Victimisation

[Wendling Canary 0]

Is it me or are City being victimised by the officials, if you can call them that. Your thoughts please.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

We certainly aren''t getting the decisions, which is cause subconsciously the refs know we are the new boys and one of the poorest in the Division!

[WeAreYellows49 0]

It seems that way to me, but then ive kinda written this season off, so I don''t get dissapointed lol. It''s new club syndrome, but something needs to be done to address this problem.

Trouble is they are accountable to no one, sorta like an old boys club mentality, and all the time they aren''t accountable, poor decisions and inconsistencies will happen.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]It seems that way to me, but then ive kinda written this season off, so I don''t get dissapointed lol. It''s new club syndrome, but something needs to be done to address this problem. Trouble is they are accountable to no one, sorta like an old boys club mentality, and all the time they aren''t accountable, poor decisions and inconsistencies will happen.[/quote]

 

Cheats and corrupt...I''d investigate their bank accounts mate.

[Jack Barak 46]

4 pens in 4 games - the stoke challenge was outside the area and today''s was a dive...it''s either cheating or ineptitude but either way it is costing us.I''m so cross tonight I haven''t felt this dejected in ages, the team keep playing well but everything seems to be conspiring against us, don''t get me wrong we should have taken a chance or two but when you don''t and you seem to get all decisions against you it is impossible.

[NWC 240]

I''m actually quite pleased we are getting a run of poor decisions!These things tend to even themselves out over the season - its better we get it over with and have some good luck and penalties FOR us at the end of the season when it really counts.It took us 14 matches to win a game last time in the prem, and we nearly stayed up. This is our 4th match.Yes we should have beat Stoke, but we deserved no more than a draw today.

[WeAreYellows49 0]

Wiz buddy, if only eh lol

[Shack Attack 0]

We''re getting a realy bad run and it''s easy to believe there is a conspiracy against us. But who really believes that referees are out to relegate Norwich City? Things don''t ''even themselves out'' but other teams will go through a similar run before the season is out.

[Martin Bryant 0]

it does seem a bit like ref''s are happy to whip out the red cards and give penalties against Norwich maybe as they are a new team... I just really want to see a game where theres no red cards and no penalties.

People must look at the stats and think Norwich are a really dirty team... completely untrue. Poor Vaughan gets nothing for a smack in the mouth when earlier West Brom won a penalty as a Norwich player was stood slightly close to them... boo

[BarclayCanary (Former HDDH) 0]

I know this sounds horrible but I for one am glad the ref got a bit of stick, shouldn''t have been referring there were so many more decisions.

[Mahogany 0]

Just because we''re paranoid doesn''t mean they''re not after us.

[Noseybonk 0]

The worrying fact is that what constitutes a penalty against Norwich is completely different to what constitutes a penalty for Norwich.

This puts us at a massive disadvantage over the course of a season.

Now I don''t believe it''s corruption or even victimisation. But I do believe that in the back of their minds, the referees are aware there will be very little flak should Norwich lose due to one of their contentious decisions, even at CR.

It happened in 04-05 and it''s happening now.

Personally, I don''t think a call to the referee''s association bringing it to their attention could do any harm.

[Tumbleweed 106]

I am very sceptical that there is even something subconscious. However it is absolutely clear to me that the refs we have seen are verging on the incompetent.

The Wigan pen involved minimal contact, the Stoke was probably not even a foul and was outside the box and we got the double whammy of a red card, against Chelsea the pen was pretty clear but the red card wasn''t as Ramires was already on the way down and the ball was running way off line.

Today was a case in point. Olson was wrestling our folks to the ground all day long, including in the box. There was more contact in each of those individual challenges than Morison''s. The elbow on Vaughan was a disgrace and I''m glad he reacted so strongly at the end. How can 3 officials not see something like that yet give the one at the other end? What is almost as bad is that then TV pundits say Olson''s tackles are "clever defending", yet then state that Morison is "clumsy"!

The only element of  consistency is the poor decision making. The PL may have some of the best players but the refereeing standards are shockingly low, and arguably worse than we have seen in either the Champ or Lge 1.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="NWC"]I''m actually quite pleased we are getting a run of poor decisions!

These things tend to even themselves out over the season - its better we get it over with and have some good luck and penalties FOR us at the end of the season when it really counts.

It took us 14 matches to win a game last time in the prem, and we nearly stayed up. This is our 4th match.
Yes we should have beat Stoke, but we deserved no more than a draw today.
[/quote]

This is probably the most over-quoted phrase in football. It is a nonsense, a fallacy, a myth. Where is the evidence that "things even themselves out?". If you really believe that, just look at the number of home and away penalties there have been at Old Trafford over the last 10 years. I am seriously concerned that there is something more sinister to the appalling decisions we are receiving. Italy and Germany have both been involved in major match fixing scandals recently. Just wait for the announcement that suspicious betting patterns are being investigated in this country.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Webbo118"]

[quote user="NWC"]I''m actually quite pleased we are getting a run of poor decisions!

These things tend to even themselves out over the season - its better we get it over with and have some good luck and penalties FOR us at the end of the season when it really counts.

It took us 14 matches to win a game last time in the prem, and we nearly stayed up. This is our 4th match.
Yes we should have beat Stoke, but we deserved no more than a draw today.
[/quote]

This is probably the most over-quoted phrase in football. It is a nonsense, a fallacy, a myth. Where is the evidence that "things even themselves out?". If you really believe that, just look at the number of home and away penalties there have been at Old Trafford over the last 10 years. I am seriously concerned that there is something more sinister to the appalling decisions we are receiving. Italy and Germany have both been involved in major match fixing scandals recently. Just wait for the announcement that suspicious betting patterns are being investigated in this country.

[/quote]

 

100% spot onWebbo, I''m utterly convinced that ref took a bung yesterday.

[24March1985 0]

Interesting article in today''s Daily Mail by Graham Poll which includes the following comments:

"In their first game it was the assistant referee who indicated for a penalty to be awarded as Ritchie De Laet stumbled into Franco Di Santo who fell dramatically.

Next up was a ludicrous penalty awarded to Stoke City for a Leon Barnett foul which was clearly well outside of the penalty area.

The referee was Neil Swarbrick, a new official to the Premier League who on that showing will have to wait quite a while before refereeing at Old Trafford or Anfield.

The penalty against Chelsea when the Canaries’ goalkeeper John Ruddy brought down Ramires, could not be disputed, although Paul Lambert seemed to want to, but Sunday’s award by Mark Halsey was again as soft as you will see all season.

Steven Reid clearly In their first game it was the assistant referee who indicated for a penalty to be awarded as Ritchie De Laet stumbled into Franco Di Santo who fell dramatically.

Next up was a ludicrous penalty awarded to Stoke City for a Leon Barnett foul which was clearly well outside of the penalty area.

The referee was Neil Swarbrick, a new official to the Premier League who on that showing will have to wait quite a while before refereeing at Old Trafford or Anfield.

The penalty against Chelsea when the Canaries’ goalkeeper John Ruddy brought down Ramires, could not be disputed, although Paul Lambert seemed to want to, but Sunday’s award by Mark Halsey was again as soft as you will see all season.

Steven Reid clearly played for contact from Steve Morison and fell immediately he felt it. "

Plus:

"Let me guarantee you this: none of the penalties given to Wigan Athletic, Stoke City or West Bromwich would have been awarded against Manchester United and yet they were against Norwich City."

[24March1985 0]

Sorry. Some repetition in previous post - not very experienced as my posting record demonstrates!

[Jim Smith 2,317]

Very interesting quotes 24 March 1985 and for once I agree entirely with Poll. The Wigan, Stoke and WBA penalties were all not penalties in my opinion and I don''t think either of the red cards against Stoke or Chelsea were fair decisions. Similarly teams are getting away with things against us that they should not be. I don''t think there is corruption involved but something here is very badly wrong and it is costing us points.

Conversely Stoke have had a string of refereeing decisions in thier first few games which have gained them half a dozen points they should not have. Pulis apparantly is keen on compiling videos of dodgy decisions against them and sending it it to the Prem and referees association. Perhaps we should do similar. On the evidence of our first few games it would make compelling viewing.

[Tumbleweed 106]

McNally and Lambert are tough cookies, I hope they are considering such a complaint to the PL, maybe we should be encouraging them to do so. This could cost the club millions in lost revenue if we get relegated by just a few points.

[PKC 0]

My worry about this things will even up is we will get away wiyh a penalty or get a soft one when it doesn''t matter. eg we are 4-0 down to one of the Manchesters. The penalties given against us thus far have all been when the game has been in the balance.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="PKC"]My worry about this things will even up is we will get away wiyh a penalty or get a soft one when it doesn''t matter. eg we are 4-0 down to one of the Manchesters. The penalties given against us thus far have all been when the game has been in the balance.[/quote]

The "even up" theory is a myth.

[Robert N. LiM 4,344]

Reall interesting article by Poll, who should be a regular pundit on MOTD if you ask me.

Most interesting line was the one about the ref ''not getting a game at Anfield or OT any time soon.''

It''s fair enough that there should be better refs in the Prem than the Champs, but the implication in Poll''s line that doing Norwich-Wigan is just an audition for officiating one of the big clubs is outrageous. And almost certainly true.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Webbo118"]

The "even up" theory is a myth.

[/quote]

 

Agreed. What tends to happen is that all clubs (with the possible exception of a couple at the top) go through a period where they are on the receiving end of some poor decisions. We are going through that period at the moment (as it seems are Liverpool [^o)]) but all of our rivals have that still to come. We need to keep our heads up and improve the things that are within our control rather than worrying about some massive conspiracy. There are reasons other than dodgy refereeing why we have yet to win a game this season.

[Power Hamster 0]

[quote user="Tumbleweed"]

I am very sceptical that there is even something subconscious. However it is absolutely clear to me that the refs we have seen are verging on the incompetent.

The Wigan pen involved minimal contact, the Stoke was probably not even a foul and was outside the box and we got the double whammy of a red card, against Chelsea the pen was pretty clear but the red card wasn''t as Ramires was already on the way down and the ball was running way off line.

Today was a case in point. Olson was wrestling our folks to the ground all day long, including in the box. There was more contact in each of those individual challenges than Morison''s. The elbow on Vaughan was a disgrace and I''m glad he reacted so strongly at the end. How can 3 officials not see something like that yet give the one at the other end? What is almost as bad is that then TV pundits say Olson''s tackles are "clever defending", yet then state that Morison is "clumsy"!

The only element of  consistency is the poor decision making. The PL may have some of the best players but the refereeing standards are shockingly low, and arguably worse than we have seen in either the Champ or Lge 1.

[/quote]Am I the only person who thinks that, if Ramirez was "already on the way down" then it shouldn''t even have been a penalty, and certainly not a sending off? If he was already going down then Ruddy didn''t bring him down, so it isn''t even a foul! The fact that there was contact between the players does not constitute a foul - if it did there would be 20 penalties in every match. Any player who "goes down too easily" in the box is basically cheating, and should be cautioned. No need for a change in the rules, as it is already covered by the unsporting conduct rule. It just needs to be enforcedproperly.[:@]

[Noseybonk 0]

[quote user="Power Hamster"][quote user="Tumbleweed"]

I am very sceptical that there is even something subconscious. However it is absolutely clear to me that the refs we have seen are verging on the incompetent.

The Wigan pen involved minimal contact, the Stoke was probably not even a foul and was outside the box and we got the double whammy of a red card, against Chelsea the pen was pretty clear but the red card wasn''t as Ramires was already on the way down and the ball was running way off line.

Today was a case in point. Olson was wrestling our folks to the ground all day long, including in the box. There was more contact in each of those individual challenges than Morison''s. The elbow on Vaughan was a disgrace and I''m glad he reacted so strongly at the end. How can 3 officials not see something like that yet give the one at the other end? What is almost as bad is that then TV pundits say Olson''s tackles are "clever defending", yet then state that Morison is "clumsy"!

The only element of  consistency is the poor decision making. The PL may have some of the best players but the refereeing standards are shockingly low, and arguably worse than we have seen in either the Champ or Lge 1.

[/quote]Am I the only person who thinks that, if Ramirez was "already on the way down" then it shouldn''t even have been a penalty, and certainly not a sending off? If he was already going down then Ruddy didn''t bring him down, so it isn''t even a foul! The fact that there was contact between the players does not constitute a foul - if it did there would be 20 penalties in every match. Any player who "goes down too easily" in the box is basically cheating, and should be cautioned. No need for a change in the rules, as it is already covered by the unsporting conduct rule. It just needs to be enforcedproperly.[:@][/quote]

I totally agree with this.

I yell at the tv every time a pundit says something like "There was contact so he had every right to go down" or even worse "he was entitled to go down".

Motson and Shearer are the worse. They need reminding football is still a contact sport (although not for much longer, if they had their way).

It''s called cheating and needs to be treated as such.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Noseybonk"] I totally agree with this. I yell at the tv every time a pundit says something like "There was contact so he had every right to go down" or even worse "he was entitled to go down". Motson and Shearer are the worse. They need reminding football is still a contact sport (although not for much longer, if they had their way). It''s called cheating and needs to be treated as such.[/quote]

 

That''s all very well as long as you take a consistent approach and yell your displeasure at Grant Holt every time makes the most of minimal contact from an opposition defender. Unfortunately there are too many fans who are happy to turn a blind eye to their own teams misdemeanours whist demanding censure for the opposition. For instance last time we were promoted nobody ever seemed to have a problem with the ''balance issues'' that sometimes affected Darren Huckerby in and around the penalty area but Andy Johnson was a cheat. From that paradox comes the idea of players ''being entitled to go down'' as it is a grey area somewhere between a foul and outright cheating that we apply to our own players. Shearer and Co. are just reflecting the moral hypocrisy of your average football fan.

[San Miguel 0]

with all the money that there is in football and since it''s 2011 not 1911 why is there not video technology?  i''m not talking just goal line stuff but a 5th official watching instant replays and telling what he sees to the referee?

 

it''s talked and talked about with no one making any effort to implement it, or at least trial run it in one of the lower leagues,

 

makes me wonder if the likes of FIFA are intentionally stopping it from coming in.

[Old Shuck 183]

i think a lot of referees are more interested in their own performance and career in Prem games.

Its a competitive world for them and they are suspended and/or dropped to the Champ and below (quite how they are not good enough for the Prem, but OK enough to be palmed off onto Champ clubs, I don''t know) for any perceived poor performance and/or judgement in decision making-an ex-FIFA ref assesses every Prem game I believe?

So they want to come across as strong and unafraid to make decisions in Prem games in front of their assessors-and its probably ''easier'' to do that in games featuring the smaller teams or at a place like Norwich than it is at OT, Emirates etc.

And no-one listens if you upset the Manager of a Norwich etc.

[Power Hamster 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"]

[quote user="Noseybonk"] I totally agree with this. I yell at the tv every time a pundit says something like "There was contact so he had every right to go down" or even worse "he was entitled to go down". Motson and Shearer are the worse. They need reminding football is still a contact sport (although not for much longer, if they had their way). It''s called cheating and needs to be treated as such.[/quote]

 

That''s all very well as long as you take a consistent approach and yell your displeasure at Grant Holt every time makes the most of minimal contact from an opposition defender. Unfortunately there are too many fans who are happy to turn a blind eye to their own teams misdemeanours whist demanding censure for the opposition. For instance last time we were promoted nobody ever seemed to have a problem with the ''balance issues'' that sometimes affected Darren Huckerby in and around the penalty area but Andy Johnson was a cheat. From that paradox comes the idea of players ''being entitled to go down'' as it is a grey area somewhere between a foul and outright cheating that we apply to our own players. Shearer and Co. are just reflecting the moral hypocrisy of your average football fan.

[/quote]I don''t think there is any hypocrisy in saying, firstly that Holt would be stupid not to go down easily looking for a penalty, so long as that is what every other striker in the Premier League does, and it seems to be condoned by referees and even encouraged by the likes of Shearer and Motson. However, secondly, to also say that I would like to see the rules re-interpreted so it does in fact count as cheating, whether it is done by Holt or by any other player, and we accept that football is a physical contact sport.In other words I want the rules changed, but I accept that we have to play by the existing ones for the time being. Nothing hypocritical there.

[PurpleCanary 5,559]

[quote user="Shack Attack"]

 

That''s all very well as long as you take a consistent approach and yell your displeasure at Grant Holt every time makes the most of minimal contact from an opposition defender. Unfortunately there are too many fans who are happy to turn a blind eye to their own teams misdemeanours whist demanding censure for the opposition. For instance last time we were promoted nobody ever seemed to have a problem with the ''balance issues'' that sometimes affected Darren Huckerby in and around the penalty area but Andy Johnson was a cheat. From that paradox comes the idea of players ''being entitled to go down'' as it is a grey area somewhere between a foul and outright cheating that we apply to our own players. Shearer and Co. are just reflecting the moral hypocrisy of your average football fan.

[/quote]

 

Yes, but that was a recognised (albeit rare) medical condition - a psychosomatic inner ear infection brought on by proximity to grass rectangles marked with white lines. Darren''s mum used to give the ref a note to that effect before each game...[;)]