Ref Review : Arsenal – Man City

Referee: Mark Clattenburg

Week 4


Arsenal Man City

A somewhat confusing match from Clattenburg to be honest.

Looking at the numbers his first half was rather poor. A score of only 70% and a weighted score of only 63% are very low for his standards. His score on the important decisions with a result of only 37,50% is amazingly low.

In the second half he had a better score with a total score of 82% and a weighted score of almost 78%. And the important decisions score goes up to 66,67%. Much more familiar territory for Clattenburg.

The final score goes is 76.60% and with a weighted score of 71% he still is rather low. The important decisions with a score of just under 53% is also still rather low.

So where did he go wrong? The yellow cards were a complete disaster. The way Milner treated Debuchy in this match or should I write mistreated Debuchy was amazing. And the most amazing part was that Milner got away with no yellow card. I can’t help but wonder if all the kicking (including a few dangerous fouls aimed at the ankles of Debuchy) have helped in him finally injuring himself later in the match. I had the feeling that Debuchy was not completely fit in the second half even before his injury. He looked not as mobile and quick as I have learned to know him in the last weeks.

A few yellow cards he also missed and then a few when he gave in to what looked to be trying to compensate things. I never like seeing such things.

The penalty appeal for City. I think Arsenal was very lucky that Wilshere was running with his back to Clattenburg so he couldn’t see the incident from the front. I think he would have pointed to the spot if he had seen it from the other angle. Wilshere made a move with the arm and so he knew what he was doing. Another thing that might have saved him was that his arms were close to his body but they weren’t completely fixed to his body.

I have seen better matches from Clattenburg who seemingly was very busy with trying to not blow his whistle if he possible could avoid it. I think he could have give at least 20 fouls more than he gave at the end. But he was very even I thought in allowing a lot of force in the duels and using the arms and body towards opponents. That is an option you can take as a ref but it can backfire when teams don’t want to play according to the rules and thus it is a dangerous thing to do.

The bias numbers are that he gave a few yellow cards decisions in favour of City and one penalty decision in favour of Arsenal. If he would have done these things differently the final result might have changed. Now some City players could keep on doing the dirty work and Arsenal escaped from a penalty decision.


There is an index to recent posts, a guide to today’s anniversaries, and details of our other sites on the Untold Arsenal home page

18 Replies to “Ref Review : Arsenal – Man City”

  1. Thanks Walter for the second review in a matter of days:) I thought Clattenburg was the right man for this match, but the amount of missed decisions is staggering. I also thought Jack’s ball handling was suspect, but that was partly due to the City player pushing the ball towards him from less that 2 feet away. But yes, I guess Jack did create an advantage for himself by using his arm, so the penalty claim is justified.

  2. Thank you very much Walter for this review. I did feel clatternburg wasn’t fair in calling the fouls, and this confirms it.
    Isn’t it strange that Milner made two bad tackles on Debuchy and got away with it both times. Yet when Debuchy made one foul on Milner he got punished?
    I also thought the same was true for Flamini and Silva. Flamini first made a tackle which he was carded for (he pulled him down), and a couple of minutes later Silva shoved Flamini in the back and kicked him in the back of the head, and only a free kick was awarded. These two situations show that the ref was not blowing his whistle fairly. Never mind we were the home team, we don’t want playing at home to be an advantage in terms of refereeing, but one would think the referees would tend to favour the home team as they’re are sometimes influenced by crowd noise. Not true in Arsenal’s case unfortunately . Other sides like Liverpool are getting penalties for fun, and one wonders why isn’t the case for us.

  3. I am thinking the same thing, the constant fouling by Milner should be classed as an attack to weaken Arsenal, i’m serious.

    I was fuming during the match, and when at the end i saw Debuchy injured i was more furious, especially at Milner and the ref.
    Looks like the agenda continues.

    Just wonder where are our other players? Are they not doing well in training or injured?

  4. The penalty appeal against Wilshere was based on an alleged handball.

    It seemed to me that at least one of the two City players close to teh incident had handled the ball, in playing it against him, so that it should have been a free-kick to Arsenal.

    Also, the City players were visibly appealing before the ball made contact with Wishere.

    ie: It was not a genuine appeal.

  5. Walter – can’t wait for Dortmund analysis . Too much negativity out there, I need a sensible perspective.

  6. A good review Walter. Milner certainly had a charmed life & his repeated assaults appeared to be part of a deliberate plan.

    I am not so sure if the penalty appeal was valid, but I will look at it again. My first and second impression was that the arm contact was minimal and accidental – and a city player handled the ball – possibly first. But it was all very quick, with minimal arm movement and hard to see.

  7. Chamakh…of all people, then Naismith, Hammond, Milner….soon to be followed by Senderos or Delph…….then Capoue…..Matic and Terry. A recipe for rotational fouling. Let’s see how many yellows these opponents get in coming matches, compared to the first tackle Arteta, Flamini or even FFS Gibbs makes!

  8. It is worth noting that untold Arsenal seems to masquerade as an objective unbiased assessment. This is specious nonsense. The methodologies used obviously reflect nothing more than selective bias. Arsenal fans are unique in some respects that you seem to believe your players shouldn’t fall victim to injuries while seemingly ignoring that every other team also has the same problem. City should have beaten Arsenal comfortably but for another woefull performance by clattenburg (city’s mike dean). You were lucky he was the ref. Arsenal did not score a single legitimate goal. Both came from obvious fouls. City should have won at least 0-3 but for clattenburg doing what he does best. I hope Debuchy gets well soon, he injured himself ok. Fair play to those speaking truth Mom wilshere intentionaly played basketball but like stoke v city 2013 crouch can score playing basketball so can wilshere when defending. Where are the comments about your 2 illegal goals eh lads?

  9. Walter, I have had another look at the penalty decision.

    There were two city players involved, with Wilshere. There seemed to be two possibilities of Wilshere handling all in the one incident. On the first occasion Silva seemed to have his hand in advance of Wilshere and closer to the ball, so I don’t think Wilshere handled then. The ball then struck Navas on the arm and then immediately bounced onto Wilshere’s arm – his arm was already close to his body & any movement seemed to be designed to move his arm closer to his body rather than to control the ball, so I am doubtful if it should have been called.

  10. @Mike The reviewer said Wilshere goal shouldn’t have counted. Alexis goal -things were committed by both teams….did you read the review?

  11. These are not rotational fouls anymore. These are cheap shots aided by official bias. It has been happening since the beginning of last season. Media played a big part of this where they continuously undermine Arsenal’s so-called ‘physical fragilities’. So, if Arsenal players were tackled no matter how, it’s clean and the same does not apply oppositely. I have played in competitive matches before, I can swear that such tactics will only breaks your momentum and demoralize you to an extent where you just wanna walk out. Even rugby is not that scandalous. True to some phrase I learned in South Africa in those days, rugby is supposed to be a hooligan’s game for gentlemen and football is supposed to be a gentleman’s game for hooligans. No more, football is a hooligan’s game for mobsters.

  12. I thought this a fantastic game. The late goal conceded put many of us on a downer but the positives were huge. We fought very hard for our two goals and gave away two sloppy ones, with the late header lucky to go in due to over-diligence by Sczezny and Flamini. Pellegrini’s reaction and genuine look of concern was, I believe, because he saw that we ran rings around them for much of the match and will be a thorn in their side this season. Fair play to City and especially Silva, who is immense and can completely change any game. Milner did annoy me too, he just got away with far too much dirty play. |
    The biggest positive for me is Welbeck, who is bringing something unique to the table. Once his shots start going in, and most have been close, he will be a force. I feel that he is a much bigger gain for us than he is a loss for United. He seems to give that same quick threat that United players have upset us with so many times over the last decade or so. Yes, we had a major blip against the mightily impressive Dortmund but we were clearly knackered from the huge battle against City and they one of the best games against us that I have personally ever seen. The positives are all there and if the defence improves, as it surely will, then contrary to popular belief, I think that we will definitely be there or thereabouts this year. An early kick up the backside as we have just had will probably end up doing more good than harm in the long run. Lastly, I noticed after a couple of games that Ramsey looked incredibly annoyed and frustrated. I don’t know exactly why but I am sure this had an effect on the team as he is such a key player. He is making the right noises again now and I think the team is ideally placed and charged for a rip-roaring display against the Villa on Saturday. Bring it on!

  13. If only those who disagreed with the format of these reviews could quantify their observations or records in some kind of numerical format we could then compare the assessment of the decisions and the numbers themselves.

    Such a shame they don’t! . For some reason. Even when the template above has beens provided.

  14. Btj

    I agree with the review above, there’s contact on Jack’s upper arm before the multiple ricochet of everyone’s arm.

    This is a great example of how I understand these reviews work: it was a difficult call and the ref shouldn’t give it unless they are sure (not like Mike Dean or A.Taylor vs. The Arsenal then!) so even though the reviewer has impliede the ref did the right thing it was still an incorrect decision! Brilliant review.
    The opposite example as in one against Arsenal was the early penalty call on Ramsey in the first Palace game. A clear push on Ramsey if you were sat behind the goal like me, however the referee’s vision as with the Wilshere incident was blocked by the melee. So although we understand that the offical did the right thing to not call a pen if not sure, it is still the wrong call. Maybe the Lino had a better view! Considering the other officials etc. the format of these reviews makes perfect sense and are very fair.

    In my humble and ignorant opinion no one should be upset over either call given as examples above even though they were both wrong. There are many examples of officals giving marginal calls against AFC, but not for, and that is interesting for those of us who follow the Arsenal.

    Using these measures or margins we can then see and assess, for example, Probert’s four non-calls in the FA Cup final for the blatant tilting that it was. Perhaps only one of those calls were as understandably tricky and difficult to make as the two above. And that’s not good enough in a five a side between mates*, let alone a Cup Final. *If you or I had been done by Carzola and tricked into a minor foul during a kick about we’d hold our hands up, laugh, and probably place the ball on huge spot for him…what are we to make of professional officials who seem to have momentary lapses where they forget the rules and indeed the conventions of Association Football? The call not given against Cazorla at Leicester cannot be defended by any serious person. Don’t waste your time!

    Untold have provided a magnificent service for all football fans with these reviews,and even with the format of the reviews.

  15. @Sally you are absolutely right,I think scezny needs a breather and let ospina take over.
    So is Ramzy what I don’t understand is Campbell injured or what, we need him against villa so prof i know you always read untold against villa we need some fresh legs.

  16. @finsbury

    I have yet another look at the penalty incident – and you are right the ball did brush Wilshere’s right shoulder/upper arm before it caught Navas. Just before it brushed Wilshere’s shoulder, Silva took his hand – which was in front of Wilshere, out of the ball flight path.

    But it would have been a very harsh decision – Walter you are a hard taskmaster! 🙂

  17. Wilshere definitely pushed his body towards the ball in order to make contact with his arm.

    Its a penalty in My opinion.

    I also thought Wilshere was lucky not to be cautioned for his kick on Clichy, however he was nowhere near as lucky as that man Milner. How the Ref failed to give him at least one yellow card is beyond belief.

  18. From when I first saw Clattenberg I really liked that he was not one of the prima donna referees who have to be centre stage throughout the game. Indeed all his instincts are to try to let the game flow and this is basically a good stance. However the down side can be too much advantage played and insufficient early use of the yellow to stamp out professional fouling. Certainly Premier managers are more than cute enough to test Clattenberg’s judgement and tolerance with rotational fouling.

    On the penalty I thought that the ball did initially come off Jack’s arm and the was handled deliberately by Navas and then back onto Jack’s arm for the third potential handball contact. However Jack’s arm was very close to his body and he could not have done more to ensure that all the movement was body movement rather than arm movement. So I feel although there is a technical argument for Walter’s decision it would be too harsh and if their were doubts on sight lines for the referee too then the correct decision was made.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *