then people asked for explanations and one word lead to another and so emotions could be seen around sometimes.

    Just look at it this way: you can perfectly eat a steak without salt and pepper. But I know it tastes much better with salt and pepper.

  11. emma
    04/06/2012

    its an old story. Man u is regularly favoured. A number of particularly Web’s decision can attest to that. This is not about being emotional or biased or having passion as a fan for the club you support but about fact and reality.

    But its high time those biased refs stopped it so that they do not rubbish the integrity and standard of EPL.

Back to top