Ian Holloway

[HarryCardno]

Does he have a point that bigger teams get the decisions? Or is he being same old Ian Holloway feeling sorry for his small team.

I see where he's coming we sometimes we see it at AG but on other hand we have had our luck most notably Freddie sears phantom goal for palace.

I can't work him out whether he's got a point or whether he's sobbing to the media.

Views?

[GrahamC]

Of course he's right.

How many penalties given against Man U last season? 0

How many red cards? 1, after they'd already won the title.

Does anyone really believe there wasn't a single game last season when they shouldn't have conceded a penalty?

His Tottenham point is spot on, if they play say Hull, they'll get more decisions, when they go to Old Trafford they'll get sod all.

[Cunnyfunt]

Of course he's right.

How many penalties given against Man U last season? 0

How many red cards? 1, after they'd already won the title.

Does anyone really believe there wasn't a single game last season when they shouldn't have conceded a penalty?

His Tottenham point is spot on, if they play say Hull, they'll get more decisions, when they go to Old Trafford they'll get sod all.

They'll get more decisions against Hull etc because they will see more of the ball as opposed to playing Chelsea, Spurs, Utd etc.

[Aizoon]

The last Man Ure player to concede a penalty at Old Trafford parked his Lamborghini on double yellows.

Of course big clubs get the decisions. End of.

[HarryCardno]

See part of me thinks this

I have sometimes come home from AG angry with officials decision making

Just makes me wonder what if the game is even more corrupt than it is

But then I think what Manchester United and SAF have achieved has been impressive

I think if more managers continue to voice their frustrations surely there has got to be some sort investigation.

Or even just educating referees how to deal with, for example, 75000 different opinions at old Trafford to make the correct, fair decision

I suppose we can only ask the referees what they are told to do

[The Right Honourable Les Q]

Of course he's right.

How many penalties given against Man U last season? 0

How many red cards? 1, after they'd already won the title.

Does anyone really believe there wasn't a single game last season when they shouldn't have conceded a penalty?

His Tottenham point is spot on, if they play say Hull, they'll get more decisions, when they go to Old Trafford they'll get sod all.

Graham, c'mon, leave it. It's the law of the jungle, the food chain, Darwinism in action. The big boys have it over the little ones. You can't do anything about it it. All you can do is accept it and let it go. Or get Clive Thomas back in his kit and doing his worst. He could do Swans/Cdiff...stir things up a bit.

[Guest]

Plenty of decisions go against the big clubs too. IMO it's just Holloway being an inarticulate, bad loser like 99% of managers are when they don't get the 3 points. Look how long we endured without a penalty?! Was it bad refereeing? On some occasions yes, but we have been plenty fortunate in the past. It does even itself out I believe. Wasn't there some analysis carried out by a journalist looking into decisions given for and against 'big' clubs within the past 18 months and it showed ultimately that preferential treatment is a fallacy created by the worse sides to excuse their own short-comings?

[Cap flinger]

Moan all he wants it was a stone wall pen, can't take the guy seriously when he is not selective over his rants

[Alex_BCFC]

It might happen on the odd occasion but generally I don't think big clubs are favoured...shouldn't happen at all though.

[Simon79]

Does he have a point that bigger teams get the decisions? Or is he being same old Ian Holloway feeling sorry for his small team.

I see where he's coming we sometimes we see it at AG but on other hand we have had our luck most notably Freddie sears phantom goal for palace.

I can't work him out whether he's got a point or whether he's sobbing to the media.

Views?

Freddie sears goal was disallowed for a foul in the build up. It bloody annoys me hearing this repeated all the time! Or was I dreaming?

[SimplyRed]

These threads always amuse me. Whether or not referees are partisan to the 'big' clubs.

You always get managers (usually of smaller teams) moaning their teams get nothing from referees when playing bigger clubs.

It's a complete load of tosh, particularly if you consider 3 simple points:

• "Bigger" (read "better") teams generally have more possession and consist of more skilful players. It follows that those players are more likely to be fouled.
• Managers (and players) who give their opinion on a controversial decision are unlikely to know what they are talking about. As a former referee, the first thing you are taught on a referees course is that players and managers do NOT know the technicalities of the Laws of the game.
• What possible motive could a referee have for being biased (unless he is a closet fan!)?

IMO, in the Spurs/Palace game, the ref got it right with the tackle - it was a fair shoulder charge - but got it wrong with the pen. How that can be classified as deliberate is beyond me. It seems that Law 12, regarding handball, has migrated somewhat to : if it hits your hand and the ref thinks you had time to get it out of the way of the ball, it's handball. The Law simply states "DELIBERATELY HANDLES THE BALL". In my day, the golden rule was "hand to ball, NOT ball to hand". For me, there's no way on this earth that the Palace player deliberately handled the ball.

However, for me, the biggest controversy of today's games was the 'free kick' which led to Lampard's super-strike. Once again, Torres is caught cheating, tripping over thin air. Disgraceful. The sooner "simulation" becomes a sending-off offence with a 3-game ban, the quicker we'll stamp it out of our game. I hate it.

[HarryCardno]

Freddie sears goal was disallowed for a foul in the build up. It bloody annoys me hearing this repeated all the time! Or was I dreaming?

sorry to annoy you but I was at the game that day and from the reaction of the players and Neil warnock having a pop at us I've always known that goal to be a phantom goal - the official couldn't make out whether it went in or not so decided not to award the goal?

[Mendip City]

It might happen on the odd occasion but generally I don't think big clubs are favoured...shouldn't happen at all though.

I agree, the point about how much of the ball the bigger (better) sides see is also valid.

As for Holloway, he's no different to any other manager - pointing at the ref deflects blame from him/ his team. I'm sure most players make more mistakes, on average, than most refs.... funnily those mistakes don't get much of a mention in post match interviews.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

These threads always amuse me. Whether or not referees are partisan to the 'big' clubs.

You always get managers (usually of smaller teams) moaning their teams get nothing from referees when playing bigger clubs.

It's a complete load of tosh, particularly if you consider 3 simple points:

• "Bigger" (read "better") teams generally have more possession and consist of more skilful players. It follows that those players are more likely to be fouled.
• Managers (and players) who give their opinion on a controversial decision are unlikely to know what they are talking about. As a former referee, the first thing you are taught on a referees course is that players and managers do NOT know the technicalities of the Laws of the game.
• What possible motive could a referee have for being biased (unless he is a closet fan!)?

IMO, in the Spurs/Palace game, the ref got it right with the tackle - it was a fair shoulder charge - but got it wrong with the pen. How that can be classified as deliberate is beyond me. It seems the Law regarding handball has migrated somewhat to : if it hits your hand and the ref think you had time to get it out of the way of the ball, it's handball. In my day, the golden rule was "hand to ball, NOT ball to hand". For me, there's no way on this earth that the Palace player deliberately handled the ball.

However, for me, the biggest controversy of today's games was the 'free kick' which led to Lampard's super-strike. Once again, Torres is caught cheating, tripping over thin air. Disgraceful. The sooner "simlulation" becomes a sending-off offence with a 3-game ban, the quicker we'll stamp it out of our game.

+1, **** all will happen though.

[Lrrr]

Thought Spurs should actually have had another penalty personally, so Holloway should count himself lucky there that Palace got that decision in their favour.

I'm not sure on the penalty given, I understand it has to be deliberate, but he's chosen to put his body there, he has lunged and probably could have had his arm lower if he really tried so has blocked the balls path into the box.

[MarcusX]

Does he have a point that bigger teams get the decisions? Or is he being same old Ian Holloway feeling sorry for his small team.

I see where he's coming we sometimes we see it at AG but on other hand we have had our luck most notably Freddie sears phantom goal for palace.

I can't work him out whether he's got a point or whether he's sobbing to the media.

Views?

Pure bad-losing bollocks. What's changed this season to make Spurs a "big" club worthy of decisions since last year? Have a look how many spurs were awarded last year

[BrizzleRed]

Freddie sears goal was disallowed for a foul in the build up. It bloody annoys me hearing this repeated all the time! Or was I dreaming?

Spot on Simon and no, you weren't dreaming.

Still, if our own fans can't get it right and are still coming up with that old chestnut, what chance is there that anyone outside is going to get it right?

Thanks mainly to Colin and a few parrots who keep repeating that same old misconception, I reckon we're stuck with this one for evermore.

[LondonBristolian]

Spot on Simon and no, you weren't dreaming.

Still, if our own fans can't get it right and are still coming up with that old chestnut, what chance is there that anyone outside is going to get it right?

Thanks mainly to Colin and a few parrots who keep repeating that same old misconception, I reckon we're stuck with this one for evermore.

If I recall correctly, the referee never actually said publicly why the goal was disallowed. Colin Sexstone was the one who said the goal was disallowed for a foul in the build-up but I'm pretty certain this was never confirmed by any official and the Referees' Association apologised to Crystal Palace afterwards, which makes me think it probably was actually an error on the referee's part.

But, as I say, the question as to why the goal was disallowed was never actually cleared up. It's not a misconception per se though and certainly not a case of people 'getting it wrong' by not being convinced that the goal was disallowed for a foul just because our chief exec. said so.

Ps that's not to say that the reaction from Warnock and Jordan wasn't utterly ridiculous and it was appalling the way the club were blamed for what was - if anything - a referee's error.

[luke_bristol]

Ref never apologised for disallowing Hartley's goal either and he was about a yard onside

[Brian Butterfield]

My opinion is lets not discuss what that Bellwhif has to say on anything

[Jordan Tansley]

These threads always amuse me. Whether or not referees are partisan to the 'big' clubs.

You always get managers (usually of smaller teams) moaning their teams get nothing from referees when playing bigger clubs.

It's a complete load of tosh, particularly if you consider 3 simple points:

• "Bigger" (read "better") teams generally have more possession and consist of more skilful players. It follows that those players are more likely to be fouled.
• Managers (and players) who give their opinion on a controversial decision are unlikely to know what they are talking about. As a former referee, the first thing you are taught on a referees course is that players and managers do NOT know the technicalities of the Laws of the game.
• What possible motive could a referee have for being biased (unless he is a closet fan!)?

IMO, in the Spurs/Palace game, the ref got it right with the tackle - it was a fair shoulder charge - but got it wrong with the pen. How that can be classified as deliberate is beyond me. It seems that Law 12, regarding handball, has migrated somewhat to : if it hits your hand and the ref thinks you had time to get it out of the way of the ball, it's handball. The Law simply states "DELIBERATELY HANDLES THE BALL". In my day, the golden rule was "hand to ball, NOT ball to hand". For me, there's no way on this earth that the Palace player deliberately handled the ball.

However, for me, the biggest controversy of today's games was the 'free kick' which led to Lampard's super-strike. Once again, Torres is caught cheating, tripping over thin air. Disgraceful. The sooner "simulation" becomes a sending-off offence with a 3-game ban, the quicker we'll stamp it out of our game. I hate it.

Good post, and the sooner the handball rule is tidied up and consistently enforced the better.

Diving is vile, although we have our own simulators, Cunningham is a bit naughty when he gets kicked and generally does a bit of play acting, but in his time here he's been the victim of some very bad challenges and received no protection so you can kinda see why he would do that.

[The Humble Realist]

Spot on Simon and no, you weren't dreaming.

Still, if our own fans can't get it right and are still coming up with that old chestnut, what chance is there that anyone outside is going to get it right?

Thanks mainly to Colin and a few parrots who keep repeating that same old misconception, I reckon we're stuck with this one for evermore.

Rubbish, what foul ? The ref never gave a foul it was a terrible cover story to cover up the terrible mistake. That goal was 100% ruled out because the ref n lino made a huge balls up! Lino indicated a goal kick, not a foul n the ref gave nothing n was playing on until he was alerted to the lino flag for a goal kick

[Guest]

IMO, in the Spurs/Palace game, the ref got it right with the tackle - it was a fair shoulder charge - but got it wrong with the pen. How that can be classified as deliberate is beyond me. It seems that Law 12, regarding handball, has migrated somewhat to : if it hits your hand and the ref thinks you had time to get it out of the way of the ball, it's handball. The Law simply states "DELIBERATELY HANDLES THE BALL". In my day, the golden rule was "hand to ball, NOT ball to hand". For me, there's no way on this earth that the Palace player deliberately handled the ball.

Personally I thought it was a stonewall penalty. In cases such as these I think there is an 'implied' intent to handle the ball. You know you run the risk of the ball hitting your hand when you have your arms flailing yet you have still positioned yourself like that. If the rule is interpreted solely as a deliberate motion towards the ball to block it there is a huge disadvantage to the attacking team and if I was a defensive coach I would be coaching all players to perform star jumps when they trying to block a shot/cross.

[CheddarReds]

I think he's right, bigger clubs get more decisions their way.

However, the challenge he complained about yesterday IMO wasn't a foul and Palace got the ball back 1 or 2 times before the Spurs goal.

[Simon79]

If I recall correctly, the referee never actually said publicly why the goal was disallowed. Colin Sexstone was the one who said the goal was disallowed for a foul in the build-up but I'm pretty certain this was never confirmed by any official and the Referees' Association apologised to Crystal Palace afterwards, which makes me think it probably was actually an error on the referee's part.

But, as I say, the question as to why the goal was disallowed was never actually cleared up. It's not a misconception per se though and certainly not a case of people 'getting it wrong' by not being convinced that the goal was disallowed for a foul just because our chief exec. said so.

Ps that's not to say that the reaction from Warnock and Jordan wasn't utterly ridiculous and it was appalling the way the club were blamed for what was - if anything - a referee's error.

I seem to recall that GJ said around the time that in the refs report, it said the goal was disallowed due to a foul in the build up. I can't say I ever heard Sextones comments, but definitely GJ. Not that it's that important a few years down the line!

[Welcome To The Jungle]

Of course he's right.

How many penalties given against Man U last season? 0

How many red cards? 1, after they'd already won the title.

Does anyone really believe there wasn't a single game last season when they shouldn't have conceded a penalty?

His Tottenham point is spot on, if they play say Hull, they'll get more decisions, when they go to Old Trafford they'll get sod all.

Manure were the best team last season, simples. If you can find an incident where they should have conceded a pen I'll hold my hands up, but few teams even got to their box

[Aizoon]

If I recall correctly, the referee never actually said publicly why the goal was disallowed. Colin Sexstone was the one who said the goal was disallowed for a foul in the build-up but I'm pretty certain this was never confirmed by any official and the Referees' Association apologised to Crystal Palace afterwards, which makes me think it probably was actually an error on the referee's part.

But, as I say, the question as to why the goal was disallowed was never actually cleared up. It's not a misconception per se though and certainly not a case of people 'getting it wrong' by not being convinced that the goal was disallowed for a foul just because our chief exec. said so.

Ps that's not to say that the reaction from Warnock and Jordan wasn't utterly ridiculous and it was appalling the way the club were blamed for what was - if anything - a referee's error.

Does anyone else think that, if Colin wasn't such a well-known prannock, the ref might have paid more attention to his protests?

Karma, innit?

[SimplyRed]

Personally I thought it was a stonewall penalty. In cases such as these I think there is an 'implied' intent to handle the ball. You know you run the risk of the ball hitting your hand when you have your arms flailing yet you have still positioned yourself like that. If the rule is interpreted solely as a deliberate motion towards the ball to block it there is a huge disadvantage to the attacking team and if I was a defensive coach I would be coaching all players to perform star jumps when they trying to block a shot/cross.

You have interpreted to Handball offence exactly as it seems to be done at the moment. My point is, the Laws of the Game simply state "deliberately handles the ball" - there is no "implied intent".

As for flailing your arms, I'd like to see any player raise his foot as high as the Palace player did in order to try to block the cross, without raising one's arms to balance oneself.

It is similar to the ridiculous elbowing offences that are given. Admittedly, some of them are deliberate, but I've seen many completely innocous clashes resulting in an innocent player being sent off. It is almost impossible to jump up to head the ball without raising your arms to get leverage.

In fact, when I was young enough to play football, I always remember my coach saying to us "when you jump up to head the ball, READ THE PAPER" - in other words, throw your arms and shoulder back to gain height.

It is a sad fact that football, as we know it, is no longer a contact sport. :-(

[marksy]

whatever he say's, he's just gutted because he his team lost. They say the most pressurized job is managing a team fighting relegation from the premiership. Stressful season in store for Holloway !

[BRISTOL86]

Hopefully we'll beat Palarse with a phantom goal and make his head explode