Sam Allardyce call the ref a cheat - FA action?

124»

Comments

  • alancrackeralancracker Posts: 5,280
    Forum Member
    I just think it happens more becuase we are live on tv more, and so people here these comments more often, I am sure if Wigan or Aston Villa say were on as much as we were, then perhaps we would get the same old comments about certain players of theirs.
    I am not trying to say that is doesn't happen, more just along the lines of why it does, that is all.

    As for him getting away with it from an on-the-pitch perpsective, referees are only human, and will have certain set thoughts of players, such as when Robbie Savage was playing for example, or Klinsmann before he first came to Spurs, so as much as they try to start a match with a clean sheet, being human they are prone to have at least a moment's thought of a certain person's actions, be it a dive, a bad tackle, or whatever.

    I am prob more tolerant of Scholes cos (whisper it) i basically like him - in fact MUFC wise there are only 2 people I dislike these days and you prob do not have to be a rocket scientist to work out who - Ferguson and Evra if you were in any doubt, the reasons for which we won't go into just now!!

    Re refs yes they do watch out for certain players and imo that is fair enough - I recall once when Duncan Ferguson came on as a sub and the ref called to his liner 'Watch out for the elbows from this guy' as you could lip read and he got a lot of stick for it. To me that was not out of order at all - when DF played as an official you should be looking out for elbows - and the same with Scholes - you should be watching his tackles closely and seeing if they are 'correct' or not. Its called doing your job properly - or at least trying to - cos as you point out and we all know refs do get things wrong from time to time.
  • Robbedin73Robbedin73 Posts: 7,859
    Forum Member
    Domt really understand the accusations against big Sam on this thread je just questioned why the decisions went against his team at ot
    Nothing wrong with that IMO
  • Cantona07Cantona07 Posts: 56,910
    Forum Member
    Robbedin73 wrote: »
    Domt really understand the accusations against big Sam on this thread je just questioned why the decisions went against his team at ot
    Nothing wrong with that IMO

    You obviously havent read the thread then because its explained in great detail.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Ijn the interests of fairness I think the following comments taken dirctly fro the BBC interview after the game should be included here ( better that than yet another anti-Utd thread ? )
    "We did so well at everything and we kept heading it out, the disappointment is not finishing them off. We had a lot of opportunities on the counter attack but our final ball let us down.

    "It was a clear penalty-kick on Wayne Rooney but in no way was the the linesman going to give that. He gave them everything else. We have not had a good record with this linesman, against Chelsea a few years ago he gave onside to Didier Drogba who was three yards offside, you remember those things.

    "They pumped the ball forward, maybe David De Gea could have got a better punch on it, but I will have to see it again.

    "Tottenham were very committed and aggressive. I think they have a decent squad and a good team.

    "If you look at our away programme we have been to Everton, been to Liverpool, been to Manchester City, been to Chelsea, been to Tottenham... We have been to all the top teams away from home."

    Now whether the bib is factually accurate or not , surely this a serious insinuation against the assistant, if Sam has been charged then I do think the FA have to be consistent and charge Fergie as well
  • Richie1001Richie1001 Posts: 8,217
    Forum Member
    Well, expecting the FA to be consistent is pretty much looking for the impossible anyway...

    I can't remember the exact wording of what Allardyce said - we'd really need to see them next to each other as that's how the FA will justify any charge or otherwise.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Richie1001 wrote: »
    Well, expecting the FA to be consistent is pretty much looking for the impossible anyway...

    I can't remember the exact wording of what Allardyce said - we'd really need to see them next to each other as that's how the FA will justify any charge or otherwise.

    True - their only consistency is that they are always inconsistent !!!!

    My specific comparison is that Sam said 'you don't get these decisions at OT' while Fergie has said 'he gave them everything else'.

    If he had said he felt a single decision was incorrect then no problem but he said every decision went against them which implies the teams involved are a factor in the decision making process
  • alanrollinsalanrollins Posts: 3,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dangerman wrote: »
    Now whether the bib is factually accurate or not , surely this a serious insinuation against the assistant, if Sam has been charged then I do think the FA have to be consistent and charge Fergie as well

    I would agree.

    I hope Cantona07 now confirms that is his view as well, if consistency is what he is looking for, he will hopefully be consistent himself in his views.
  • KierenjKierenj Posts: 2,457
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dangerman wrote: »
    Ijn the interests of fairness I think the following comments taken dirctly fro the BBC interview after the game should be included here ( better that than yet another anti-Utd thread ? )



    Now whether the bib is factually accurate or not , surely this a serious insinuation against the assistant, if Sam has been charged then I do think the FA have to be consistent and charge Fergie as well

    If the bib is factually correct is he not allowed to state facts? He hasn't insinuated anything... insinuation is implying something without saying it... he's just stated a fact... but he is playing with fire.
  • Richie1001Richie1001 Posts: 8,217
    Forum Member
    Kierenj wrote: »
    If the bib is factually correct is he not allowed to state facts? He hasn't insinuated anything... insinuation is implying something without saying it... he's just stated a fact... but he is playing with fire.

    I guess it could be argued that saying "It was a clear penalty-kick on Wayne Rooney but in no way was the the linesman going to give that." is possibly making insinuations maybe?

    I don't really know how the FA read anything these days so I would be surprised if anything comes from this.
  • alanrollinsalanrollins Posts: 3,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Saying "we've had trouble with the linesman before" and "he gave them everything" is stretching the facts a long way as far as I am concerned.

    Football is a game of emotions and I don't think I would be charging him for those comments but if the FA want to get Allardyce...its difficult for them not to take a dim view on this one.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Kierenj wrote: »
    If the bib is factually correct is he not allowed to state facts? He hasn't insinuated anything... insinuation is implying something without saying it... he's just stated a fact... but he is playing with fire.

    He has stated as fact that the linesman was never going to give Utd a penalty, that is insinuating bias.

    The rest is verifiable if arguable - was it a penalty, did every single decision go to Spurs etc. ?

    I completely agree with your last point though - he is playing with fire !!!!!!
  • PeePee Posts: 8,154
    Forum Member
    I too would welcome Cantona's views on these latest comments.
  • Cantona07Cantona07 Posts: 56,910
    Forum Member
    I would agree.

    I hope Cantona07 now confirms that is his view as well, if consistency is what he is looking for, he will hopefully be consistent himself in his views.

    Yea-ah sort of.

    I only saw the sky interview today where he said we didnt get a single decision today and the linesman had a shocking game as he did the last time we had him. Thats saying the linesman was shit rather than biased.

    If the interpretation is that the lineman didnt give us a decision because he's a shit linesman then i have no problem with that.

    If hes saying that the linesman didnt give us a single decision because we are Man Utd, then yes charge him by all means.

    Similarly if "Theres no way he was going to give the penalty" is because he got every other decision wrong too then thats fine. If its "Theres no way we were getting the penalty because its Man Utd" then fair enough charge him.

    Thats the difference, and its always been my point, regardless of who says it.
  • KierenjKierenj Posts: 2,457
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Saying "we've had trouble with the linesman before" and "he gave them everything" is stretching the facts a long way as far as I am concerned.

    Football is a game of emotions and I don't think I would be charging him for those comments but if the FA want to get Allardyce...its difficult for them not to take a dim view on this one.

    Oh I completely agree... from what he's said he's used only one piece of quite clear evidence (the Drogba goal) that the Linesman is bad but I imagine there are 100 times that amount of times when the same guy as done a Utd game without incident or given Utd something.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cantona07 wrote: »
    Yea-ah sort of.

    I only saw the sky interview today where he said we didnt get a single decision today and the linesman had a shocking game as he did the last time we had him. Thats saying the linesman was shit rather than biased.

    If the interpretation is that the lineman didnt give us a decision because he's a shit linesman then i have no problem with that.

    If hes saying that the linesman didnt give us a single decision because we are Man Utd, then yes charge him by all means.

    Similarly if "Theres no way he was going to give the penalty" is because he got every other decision wrong too then thats fine. If its "Theres no way we were getting the penalty because its Man Utd" then fair enough charge him.

    Thats the difference, and its always been my point, regardless of who says it.

    A poor official no matter how bad , even if he ( or she ) gets every single decision wrong will have decisions in favour of both sides. A biased official will have the majority ( or every single one ) against a particular team.
    For that reason I cannot see Fergie's comments as implying the linesman was anything other than biased
  • Cantona07Cantona07 Posts: 56,910
    Forum Member
    Dangerman wrote: »
    A poor official no matter how bad , even if he ( or she ) gets every single decision wrong will have decisions in favour of both sides. A biased official will have the majority ( or every single one ) against a particular team.
    For that reason I cannot see Fergie's comments as implying the linesman was anything other than biased

    If thats the interpretation the yeah, charge him.

    That wasnt why i started the thread but people seem to want an answer from me! :D

    the entire point of why i started the thread was because what Allardyce said so often goes unpunished. Fortunately, the FA now have the good sense to read my posts and rightly charged him.

    Any obvious questioning of the integrity of the referee is a chargeable offence. The FA, of course have a scattergun approach to these things. However, saying an official is poor or had a poor game should never see a manager up on a charge.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,829
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Cantona07 wrote: »
    If thats the interpretation the yeah, charge him.

    That wasnt why i started the thread but people seem to want an answer from me! :D

    the entire point of why i started the thread was because what Allardyce said so often goes unpunished. Fortunately, the FA now have the good sense to read my posts and rightly charged him.

    Any obvious questioning of the integrity of the referee is a chargeable offence. The FA, of course have a scattergun approach to these things. However, saying an official is poor or had a poor game should never see a manager up on a charge.

    Fair enough, it's not how either of us interpret any comments but how the FA do which really matters - Fergie is too smart to openly accuse an official of bias , indeed I can't think of any manager who has done so, it's always an implication which can then be denied.

    I just think it shouldn't matter whether it's Ferguson, Allardyce, Rodgers, Pulis etc. etc. every manager should be treated the same way - not much chance of that ever happening though
  • TheSlothTheSloth Posts: 18,711
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Dangerman wrote: »
    Fair enough, it's not how either of us interpret any comments but how the FA do which really matters - Fergie is too smart to openly accuse an official of bias , indeed I can't think of any manager who has done so, it's always an implication which can then be denied.

    I just think it shouldn't matter whether it's Ferguson, Allardyce, Rodgers, Pulis etc. etc. every manager should be treated the same way - not much chance of that ever happening though

    Where Fergie should have been careful was when he said
    ...but in no way was the the linesman going to give that. He gave them everything else.

    That's suggesting the official's future decisions were going to be biased based on past decisions. People can paint it how they like or play with semantics but it is bringing into question the official's integrity.

    If he simply said the decision was wrong in his opinion, it would have been fine. Instead, inferring the way the decision was going to go based on the perceived bias of previous decisions was not wise.

    Charge him as well and move on.
  • Cantona07Cantona07 Posts: 56,910
    Forum Member
    TheSloth wrote: »
    Where Fergie should have been careful was when he said

    That's suggesting the official's future decisions were going to be biased based on past decisions. People can paint it how they like or play with semantics but it is bringing into question the official's integrity.

    If he simply said the decision was wrong in his opinion, it would have been fine. Instead, inferring the way the decision was going to go based on the perceived bias of previous decisions was not wise.

    Charge him as well and move on.

    Yeah that's the killer line, you're right there. I would say in all honesty that that's a chargeable offence.
  • alanrollinsalanrollins Posts: 3,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Dangerman wrote: »
    I completely agree with your last point though - he is playing with fire !!!!!!

    Indeed he is.
    Cantona07 wrote: »
    Yea-ah sort of.

    I only saw the sky interview today where he said we didnt get a single decision today and the linesman had a shocking game as he did the last time we had him. Thats saying the linesman was shit rather than biased.

    If the interpretation is that the lineman didnt give us a decision because he's a shit linesman then i have no problem with that.

    If hes saying that the linesman didnt give us a single decision because we are Man Utd, then yes charge him by all means.

    Similarly if "Theres no way he was going to give the penalty" is because he got every other decision wrong too then thats fine. If its "Theres no way we were getting the penalty because its Man Utd" then fair enough charge him.

    Thats the difference, and its always been my point, regardless of who says it.

    I posted in the form I did because I knew you would be around to comment and I anticipated a balanced and fair reply.

    Your opinion reads as credible to me, even if I think the same interpretation is fair to take betwen the two.

    I don't like the idea of charging managers in that situation, in the heat of what has just happened after the game. Maybe a manager should have the option of a cooling off period before giving their post match verdict.
  • Cantona07Cantona07 Posts: 56,910
    Forum Member
    Indeed he is.



    I posted in the form I did because I knew you would be around to comment and I anticipated a balanced and fair reply.

    Your opinion reads as credible to me, even if I think the same interpretation is fair to take betwen the two.

    I don't like the idea of charging managers in that situation, in the heat of what has just happened after the game. Maybe a manager should have the option of a cooling off period before giving their post match verdict.

    I do try and be as fair as i can although im obviously going to be biased as ive said before.

    What i would say though is that today we had a stonewall penalty turned down and conceded the equaliser deep into injury time. No neutral fan has mentioned it (and why should they) Can you imagine the storm if that was the other way round and an opposing team had a stonewall penalty turned down and we equalised three minutes into "Fergie Time"?

    This place would have gone into meltdown, with more conspiracy theories than 9/11 and accusations of refs being in our back pocket, but guess what? Its just football, there is no conspiracy, sometimes it goes for you, sometimes against you, today we didnt get that decision but a point was a fair result overall. Spurs are a very good side and ive no complaints.
  • alanrollinsalanrollins Posts: 3,045
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The point of the thread obviously isn't to discuss whether or not United have had a penalty, but as you mention, there is no doubt it should have been.

    That is where as I have said before I understand managers getting angry and I sympathise with their frustrations. It is probably had to rein the frustration in when a microphone is shoved in your face a few minutes after it happens.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,664
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Sam made some ill-advised, ill-timed comments after the WHU/MU match, but if you look back at his comments now, there is no specific accusation of cheating, simply an acknowledgement that getting a decision at OT is often more tricky than perhaps it should be. He maintained in the post-match press conference that he thinks Dowd is a good referee, but got decisions wrong in that particular match. Fergie's statements today, as far as I'm concerned, cannot be taken in any other way than as a direct accusation of cheating against the linesman. Be interesting to see how the FA treat the two situations...
Sign In or Register to comment.