Untold’s Unacceptable Referee Review: Chelsea – Arsenal

Referee : Martin Atkinson

Match : Chelsea – Arsenal

chelsea arsenal test



This surely is one of the most bizarre performances I have seen from a ref. It brings back memories of the days when Riley was doing matches at Old Trafford and one game in particular.  And I don’t know if I have to follow the chronology of the events or go from player to player.  I probably will end up mixing the two.  But better take your time as I think this might be a long comment section.

Let me start with the good things that I can find. I think the assistants were rather good! No complaints about them.  And Atkinson managed to make some correct decisions also. And… well this is all the good things I can say after that.

Oscar would have won an Oscar if there was an Oscar for being able to avoid yellow and red cards. I cannot remember any player having so much liberty and impunity to make fouls without getting a yellow card. I know he did at the end but that was to cover his traces. His=Atkinson of course.  I cannot really remember a ref being so lenient towards a player. Last time I can remember was…er…. oh yes I now remember … Ramires two seasons ago in a match Chelsea – Arsenal with the same ref.

The problem is that Atkinson never seemed in control of this match. This could be seen by the way he handled certain incidents that are beyond belief. We all remember the Chelsea outrage when Hazard attacked a ball boy who didn’t let the ball go. Well in the first minutes Mourinho ordered the ball boy to give the ball to him when Chelsea made a poor pass and there was gap on their right flank. Gibbs wanted the ball to throw it in quickly but the ball boy duly gave it to Mourinho who then held on to the ball till all his players were back in position. And the ref just let it go.

Another moment was when two players claimed the throw and the ball ended up in Mourinho’s arms. Ref Atkinson waited before signalling and then Mourinho gave the ball to his player of course and then Atkinson confirmed it. It sure gave the impression that it was Mourinho who was telling Atkinson what to do.

The defining moment and decision was the Cahill tackle. A straight red card tackle. But because Aktinson was not daring/wanting to draw the anger of Mourinho on him kept the red card in his pocket. After that poor decision you know the ref is no longer suitable to do this match. OK, we knew this even before kick off but that moment confirmed all our doubts. If you can still call it doubts.  If he would have acted then he would have got the game in hands. Now it slipped away from him.

By the way if you look at the images from behind the goal you can also see Ivanovic throwing an elbow at Özil while Cahill is trying to amputate Alexis’ foot.  But if you let an assault like Cahill did go, then it is no big deal to let an elbow go of course.  Alexis also tried to throw a punch a bit later towards Ivanovic and that also should have been a red card.  But at that moment the ref had gifted the players a free pass to have a go that it all became rather normal to do such things.

The ref also made a few real technical errors. Like stopping the play for the hand injury from his friend Oscar. Or when he didn’t allow Arsenal a quick restart after yet another Oscar foul. It had all the ingredients for a quick restart. Now as a ref you can prevent a quick restart if you have to give a yellow card. But the ref didn’t give a yellow card. No he told Oscar to stop the multiple fouling all over the field. So no yellow card (which he should have given) and give Chelsea the time to reorganise themselves in defence. Atkinson was doing  a great defensive job for Chelsea.

The yellow card from Chambers. If you look at the images it is clear to see that it was actually Hazard who stuck out his leg and planted it between the legs of Chambers. Chambers then went down of course because he was tripped by Hazard. And final result was Chambers getting a yellow card. It should have been a free kick to Arsenal and a yellow card against Hazard for a deliberate foul and for trying to fool the ref. Which he did in the end. So don’t suggest Chambers should have got a second yellow card when he blocked Shurle. A yellow yes, but not a second.

The yellow card for Koscielny was ok. It wasn’t reckless or dangerous, just mistimed. Gibbs was deeper and might have had a chance to assist the keeper in making the angle difficult. And Hazard dribbled himself to the outside of the goal and therefore could have a shot at goal but not an obvious scoring chance. And probably Atkinson knew all too well that after not sending Cahill off he had to be careful to not make it too obvious what he was doing. It didn’t help him in the end though.

As for the not given penalty for Arsenal… Fabregas raised his hands next to his head. And blocked the shot and diverted it in to a corner. His hands were deliberately raised to block a shot and in an unnatural position. So it should have been a penalty and a yellow card. But this is Arsenal. This is Atkinson doing a Chelsea match. So you don’t give a penalty against the boss. If needed you can always invent one like WBA experienced last season in favour of Chelsea of course. But not against them. Not even when it is a clear penalty.

So who should have been sent off in this match? Cahill with a red card, Ivanovic with a red card or with a few yellow cards later on. All when the score was still 0-0. Alexis should have been sent off for trying to punch a player who shouldn’t have been on the field if the rules would have been followed. And so you see the stepping stones at work from the ref.  Oscar did enough to be sent off 2 or 3 times with two yellow cards. And Welbeck should have been sent off. But at that moment the ref had done so much wrong that he just continued his line of being useless.

I have to round it off now and will highlight the numbers.

First half score overall of only 51.35%. So only half of his decisions were correct. Disgraceful. If we add weight to it we see it drops to 42%. Utter disgrace. And if we look at the important decisions we see that he only gets a score of 17,65%. Completely unacceptable.

Second half score overall of 56.52%. Disgraceful. If we add weight to it we see it drop to 48.65%. Utter disgrace. And if we look at the important decisions we see a score of 36%. Wow what an improvement. NOT.

Total score for the 90 minutes was 53,33%. Disgraceful. If we add weight to the decisions we see a score of 44,68. Utter disgrace. And if we only look at the important decisions we see a score of only 25% correct decisions. This is competely unacceptable.  Incompetence.

The bias score is as Untold predicted it would be before the match: all the small decisions for 100% in favour of Chelsea. And the important decisions were also very much in favour of Chelsea with a balance of 76% in their favour.

Apart from each time when he does Arsenal-Chelsea and we know we will get a very unbalanced referee this was a referee performance that can be put next to the ones we have been used from Probert and Dean. Dean who will referee our match against United. You read it here first.  And it certainly brought back memories of match 50.

The ref for this match was as in match 50 biased and completely rubbish at the same time. And it will be a coincidence but both matches ended with the same score.

The Untold index to articles and today’s anniversaries is on the home page.

The books

Woolwich Arsenal: The club that changed football – Arsenal’s early years

Making the Arsenal – how the modern Arsenal was born in 1910

The Crowd at Woolwich Arsenal

The anniversary file for October is here, and the complete index to the Anniversary file is here


98 Replies to “Untold’s Unacceptable Referee Review: Chelsea – Arsenal”

  1. Even other Atkinson (Rowan aka Mr.Bean) can lead this game better. In other hand, Mou’s phylosophy of pragmatism football was clear and practice well by his boys, specially Oscar. My sorry was, Arsenal has never won against this kind of tactic.

  2. Atkinson makes some of the Italian referees look like saints.

    Russian money into Atkinson’s back pocket, pure and simple.

    English FA condones this repeated performance, so one has to question why they have bias, in a sport that should have no bias.

  3. Walter,
    Many thanks for this analysis. How anyone can fail to see what is being perpetrated systematically is quite beyond me….,,,keep up the excellent work.

  4. A question to some trying to comment: do you really think it is wise to comment without really reading or understanding the article? So forgive us for preventing to make a fool of yourself by not allowing your comment.

    You can of course make a second attempt after reading the article.

  5. Using a multiball system would get rid of a number of problems with returning the ball and time wasting. It is a travesty that it’s not used in the EPL

  6. Indeed insideright.

    It is used in the CL and many important leagues to reduce time wasting.
    It is as if the forces in charge don’t want that it stops.

  7. Walter (and Tony), I would give up writing on a blog or the Internet full stop. You can comment but only if you agree with me 100% or you do reply with a intellectual essay about why you are wrong. Welcome to the internet, you seem shocked that there are trolls out there and that people who support Arsenal who don’t agree with your views. Lighten up, how can you support a team you love and not enjoy it. Things go wrong accept it, it happens to every team and yes we all think the Gods and everything is against us and why we don’t win everything in sight.

    I watch my team, shout swear when it is going bad, sack the manager the board but an hour later I’m over it, maybe a few comments on the big talking points but then i look forward to the next game. Over analysing (and trying to be better than everyone else) looking at every minute detail can’t be healthy. Sit back watch your team and enjoy it. And there is nothing wrong with wanting a manger to be sacked but to blame it on all outside forces well that does come accross as being blinkered.

    So all together now Arsenal fans COYG.

  8. It is the predictability of it all that wears you down in the end. I now watch each game expecting an Arsenal player to be carded first, for another to be sent off, and for countless rotational fouls to take place just as Arsenal attacks are about to gather pace.

    The big question of course is why? Why do these weekly assaults on the integrity of the game take place? And why does there seem such a conspiracy of silence?

    Please keep up the good work, Walter.

  9. FatherJack,
    The approach taken by this blog is to counter the utter negativity and lack of reasoned thought which springs from so many other sources. The application of rational thought and something approaching use of the scientific method is what have dragged us out of the Middle ages. These approaches are welcomed here and form the basis of the argument. Nobody is suggesting that those incapable of understanding the approach need to be silenced. Just that they won’t be taken seriously, nor should they, by those that do

  10. No Father Jack, we will not give up. 😉

    And about not allowing some comments we do allow different views.
    But if some (not you or did you use another name) say in their first comment something like: ‘so all Chelsea players had to be send off and not one Arsenal player” then they clearly didn’t read the article as I said clearly that 2 Arsenal players had to be send off.

    So I could publish their stupid comment and expose them as stupid. I chose to spare him/her from this.

    Anyway COYG!!!

  11. @Walter you may be aware that the table appears in fixed width columns and is awkward to read. I would suggest you put the comment under the incident in a full width box. This will improve the visual impact and allow for an easier read.

  12. I will try to do this in the future Menace.
    The layout is not like I wanted it but it is the best I can make of it for the moment.

  13. Thanks Walter, I have been looking forward to this report – and I do think it is healthy to have a good understanding of what is being done to our team.

    Atkinson behaved just as expected – why can I write that? Simply because Atkinson has previous – and always got away with it (or always successfully carried out instructions).

    Atkinson – and most of the PGMOL select group should not be allowed anywhere near a football match – they are not fit for purpose.

    As for Mourinho – he showed yet again what a despicable character he is and that he has manipulated his team into a gang of cheating thugs that totally disgrace and misrepresent the ethos of the once beautiful game.

  14. Atkinson is clearly a cheat. Just look at every time he has officiated against Chelsea. But let’s not kid ourselves here, there is a whole list of referees that allow the most diabolical decisions against Arsenal – Dowd, Dean and my absolute favourite Probert!

    As for Moureen – he is a disrespectful, cheating thug whose idea of football is to strangle the game into submission. Even though Roy Keane is not top of my favourites list, he is bang on when he says that he needs a slap – after trying to shake hands before the game is finished – and not for the first time either.

    I agree with lots of comments today, none more so than bjtgooner – you are right they should not be allowed to even referee a kick about in the local park.

  15. Menace,

    what do you think now? I changed it (manually job so rather time consuming) and I think this looks better now

  16. @Father Jack – so all the police, law courts, social services, hospitals, media, should all stop. Lets allow everyone to run amok & create chaos. AND then say COYG?

    PGMOL are a bunch of cheats working for an FA that is corrupt. Football is being sucked of all its finances by greedy bastards whilst the Game is being abused by fake officials. I love football and will comment with passion against those who will not promote the sporting Game and its Laws.

  17. “If you see fraud, and don’t shout “fraud”, you are a fraud”.

    Nassim Nicholas Taleb

  18. @ Walter

    It would be churlish to argue that Atkinson had anything other than a poor/ bad/terrible game but in the spirit of neutrality why not mention of Wenger raising hands on Jose?
    The Chambers foul on Hazard was indeed a foul. Hazard had control of the ball and it was within playing distance he was within his rights to use his body to defend the ball from the player behind him. Having said that Chambers was booked incorrectly.
    The handball is an interesting one as if you look at it again you will see Fabregas is looking away and not at the ball that being said overhead replays shown on Chelsea TV clearly show the offending hand was outside the box.
    As for Chelsea’s penalty Gibbs again the overhead shots on Chelsea TV show that there was no way he would have got round on the cover.
    Just one point about Ozil I am surprised no one has mentioned the fact that Wenger has said in an interview that Ozil complained at half time of “a crack in his knee” it seems it happened very early in the game way before any contact indeed it happened when he kicked the ball with the outside of his foot.
    Wenger goes to say he made the decision to keep Ozil on knowing he was struggling with the injury and is now surprised of the extent of the injury

  19. @Mike T – Hazard had control of the ball but he fouled Chambers by kicking out at him and going down. Hazard is a very skillful player and uses skill to cheat just like Robben does. Officials have to interpret the Laws and usually find in favour of the skillful player as they get cheated into thinking that way.

    The Wenger incident was nothing short of a farce instigated by Mourinho. There is no need to obstruct anyone outside the pitch but Jose being a specialist in cheating did so. Had Atkinson done the right thing & sent Jose to the stands for taking the ball from the boy, Wenger would not have had to push him. I look forward to Roy Kean & Jose sharing smiles.

    As for Ozil & his injury, this has been covered in other posts on this site. The initial injury I believe occurred in the Spurs match and subsequently ‘cracked’ during the Chelsea game. Alexis has been injured by Cahill and the subsequent findings will happen in the next games. The PGMOL officials are responsible for these injuries due to dereliction of duty.

  20. @ Menace

    Walter was the first person, now followed by you being number 2, that thought that Hazard committed the foul. I don’t disagree that he “drew the foul” but he didn’t kick out at Chambers he used part of his body to protect the ball, which he was entitled to do.
    I am not going into the rights and wrongs of the spat between Wenger & Jose my point is that Walter make subjective comments regarding Chelsea’s manager but doesn’t even feel the incident is worthy of review.
    If indeed the Ozil injury was caused re Spurs then to play him past the point of where he is complaining about the crack in his knee surely is nothing short of reckless

  21. Menace @ 12.01 pm

    Well said – I agree with you comments to Mike T – who was being, not for the first time a bit mischievous and disingenuous.

  22. @Mike T -I don’t know what exactly went on between Ozil & the physio but it is the player who should know if he is fit. The physio & manager do not have facilities during play to see pain or tears in ligaments or fractures on the pitch. If they did medicine would be embarrassed. The crack in the knee, had it been painful, would have resulted in Ozil being subbed. He knows better than Wenger about his own knee.

    Players have died on the field of play not because of managers being reckless. For us to pontificate on managerial decisions without detail in not appropriate. However, to pontificate on Laws of the Game is appropriate.

  23. Mike T,
    I didn’t mention it as it didn’t interfere with the game. Two managers pushing each other has not a real impact on the match.

    Mourinho ordering the ball boy to give the ball to him and not to the onrushing Gibbs does interfere with the game and so it gets mentioned.

  24. Mike T,
    As I don’t have access to the Chelsea overhead camera I cannot judge on that.

  25. The news about how Wenger “mistreated” “useless Özil” is another invention from journalists or reporters to attack Wenger.
    Özil only told about the crack after the scan but hey let some not use this to bash Wenger of course.
    That Özil said to the physio that he felt something in the knee at half time is not really that strange. I think each player will feel something in his body at half time from the knocks they get.

  26. So father jack can you forget about the shocking performance of the ref which costed us 3 points?
    The performance will be forgotten and a bad day at the office by the commentators and brushed aside. Its AFC that were robbed not anyone else. How come egorinio wasn’t booked for interfering in play?

  27. Mike T, and no I wasn’t the first to say that it was Hazard who made the foul and not Chambers.

  28. Thanks Walter. We all appreciate these referee reviews and my goodness, its damning stuff. The article you posted from a former referee official is also interesting – I find it notable that between the lines there is a very real criticism of PGMOL/Premier League referee practices. He is not calling them out as biased due to professional courtesy, but rather going the route of ‘unfit for service’.

    Its a sad business but if everything was fair which objective person can doubt Arsenal would win the league every second season, at the least. This is all done to prevent Arsenal Football Club from dominating and Arsene Wenger from being vindicated. They live in fear of the vindication of the fair and sporting principles by which this club and manager conduct themselves.

    Goodness – so many countries, big countries, get their referee scandals. When will it be the turn of England? I daresay it must be an external force like UEFA or FIFA that would need to act, but do they have jurisdiction? Do they care?

  29. on Ozil…
    He told me [about the injury] once it was discovered on the scan. He did not tell me anything during the Chelsea game, I did not know. What happened was that at half-time, just before we went out, he had a little pain with his knee but it was not bad. He wanted to go on and I told him, ‘If you don’t feel well, tell me and I will take you off straight away’. He never did that during the whole game, and after I left him on because we were in a position where we needed to score a goal and he can deliver the final ball. Then after the game, he went to Germany. With Germany, they thought at the start it was nothing. We played on Sunday, on Monday he was off, and on Tuesday they gave him the day off. He was supposed to practice on Wednesday. On Wednesday morning, he said he could still not practice. They sent him for a scan, and in this scan they discovered that he a knee ligament injury which is quite serious

  30. I’m a little confused how an offense missed by Mourinho is mentioned in the first minute, yet the incident with Wenger shoving him is not. Surely one shouldn’t be included in the review without the other, as neither would have disciplinary effects on players.

  31. SteveO,
    the difference is: I didn’t mention it as it didn’t interfere with the game. Two managers pushing each other has not a real impact on the match.

    Mourinho ordering the ball boy to give the ball to him and not to the onrushing Gibbs does interfere with the game and so it gets mentioned.

    The shoving contest should have resulted sending Wenger and Mourinho to the stands.
    Mourinho delaying the game should have resulted in the ref showing him who is the boss on the field. By doing nothing he showed that Mourinho was the boss on the field.

  32. I must admit that this is referee-assessors talk for a big part. If two managers want to have a boxing contest a ref just has to send them to the stands or dressing room to hold their fight.

    But when a referee sees a manager interfering with the match by holding the ball he should act immediately against that manager.

    If you allow this to happen and a referee-assessor is there you can be sure you will have a negative score.

  33. Mike T
    “It would be churlish to argue that Atkinson had anything other than a poor/ bad/terrible game ”

    “Referee had a fantastic game……” Said Mourinho in his post game presser 🙂

  34. Regarding Ozils injury. Don’t forget the late tackle his countrymen Shurrle gave him after he released the ball in the 16′. That coupled with the leg breaker from Tottenham and it’s pretty easy to see how the injury occurred.

  35. Jose at his most sinister – praising a bad display. Will the FA act? LOL not when it will mean missing a cruise.

    Surprising how many have queued up for the cruise.

  36. You continue to do an incredible job working out the numbers and we all love you for it. Numbers back what we all can see. The bias is so obvious when you see the stats though.The big question is: what can we do obout it but talk? With media having their own agenda against Arsenal our options seem limitted. You just have to carry on with this monumental job. It is greately appreciated.
    It seems I have missed some positive comment on LeGrove. Damn it.

  37. Walter, great job. At the time I saw it, I could not believe Ivanovic got nothing for what he did to Ozil at the time Cahill tried to break Alexis’ legs. In subsequent comments/discussions, I had stayed quiet about the Ivanovic incident because I wanted to see what your (or other’s) thoughts were on the incident when you carry out the ref view. I am glad I was not the only one who spotted Ivanovic’s rugby tactics.

    Two major fouls in the same moment and only one yellow. Some days, it’s hard not to shake your head and go “why bother”.

  38. @ Walter

    The quote you detail from AW surely is contradictory

    ” He told me [about the injury] once it was discovered on the scan. He did not tell me anything during the Chelsea game, I did not know. What happened was that at half-time, just before we went out, he had a little pain with his knee but it was not bad. He wanted to go on and I told him, ‘If you don’t feel well, tell me and I will take you off straight away”

    AW said Ozil didn’t tell him anything during the game and then goes on to detail what was said during the game.

    As for the spat between the two managers surely how it was dealt with and the fact that it delayed the game all falls within the game management

    I accept your point about not having access to the overhead camera shots( to be fair they were more from Chelsea TV elevated camera position in the East Stand )but you have made a definitive call on a camera angle that has distorted the view .

  39. Mike T,
    He had told a physio about it and that physio mentioned it to Wenger. But Özil didn’t mention the crack in his knee at the half time of the match.

    But for some reason people (including some Arsenal fans) want to make it look that Özil stumbled in the dressing room like a cripple duck and Wenger forced him back on the field with a whip.

    I can imagine that it will have been something like: I feel a little bit on my knee against the physio and then saying but I think it is all right and I can play further kind of thing.
    Because no player wants to come of at that point in the match unless you really are cripple.

  40. About the Fabregas handball: as I had no other angles I had to work with the ones I had. And as the talk was about being it a penalty or not nobody ever mentioned that it could have been outside the penalty area.
    So I just focused on the fact if it was a handball that had to be punished or not. And it was.
    That is why I would love to have access to all the possible camera angles. But alas I don’t have that.

  41. @ Mike T (5:23)

    There’s nothing contradictory about Wenger’s statement. Ozil told him about a LITTLE PAIN (which is normal) during the game, but he told Wenger about the INJURY after the scan.

    What is contradictory though, is you and morinho’s views about the referee’s performance, as highlighted by Tom @ 2:23pm.

  42. @ Mike T

    Wenger as since explained the “spat between the managers”. He was en route to Sanchez after the assault by cahill, and morinho stood in his way. He was trying to push out of the way, naturally. I’m surprised morinho didn’t gouge his eye out…

  43. C’mon, Wengerson. All you have to do is watch the replay and you can see that your explanation doesn’t hold water. Mourinho was not directly in between Wenger and the player, Wenger turned to his left and moved away from the pitch before that incident happened. He didn’t need to shove Mourinho or even come within reach of him to get by if he simply continued walking to the pitch instead of responding to the Chelsea manager. It’s one thing to support, but this is just distorting reality.

  44. Walter , Wengerson and others

    Regardless what was said and when, no amount of pain in your knee is ‘normal’ . If you have to play a player with a pain in his knee , there’s a problem with your squad somewhere.
    The notion that players should be able to perform while injured( unless they are ‘crippled ‘) is false.
    Players can play with a mild ankle sprain but not a knee sprain.
    Ozil should know better but this is not the first time this happened either.
    Against Bayern he carried a hamstring injury for over 40 minutes , before substituted at the half. In both cases he was totaly ineffective and ultimately he and Arsenal payed the price.

  45. @Steve0 you are right. Wenger wanted to fight Jose. Alexis wanted to kick Cahill and Ivanovic is an angel from the local church. This site is all about conspiracy and PGMOL are suppliers of Choir boys to the EPL.

  46. k i have few questions and i would like people who run this website to answer it.

    We can all moan about referee did this or he did that. What in reality can you do about that? I mean can you let it all out in the shape of banners or whatever in our next home games at the Emirates.
    I hear every one moan about referees but why cannot PEOPLE start doing something about it (Ideally at the Emirates) to let the millions of fans across globe know about this treatment.
    Its all good doing this on a website but most of the people will just moan. But it needs to be addressed by PEOPLE. If not then you will be writing alot of these in the future, guaranteed.

  47. @ Steve O

    Jose has a habit of leaving his technical area and is brought to task over that. I have no problems as he isn’t meant to leave the area , walk on the pitch etc. There is no doubt that AW left his technical area yet that seems to be ok or ignored. Indeed it was suggested by the press on Sunday that if the roles had been reversed in this recent spat JM would be at the wrong end of an FA charge.

    @ Tom . After the Chelsea Sunderland game last season Jose was charged for saying the ref had a fabulous game when everyone suggested that we all knew what he was saying!

  48. @ Steve0

    There is always a need to shove morinho, trust me. Besides, Wenger is known to be very violent. He once kicked a water bottle down a touch line…

    @ Mike T

    jose has a habit of leaving his technical area and gouging eyes

    @ Menace
    Don’t forget how poor oscar was victimised that whole afternoon

  49. @wengerson

    Aw obviously thought it prudent to shove the Odious One out of gouging range!

  50. @Wengerperson

    I don’t dispute that Jose does indeed leave his technical and I state that very fact in my earlier post.

    As for AW the suggestion , if that’s what you are trying to make by drawing reference to the water bottle, that he doesn’t have an unblemished record in such matters is, well far from reality indeed he was fined £10k in 2006 for pushing Pardew

    Also in 2006 he and Jol had to be separated by stewards.

    There are other incidents and in truth I find it re assuring a manager shows passion but please don’t suggest that AW doesn’t have previous in this type of incident.

  51. I am getting more and more annoyed that this sort of thing happens. Untold’s preview of the ref for the game and the review of the game are so on track, that it is hard for anyone to ignore.

    One of the things i hate is that “Officials have to interpret the Laws”.
    How can any system be fair if multiple persons are interpreting the rules(which are quite absolute really).

    If a foul can be interpreted differently by different people, then it is clear that this leaves room for manipulation.
    If a foul is a foul as clearly stated in the laws regardless, then no one can manipulate the result.

    But it is clear now that this is wanted in order to enable manipulation and corruption.

    From my research over the last 20 years into life, the past and present, i have found that ALL areas of life that generate massive amounts of money, are systematically controlled by others. Therefore it is no surprise that football is also full of corruption and manipulation.

    I mention again that secret betting is one of the ways that “these people” increase their money by “sure bets”. Only the ones who are given the “keys” can place bets.
    Below that, comes the individual corruption, like taking money for performing favours etc.

    Here i mention that being a very sensitive person, i was shocked at the things i learned over the last 20 years, and went into a sort of “withdrawal from the world” depression for about 5 years.

    Never taking any medicines(if you knew what i know) ever, i sorted it with a little of the “natural herbs” available to Human and Mankind, and with my analytical and curious mind.

    Don’t get me wrong, medicines are usually good for trauma accidents and such, but for mental issues, there are usually much better remedies.

    Anyway, I now can see much of the ways these people do things, for they (1:)think themselves too secure in their power, or (2:)they just have no common sense. They do things in exactly the same way over the years. (After all why change when it works, they say).

    I tip both.

    So Arsenal has a fight on their hands.

    Does anyone ask at the AGM about the attacks on Arsenal? I mean does the topic ever come up at all?

  52. @ Para

    You said

    One of the things i hate is that “Officials have to interpret the Laws”.
    How can any system be fair if multiple persons are interpreting the rules(which are quite absolute really

    See therin is the problem. Other than things like the ball being out of play or over the goal line most rules in football are applied on the basis of the referees opinion.

  53. Walter – Is this the worst assessment ever recorded by the Untold team?

    I suspect it may have been before the reviews, but Phil Dowd in the 4-4 at Newcastle must be hard to beat?

  54. Mike T. I know that you are a Chelsea supporter from way back, But I for one expected better from you. In my opinion, You trying to justify all those very dubious and curious referee decisions has diminished yourself. I really thought you were able to call a spade a spade, But deep down inside you know that the ref had an anti-arsenal agenda. I have followed many teams in various sports my whole life and when crazy and bullshit decisions favor my teams I say so. I call it like it really is. I think you know that the Arsenal got hosed, But You don’t wanna admit it cause your club was the beneficiary of that diabolical cheat of a ref. If the situation was reversed you would be screaming to high heavens about that fucking ref. Your previous comments have shown you to have a bit of a spin doctor in you. I really expected better from someone like yourself. I didn’t use any of my normal expletives against you because I do respect you, Just a little less now.

  55. @Mike T – ‘ indeed he was fined £10k in 2006 for pushing Pardew’-Wenger didn’t argue with the racist FA. He got fined but Pardew was let off because there was ‘insufficient evidence’!!! RACISM at its worst!! How can you accept money from one manager and let the perpetrator off? The same Pardew who head butted a player.

    THe FA are responsible for some of the worst miscarriage of justice one can imagine.

  56. Bill,

    I was thinking the same thing. Mike T pretends to be unbiased but is really unable to hide his true colors. If there was any referee display he’d be able to admit his club got a clear advantage, this was it. But, in the end, he deflects with the managers scuffle in the technical area, and the Ozil injury situation. Why bother pretending?

  57. Thanks Walter, now I can see why I felt the same way after the robbery in the 50th match at the old toilet.

    On Ozil it’s bonkers to suggest Wenger risked him knowingly. Anyway, if the press, and those lunatics trying to lay the blame for his injury at Wenger’s doorstep,if they really cared about Ozil wouldn’t they be trying to find out how exactly that injury came about. Anyway, the same fools were questioning why Wenger was keeping faith in a player who was completely out of form and utterly rubbish. All of a sudden he’s now the vital cog in Arsenal’s quest for trophies, and is a big blow to our survival. The same player Wenger should have dropped a long time ago is now very important. How does that work? In case this is not clear, these are rhetoric questions. So to you numpties aka Wenger-bashers keep your explanations about Ozil’s injury, lack of form, what a blow he will or will not be…etc., to yourselves. I’m not in the mood to engage dimwitted cnuts right now.

  58. @Bill & Dave C

    Of course I have a bias toward Chelsea just as every Arsenal supporter quite rightly has a bias toward Arsenal. Did the ref cheat ? No I don’t think he did was he up to the job? No he wasn’t.
    I believe I am objective, indeed far more objective than many on here the trouble is that if I question a take on say Walters view the comeback is not that my view may be correct more that its bound to be wrong because I am a Chelsea supporter.
    In another article on here Walter is pointing toward comments made by Keith Hackett where he , Hackett, states 3 players should have been sent off and one of those was Kos. That in effect is what I said.
    As you will no doubt have read I see flaws in the scoring of these reviews and again as I have stated in the past there are many decisions made during games that are correct but get no mention and that goes to my point about the spat on the touchline. Was the decision, in Walters view correct or not for if you are using a matrix to determine the game management then it should have featured.

  59. Wenger’s push was nothing…it wasn’t to the face and his hands didn’t even come close to being extended. AW’s reaction was very measured. He did leave his technical box something that isn’t enforced unless the manager is in the face of the referee and on the pitch but he should have been sanctioned. However much Wenger has let his emotions get the better of him in the past (Pardew jumping up and celebrating a goal right in front of him) while managing he has never gouged an opposition coach’s eyeball.

  60. Mike T. I am not questioning your support of Chelsea. I do Question your eyesight and your honesty in seeing what takes place in front of your face. If you are actually saying that the referee was only incompetent and not against the Arsenal, Then in the future I and everyone on the website has to take every comment you make over here with a fucking grain of salt. You can’t come over here and make statements and expect us to take them seriously if you ain’t gonna tell the goddamn truth. I realize that opinions are like assholes and everybody’s got one, But you know that that fucking ref helped your team a great deal and your piece of shit snot-nosed little manager told his players to foul and dive because that ref would hurt the Arsenal in any way possible.Please do not avoid my question again. If the situation was reversed, Would you be screaming that something was rotten in Denmark. Would you be over here saying that Chelsea got robbed. I think you should man the fuck up and tell it like it really is and stop with your spin doctoring.

  61. Mike T. I agree with you on the debatable Koscielny red, in that he was lucky to stay on. However dont forget the major decision that decided the path of the game was Atkinsons failure to send Cahill off for his disgusting and most deliberate, career threatening off the ground two footed, most clear red card of the decade candidate lunge.

    You reckon he was just not “up to the job”? In your opinion, was the ref in your game against Barcelona in Camp Nou 2009 “up to the job”, or would you think he showed a bias towards Barcelona? Actually, what would your opinion be on Anders Frisk being “up to the job”?

  62. Bill

    I agree 100% that Chelsea were lucky that Cahill wasn’t sent & wouldn’t I disagree that Oscar could and probably should have been booked earlier but where I don’t agree is that its because their is an agenda against Arsenal . Indeed if there were there is no question in my mind he would have sent off two Arsenal players namely Wellbeck & Kos and in truth Wenger would have been sent to the stands.
    As for shouting from the rooftops well we have suffered on many occasions from questionable decisions and of course I get upset about them but I don’t talk about agendas or bias I put it down to lack of ability on behalf of the officials.

  63. Well said BILL.

    Part of me has some sympathy for Mike T, but as I said earlier he is being deliberately mischievous and disingenuous – and consequently dishonest – this is not new and becomes very tiresome.

    The next stage from Mike will be an attempt at a distracting cyclic argument – he is quite good at that, but facts are facts – and the attempts by Mike to undermine Walter’s excellent report and also AW’s ability as a manager are unbecoming.

    It is difficult for anyone to be an apologist for the obnoxious owner, the odious manager and the diving cheating thugs assembled in that team – Mike tries hard to do so – but in so doing has destroyed his remaining integrity.

  64. InitalsBB

    The whole Anders Frisk thing was a disgrace in how Chelsea acted. I thought Frisk made an incorrect call in sending off Drogba but the events that followed both in the stadium and afterward by way of death threats was a disgrace. I believe he made the call on what he saw or think he saw and that’s where the debate for me ends
    The game against Barca at SB where we were denied several penalty claims is perhaps another example where people have pointed the finger at a ref with a bias an agenda but he really was out of his depth.
    Many Chelsea supporters would state otherwise in both inidents and as they say football is all about opinions

  65. In my opinion, for what it is worth, Mike T’s credibility disappeared in his first comment when he defended the cheating Hazard for manufacturing the foul which got Chambers booked. From that point on it has been a case of digging himself deeper and deeper into a self made hole. How anyone could fail to see the deliberate placing of Hazards right foot in Chambers path so as too get the foul is beyond me. Very similar to Ramirez dangling his leg out sideways a year or two back to initiate contact with Szczesny and ‘win’ a penalty. Chelsea are a bunch of cheats, encouraged, aided and abetted by their obnoxious manager. Anything they may win this season will be tarnished by their dubious methods. The sad thing is they have such a strong team that there is no need for all the gamesmanship so why not try to win by fair means as opposed to foul.

    expect to see him in many future encounters against Chelsea unless our beloved club grow some balls and start doing something about this .

  67. We are coming disconcertingly close to Mobbing Mike T.

    I do not agree with his sophistry in defending Jose Mourinho. It is my belief that much of what a team does in the first 30 minutes of a match and right after halftime is condoned if not actually on the instructions of the manager therefore the ruinous tackles of Cahill (20min)must reflect poorly on Jose Mourinho.

    I think it is fair game to bring up Wenger’s history of misconduct but if someone does so they must look at the context of each event; they are almost all because the other team has tried to injure his players. Pushing someone does not rank up there with eye gouging. I do see how Chelsea and the media could be charmed by Jose Mourinho. He can be an entertaining perhaps even likeable rogue to them but let there be no doubt he is a rogue whereas AW can be perceived as a know it all and a snob – not characteristics the unwashed mob warm up to easily.

  68. my brother who is a chelsea fan didnt really finish watching the match… by 30 mins mark he made one comment… why does chelsea have no sportmanship… that pretty much summaries chelsea display that night

  69. Wondered when I got up this morning what the response to my postings last evening would be.

    I don’t know why people seem to think Hazard cheated because he in effect was using his body to shield the ball of which he was in full control he is perfectly entitled to move in such a way. Its not cheating it happens time after time that players put their body in the way. As I said I don’t think Chambers should have been booked for the incident but the fact that he was.

    Just for clarity here is what the rules say

    “Shielding the ball is permitted. A player that places himself and the ball has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept within playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with either his arms or body.”

  70. Shielding the ball is permitted. A player that places himself between an opponent and the ball has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept within playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with either his arms or body.”

  71. Honestly Arsenal could get relegated and you guys would still blindly follow Wenger. I agree the ref was not up to scratch in the Chelsea game but let’s be honest Chelsea did not get out of second gear and we had no plan on how to beat them. Wenger was once a genius and has made the club what it is today and I am truly great full to the man. But he is done as a top class Manager. We are supposed to be the 5th richest club in the world but we are being ham strung by Wenger and the board. Apparently we are a trying to sign Hummel OHHHH please. If Wenger did manage to sign him he would probably play him as a CF anyway. Honestly it’s the blind leading the blind. Question are you guys the “Arsene can do no wrong”. “The in Wenger we trust AKB’s “. If we don’t make the top 4 this year and we will struggle I believe, are you guys going to walk around the Emirates on Match day with you head held high knowing you let Wenger get away with this mediocrity by helping him brainwash the masses. I’m not going to let you forget it…..

  72. Well Mike, when you come onto a pro Arsenal site after we have been mugged by your referee and your team and write a load of disingenuous nonsense – what do you expect.?

    I don’t know in what light you view your unsporting outfit – but from this angle “indefensible” comes to mind.

  73. Haha
    Perhaps I missed it above but I didn’t see anyone write that Hazard had not engaged in a normal bit of “gamesmanship”. Chambers had been pushing and tugging Hazard all over the place and up until the YELLOW CARD he wasn’t having any joy in the game, as Phil Neville would say the gamesmanship from the rookie Chambers was of the highest and most acceptable order.

    It’s the gamesmanship from the referee that everyone has been able to observe and comment upon above. This is not just an arsenal blog it’s a football blog and anyone who knows anything about the game, even a smidgen, they understand why that early yellow was given to Chambers and why Oscar received his yellow with three minutes to go:

    “Game management”

    From the official. Broadcast to the whole world.
    And as we all know gamesmanship from an official and not a player is not gamesmanship but something else entirely.

    these failed efforts and dangled tangents embaressing those who attempt them here and only further highlight the incongruous and odd conduct I these officials. The contrast with the England Estonia game completely exposes the poor efforts being made to defend what was undeniably and statistically a partisan performance from a sporting official: we note that in order to avoid such problems every other sport on the planet has adopted modern interactive technology.

    Importing Grand Master Busacca from the Grand Duchy of Blattersburg is not the answer but a failed attempt at further obfuscation from those who have already run out of fig leaves. Because there is simply no rational or reasonable explanation that can be given by anyone or anything that could explain the lack of the kind of system used in the sister sport of field hockey in association football do the last decade or longer. And so the beat goes on.

  74. Mike T -you are dim! The Law states “the player does not hold off the opponent with either his arms or body” and you state “I don’t know why people seem to think Hazard cheated because he in effect was using his body to shield the ball”.

    Case closed and your apology ……..

  75. Menace

    Not so sure who the dim one is!

    You really need to read what I have written as opposed to what you want it to say.
    I said that he used his body to shield the ball which is what he did.
    The rule is that you cant use your body to hold off the opponent which is a whole different matter. Or put another way you cant push/barge the opposition player to stop them getting at the ball.

  76. What’s funny is that we can see above that even if someone believes that such a basic “foul” by Chambers was worthy of a yellow (let’s be generous!) they cannot and will not comment upon the differential standards shown in the same game when issuing yellow cards. For example, using the measure applied to Chambers, Cahill should’ve been off and Ivanovic shown a yellow for two fouls within two seconds. It’s a little bit embarrassing to try and argue for one whilst ignoring the other, not a good look!

    By attempting to explain the foul on Chambers those attempting to obfuscate this performance from this official only highlight, underline and put into bold the inconsistent standards applied by the official towards both teams in this game. I thank you.

    Carry On Digging.

  77. Mike T
    The fact is he didn’t use his body, he used his leg/foot which is plain to see. Go have another look. Mike T you should have gone to Specsavers!

  78. I have re-watched the Hazard/Chambers incident. It is clear that Hazard deliberately moved away from the ball, into Chamber’s route and stuck out a leg tripping him. Hazard was not shielding the ball, he was not close enough to it to do that, he was deliberately obstructing Chambers/playing for the free kick.

    Deliberate foul by Hazard – end of!

    No doubt encouraged by this free kick success he was encouraged to ensure he made contact with Kos & went down very easily for the penalty.

    Re Hazard – a fine player – but his frequent diving and cheating antics are inexcusable.

    When running the replay I noticed that Sky tried to minimize coverage of the Odious One delaying play early on by not releasing the ball to Gibbs.

  79. @bjt

    I agree with your comment as to what Hazard did. But read the rule and you will see that as long as the ball was playable by him he is allowed to do that.

  80. To repeat:
    I wrote above the official seemed to imply the yellow was for consistent fouling, not just for that “foul”, which is interesting in the context of the rest of that game.
    So, yellow for constant fouling early on in this performance from this official for a player from one team only highlights, underlines and put into bold the inconsistent standards applied by the official towards both teams. I thank you.

  81. @Finsbury

    Sorry I had misunderstood. If that was indeed was the case then not even I could get to trying to put a different slant on it
    As I said t get booked for that incident, in my opinion was incorrect

  82. @Mike T

    Really – Shield with the body – ok; but stick out a leg and trip the opponent – within the rules? Maybe within the rules for Chelski and Atkinson!

  83. This is a waste of time arguing about. By his own admission Mike T admits he is Chelsea biased so on that basis we can take it that if the incident had been in a match against any other team where his bias wouldn’t have clouded his judgement he would have agreed with us that it was indeed Chambers who was fouled.

  84. Don’t worry, there’s no need to apologise. 🙂
    Sometimes I can be a little vague when trying to post on a quick break!: In my humble opinion I don’t know if it was incorrect to give the yellow to Chambers. Because he had been all over Hazard early on into the game, just the same as he’d been with the Galatasary LF three days earlier who is also a good player and was unlucky to not earn a few fouls during that game, not that it changed the result but it was fair to say that Phil Neville would say that Chambers was testing that official with his “gamesmanship”*

    Therefore I wouldn’t say any official was wrong to give a yellow in such incidents, But I would think that for them to give a yellow to one team and not another using such standards in the same game is incongruous – he clearly saw the kick from Ivanovic during the same incident where Cahill only slightly obviously played the man and not the ball (as clear a red as you will ever see. ever.), and therefore at the least he should’ve given if he wanted to be consistent in my opinion was two yellows in that case (not the first foul from the infamous cheeky pincher Ivanovic either). No need to mention Oscar’s performance. Which didn’t deserve an oscar, because there was nothing subtle about it! Chambers plays like a stealth machine in comparison.
    The contrast with an early yellow for consistent fouling for the Arsenal player is there, and cannot be rationally explained.

    *As you can all tell I truly am grateful for dear Phil’s bungled and self defeating commission to explain Atkinson’s “performance” a day or so after the game. Not the players, but the official, the problem with Phil’s efforts being we all know that gamesmanship is something we expect players to indulge in, like Chambers in that Chelsea game and others, not the officials!

  85. The strangest aspect of this performace from Atkinson for people I watched the game with was his positioning, especially in the c.cirle area when Arsenal were trying to break. It looked to some as if he was trying to get in the way?

    I don’t know about such things. What did others think of the strange positions the offical stood in during open play? Is Atkinson unfit in the traditional sense as well as others? The latter was implied quite clearly by Mr.Hackett!

  86. Morning all

    Gianni Dioro

    I will tell you what the rule says but its perhaps best others make comment about why, what, how etc.

    ” If a player decides to take a free kick quickly and an opponent is less than 9.15 metres (10 yards ) from the ball intercepts it, the referee must allow play to continue.

    If a player decides to take a free kick quickly and an opponent is near the ball deliberately prevents him taking the kick, the referee must caution the player for delaying the restart of play “

  87. Martin Atkinson’s random appointment for this fixture was as predicted. His performance was as expected.

    Coupled with Mourinho’s suffocating anti-football tactics the game die’s a rather boring death.

    In a week when Arsenal have once again taken a bashing for the current “price of football”, very little value was placed on the price of non-football.

Comments are closed.