Shocking Refs

[Sideliner]

why drag in poor play into the equation ? we all agree on that - we have played poorly against poor sides but still a damn side better than them most of the time - and still could not win -
our argument is clear - 14 poor decisions must surely have a bearing on the outcome of games - it goes beyond me how anybody can deny that unless we also had 14 or so favourable decisions going our way which clearly did not happen - the refs have consistantly given us a raw deal -
coincidence or not ?
please give us the 14 decisions or so which in your opinion favoured us so we can compare apples with apples - or refrain from saying poor decisions are evenly spread amongst all teams and therefor does not influence the results of matches
to say the Pienaar fowl was unclear and the Fellaini fowl was very clear in my opinion also requires heavily red tinted glasses
to say a red card , a penalty or a foul given correctly or incorrectly cannot and does not influence the outcome of a game but poor play certainly does much more, continues to amaze me beyond comprehension - we have drawn many more games where we were the better side on the park - that proves that poor play alone can not be blamed for not winning - there must be something else ...... we beleive bad refs are to blame - now prove us wrong - stop just saying we are wrong

 

[Jeff Jones]

Are you guys actually reading what i'm saying?







.

Yes, but we don't agree with some of the things you say.

We want consistency from referees, and correct decisions when they're easy to make, ie the Coates and Benteke fouls.

'The referee didn't see it that way' doesn't cut it in those instances.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Yes, but we don't agree with some of the things you say.

We want consistency from referees, and correct decisions when they're easy to make, ie the Coates and Benteke fouls.

'The referee didn't see it that way' doesn't cut it in those instances.

I don't think you are reading what i'm saying because you're insisting that your view of incidents is right and there is absolutely no chancxe that you're wrong and the ref was actually right, and that you don't even see why a ref might have got them wrong either.

Could be that the ref thought Coates actually outjumped Jagielka and only caught him on the way down and while Benteke had his arms over the defenders shoulders he wasn't holding him down and simply outjumped the guy.

Thats one way of looking at them, different to yours seemingly but unless you can show me the laws of the game that show clearly both cases were fouls that were mistakenly allowed to happen by the ref i don't know what else to say.

 

[Jeff Jones]

There's no point in continuing this. You've made your mind up.

 

[Ihaters]

I don't think you are reading what i'm saying because you're insisting that your view of incidents is right and there is absolutely no chancxe that you're wrong and the ref was actually right, and that you don't even see why a ref might have got them wrong either.

Could be that the ref thought Coates actually outjumped Jagielka and only caught him on the way down and while Benteke had his arms over the defenders shoulders he wasn't holding him down and simply outjumped the guy.

Thats one way of looking at them, different to yours seemingly but unless you can show me the laws of the game that show clearly both cases were fouls that were mistakenly allowed to happen by the ref i don't know what else to say.

haha If a ref thinks that Coates jumped over 6ft and landed lying almost flat on Jagielka's head then he needs drug testing ffs.

 

[PITA]

Are you guys actually reading what i'm saying?

Just because one ref in a game views 1 incident a certain way doesn't mean that a different ref in a different game will view a similar incident the same way.

Things like corners are actual definitive decisions, you award it if it came off the defender last (unless you make a mistake and think it came off the attacker) but you are giving a decision on an actual fact : it touched the defender last so therefor is a corner.

Other fouls are not so straight forward, the Pienaar/Arteta one is simply an opinion as to whether Arteta actually broke the laws of the game when challenging Pienaar or if it was just two players tussling for the ball, and even if he did a referee will not have the same view of it as we do on tv making it much easier for us to see everything that happened rathee than only having 1 view.

The Fellaini/Dzeko thing was a clear pull back in front of the ref, much easier to see and award in a crowded penalty area than trying to decide which one of about 10 players pushing and shoving each other was actually a foul.

I'm not saying decisions haven't gone against us this season : they have and as an Evertonian it sucks. However i understand why, for the most part its simply bad luck, very few if any have been actual definitely wrong decisions, and those that have its clearly understandable if you take off your blue tinted glasses why they went against us.

Are you actually reading what you're writing?

Blah, blah, blah basically means that if you don't accept the world according to Deathby..... then you need to take off your blue tinted specs. Sound reasoning.

 

[Ihaters]

It's abundantly clear you don't understand. You've quoted me saying:

for the umpteenth time YES we have got the rough end of an unusually large number of poor calls in several games, and there is no sign of things "balancing out", BUT EQUALLY we have underperformed in several games too, mostly against "lesser" opposition; in SOME of those games the ref has been poor but in others he's been fine. However in the games were we've NOT got the results, most of them have seen us play poorly.

and then asked why I am reluctant to accept we've had poor ref decisions. 13 or 14 major game changers (all of which I have agreed were poor, bar the free kick in the norwich game) that you claim I'm trying to refuse to see.

As I said: it's abundantly clear you don't understand. I am saying that we have had some very poor ref decisions, but that doesn't mean we can ignore poor performances. You appear to be saying that the moment a ref screws up, we can ignore any poor play by our team.

When you say poorly you mean better than the opposition who still walk away with a point because of the linesmans ... err differing view of what a ball crossing the line is, or 2 refs difference in perception of what the same foul is?
Because that's what has happened fairly consistently.. At least a dozen times in the same amount of games, each a massive decision, not the odd yellow or free kick of irrelevance, nigh on every game we have been the better side and nigh on every game the points have eluded us which wouldn't of done if the ref was correct in his decisions. Whatever the reason behind the fk up. Whether he thinks Coates can fly or if the linesman had a Pterodactyl fly in his face at the moment the incident happened, it's irrelevant.. The why is not important, its the fact not the reason that is cause for annoyance. That fact is we have lost a lot of points down to the ref's decisions that we wouldn't of done if they got the calls correct.
That's the argument, not whether the players were good enough, not even if the ref's are good. Hell its not even an argument its a statement.. At least a dozen major game changing decisions have incorrectly gone against us. end of.. close thread ffs.
If we scored 30 every game, probably we wouldn't be as bothered but that's not going to happen..
Imagine that season we finish 4th if we only got a draw for every 1-0 because the ref added one through a pen or red card incorrectly or dissallowed one of ours each game.. That's actually happening this season.
Relegation material probably then, fortunately we are better than that this season but its still screwing us over badly.

 

[PITA]

It's abundantly clear you don't understand. You've quoted me saying:

for the umpteenth time YES we have got the rough end of an unusually large number of poor calls in several games, and there is no sign of things "balancing out", BUT EQUALLY we have underperformed in several games too, mostly against "lesser" opposition; in SOME of those games the ref has been poor but in others he's been fine. However in the games were we've NOT got the results, most of them have seen us play poorly.

and then asked why I am reluctant to accept we've had poor ref decisions. 13 or 14 major game changers (all of which I have agreed were poor, bar the free kick in the norwich game) that you claim I'm trying to refuse to see.

As I said: it's abundantly clear you don't understand. I am saying that we have had some very poor ref decisions, but that doesn't mean we can ignore poor performances. You appear to be saying that the moment a ref screws up, we can ignore any poor play by our team.

It's also abundantly clear that you are off thread. The title of this thread is 'Shocking refs'. This suggests to me that the OP wanted to discuss 'shocking refs'. At least Deathby......... gets this.

You could always start a thread titled 'Blaming refs for us dropping points rather than facing up to the fact that we have sometimes let ourselves down by not scoring the second goal or failing that preventing the other team scoring a late equaliser'.

 

[Jeff Jones]

It's also abundantly clear that you are off thread. The title of this thread is 'Shocking refs'. This suggests to me that the OP wanted to discuss 'shocking refs'. At least Deathby......... gets this.

You could always start a thread titled 'Blaming refs for us dropping points rather than facing up to the fact that we have sometimes let ourselves down by not scoring the second goal or failing that preventing the other team scoring a late equaliser'.[/QUOTE

This clarifies another point I would like to make. I've made several references to the Coates climbing on Jags incident, but it wasn't game changing .It simply mitigated the incorrect Suarez offside decision.

As PITA says, this thread is about shocking refs, not whether Everton should have scored more goals so as to make their poor
decisions unimportant.

 

[noharmdone]

Arsenals penno today..

 

[Seamus Colemole]

There's no point in continuing this. You've made your mind up.

In other words you can't show me the laws of the game that were clearly and without doubt broken in those cases.

I haven't made my mind up on anything, i'm doing the opposite and keeping an open mind and trying to explain why decisions may have been made by the ref the way they were rather than saying "it was a foul and the ref is **** for not giving it".

 

[Rook]

Its time to use som of that big $$$$$$$ prem dollarz on some foreign refs. Most of the players in the prem aren't english so why are the refs?

 

[Sideliner]

Westbrom Albion was Evertoned against Arsenal by the officials today - as clear as bloody daylight - no magnifying glass or interpretation of rules required - just 2 normal eyes to have seen that both penalties were mistakes by the ref-
the standard of refereeing in this league is not even a joke anymore - its a circus
bad referees make mistakes both ways - in most matches they are in my view not bad but crooked because most bad decisions go against one of the teams on the pitch - usually not one of the traditional top5 sides -
but every call for modern technology to be introduced falls on deaf ears for some unknown reason - which makes me even more suspicious - what are they protecting by bluntly ignoring the assistance available and applied in all other major world sport ?

 

[ijjysmith]

Shocking ref here.

 

[Beagers]

Which idiot are the FA sending to frustrate the life out of us all at GP tomorrow?!!