Full confidence in our professional refs

whupathman

Moojor said:

I read that wrong.
We need 8. Goal disallowed that should have been given.

sad to say Moojor wins, as this is now 5 in a row, what rubbish can we expect at the Manure game

OutcastLondoner

Referee will rule-out our final penalty in the penalty shoot-out for offside.

whupathman

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/ref-review-the-incorrect-decisions-from-week-33
We head the power rankings but are now -11 on the rubbish calls from the official's rankings.

NEoldiron

That is way beyond a joke now. If I were the DDs I would be lobbying the FA about this obvious prejudice against us. ;angry

Expat_Hammer

OutcastLondoner said:

Referee will rule-out our final penalty in the penalty shoot-out for offside.

;lol

grey_til_I_dye

or encroachment...

Slaven_Cups_His_Beard

;lol

Moojor

whupathman said:

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/ref-review-the-incorrect-decisions-from-week-33
We head the power rankings but are now -11 on the rubbish calls from the official's rankings.

While I agree with Grey, that being subjective this isn't total proof about how we are getting unfairly treated by refs. Reading through the possible contentious decisions and how they have been viewed, I personally feel that it gives a good indication of how we have been treated.

Reading their views of our game, I personally agree with all of them. The offside of Ozil, being such a close call that you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.

What would be nice would be consistency, the reason I have heard that Lanzini's got ruled offside was because there were two attackers making it hard for the linesman to judge. Well if he isn't sure then it shouldn't be ruled offside.

Also for Payets goal and the Lanzini penalty call. Carroll has both hands on the defender and pulls him back. Fine, thats a free kick. No goal, but when Lanzini then gets yanked down with both hands on him, then that's a free kick and a penalty.

IronHerb

But there is consistency. We consistently get the rough end of the stick, no matter who the ref is. ;hmm

whupathman

There is always a danger of being too emotive due to the passion for the club to make a reasoned judgement which is why, as a scientist, I look for independent evidence. This does not suggest any conspiracy against us but shows we get very bad calls and far too many of them.

Moojor

whupathman said:

There is always a danger of being too emotive due to the passion for the club to make a reasoned judgement which is why, as a scientist, I look for independent evidence. This does not suggest any conspiracy against us but shows we get very bad calls and far too many of them.

I agree with this, I would be interested to see the opponents in which most of our "bad calls" have come against. I personally think that there is still a fear to make a big call against the so called "top 6".

Slaven_Cups_His_Beard

From December last season, starting with Songs disallowed goal until april we saw dodgy decisions. The same has happened again but this is worse.

When thinking how dodgy it really was, I try and look at how much of a stink would there be had the goal been given.

jay_in_cpt

Next 3 games appointed refs:
Man Utd - Roger East ;doh
Leicester - Jonathan Moss
Watford - Mike Dean

Btw for any conspiracy theory hunters!.....

Ref Anthony Taylor who will ref the FA cup semi final between Everton and us or Man Utd has been given the Man Utd game this weekend v Villa , so could ref them 2 consecutive Saturdays ...( they do have a game in between but still a strange one )...unless they believe they have no chance against us
;ok

eskimoking

Has anyone read Durham's article? I've been forced into sending the below to the editor of the Daily Mail in response. Obviously nothing will happen, but needed to complain.


Good morning,

Can the mail please stop letting Adrian Durham write for the paper. He writes uneducated and biased tripe.

His recent article about Slaven Bilic is clearly anti-West Ham and every decision he cites as going West Ham's way is subjective. He neglects to define the difference between decisions based on interpretation and those on fact. He says Bilic should provide evidence, well he is a hypocrite.

West Ham have been given 3 red cards this season which have later been rescinded. Fact, not subjective.

The Lanzini disallowed goal this weekend, which prompted the article was two yards onside. Fact, not subjective.

Against Everton and Chelsea, penalties were awarded where the challenge was outside the box. Fact, not subjective.

Perhaps Mr Durham should not argue facts with opinion and discredit a man and club at the highest echelons of the game. Perhaps his bias is better served away from a major national newspaper.

If I was at West Ham, I would be suing the newspaper for slander.

Lukerz

Eski - I stopped reading after the first line, which was already inaccurate when he claimed Bilic had spoken about refereeing decisions 'relentlessly' and 'week after week'.

This is a line from the article:

Bilic is on a mission to make sure any blame for a failure from his team to make the top four this season is laid firmly at the door of referees.

Which is absolute guff.

Lukerz

We'll have to get the slizzster onto it...

IronHerb

So he prepared the bait and it was taken hook, line and sinker ;lol

Lukerz

Tbf, the general message of his article I agree with. We are not targeted by refs. The decisions that have gone against us have been incorrect, but understandable at the time without replays and we have had plenty go our way too over the course of the season.

But he is a WUM and even when attempting to produce a decent analytical piece he makes a mess of it by slipping back into his "wind them up", child mindset.

SuzanneClaret

Adrian Dullard should not be taken seriously.

MrsGrey

The Daily Mail, you say? ;hmm

grey_til_I_dye

SuzanneClaret said:

Adrian Dullard should not be taken seriously.

Fixed it for ya!

With people like Durham it's caveat lector for me. You pretty much know he's going to try to be controversial, so why put yourself through the experience?

OutcastLondoner

eskimoking said:

Has anyone read Durham's article? I've been forced into sending the below to the editor of the Daily Mail in response. Obviously nothing will happen, but needed to complain.


Good morning,

Can the mail please stop... the paper

Fixed it ;biggrin

Moojor

To be fair, Slav is foreign and it is the Daily Mail. Not doubt he stole the job from some hard working English manager and is really only here to steal all our money and he is probably claiming the dole, with 900 children back in his own country who we are paying child support for.
We probably gave him a 40 bedroom house as well, to home the rest of his family that we are also paying child support for.

grey_til_I_dye

Mooj

And a car; don't forget the car.

NEoldiron

Grey, which I believe is a very tasty Ferrari, based on the one I saw with SB on the reg.plate after the Citeh game ;biggrin

eskimoking

It's just my attempt to get him sacked...

MrsGrey

;nonono Bilic?

grey_til_I_dye

eski

Fair play, but I think it might have the reverse effect; since he's a controversialist, getting up people's noses is presumably one indicator of his effectiveness.

eskimoking

Perhaps, but here's hoping there's someone honest at the top that eventually gets fed up.

Moojor

I think one thing the Daily Mail wont be concerned about is whether what they are reporting is actually backed up by facts.

I think they would be more concerned if you pointed out that he hadn't made up a load of rubbish and was actually reporting factually correct information.