Ref Review: Man Utd lucky; Chelsea & Liverpool hard done by

Date published: Monday 7th December 2015 2:34

Marouane Fellaini: Lucky to escape red card for this challenge on James Tomkins

Marouane Fellaini: Lucky to escape red card for this challenge on James Tomkins

Manchester United were lucky against West Ham, while Chelsea and Liverpool were on the wrong end of bad decisions at the weekend, according to our Ref Review panel.

Refereeing decisions are regularly the source of debate among fans, pundits, players and managers so this season a five-strong TEAMtalk panel will be passing judgement on every red card (or avoidance of one), every penalty and any other major incident every weekend.

We’ll also keep a tally of the major decisions to go for and against each team in an attempt to settle the never-ending debate about whether certain clubs are favoured more than others by Premier League referees.

Week 15

Bastian Schweinsteiger avoiding red card v West Ham: This incident was clearly missed by referee Mark Clattenburg. Had he have seen it, Schweinsteiger would surely have seen red for what appeared to be a very purposeful elbow into the throat of Reid. The likelihood is that he will now be banned retrospectively. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Marouane Fellaini avoiding red card v West Ham: Fellaini could also have seen red during the game when he planted his foot onto the leg of James Tomkins after arriving late for a challenge. This one split the panel, but a three-to-two majority eventually ruled that Fellaini should have gone. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Riyad Mahrez second goal v Swansea City: Some offside calls are so tight that it’s hard to criticise an assistant referee for getting them wrong. This one, however, was clear cut. There was no excuse for not spotting that the Algerian was well offside. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Leon Britton avoiding red card v Leicester City: On a bad day for the officials, Britton was hugely fortunate to escape a red card for a high tackle on N’Golo Kante. Four out of five on the panel felt the Swansea City midfielder should have been sent off. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Watford penalty v Norwich City: Alex Tettey got a fair bit of the ball when challenging Odion Ighalo inside the box, but unfortunately for the Norwich City man he got a whole lot of the Watford striker first. Verdict: Correct decision

Odion Ighalo disallowed goal v Norwich City: This was a much tighter decision than the Mahrez one, but replays showed that Ighalo had just about been kept onside by Robbie Brady. Verdict: Incorrect decision

James McClean avoiding red card v Tottenham: Bizarrely, McClean was bemused to have even been booked for fouling Mousa Dembele, but his challenge was so high and made with such force that all five of our panel felt he should have been shown a straight red card. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Chelsea penalty appeal v Bournemouth: Jose Mourinho, of course, felt that Chelsea should have had a penalty when Diego Costa’s low cross hit the arm of Simon Francis, who had slid in to block the cutback. Nobody on our panel agreed with the Blues boss, however. Verdict: Correct decision

Glenn Murray goal v Chelsea: This was even tighter than the Ighalo incident, but after much debate and several replays our panel eventually decided that Murray was offside – just – when heading in Bournemouth’s winner at Stamford Bridge. Verdict: Incorrect decision

Alberto Moreno disallowed goal v Newcastle United: After crucial three incorrect offside calls on Saturday, there was another one on Sunday when Moreno’s brilliant volley was incorrectly ruled out, with Paul Dummett clearly playing the left-back onside. Verdict: Incorrect decision


For and Against

Team For Against Total For/Against
1. Leicester Nine Three +6
2. Liverpool Seven Two +5
3. Man Utd Four None +4
4. Arsenal Six Three +3
5. Newcastle Five Ttwo +3
6. Man City Six Four +2
7. Tottenham Three One +2
8. Aston Villa One One 0
9. Everton One One 0
10. Sunderland Two Two 0
11. Watford Two Two 0
12. Crystal Palace One Two -1
13. Norwich One Two -1
14. Chelsea Four Six -2
15. Stoke Two Four -2
16. Swansea One Three -2
17. Southampton Two Six -4
18. West Brom One Five -4
19. West Ham One Six -5
20. Bournemouth One Seven -6

Related Articles

Your Say

Home Forums Ref Review: Man Utd lucky; Chelsea & Liverpool hard done by

This topic contains 15 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  Paxman 1 year, 2 months ago.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)
  • Author
  • #727148

    Mark Holmes

    Manchester United were lucky, while Chelsea and Liverpool were on the wrong end of bad decisions at the weekend, say our Ref Review panel.

    [See the full post at: Ref Review: Man Utd lucky; Chelsea & Liverpool hard done by]



    Why am I not surprised that the article supposedly created to monitor the “big” decisions in games has again missed 2 blatant ones during the Liverpool game. Both Coloccini and Anita should have been shown red cards for dangerous challenges. Coloccini’s was a two footed lunge which was downright disgusting and Anita was a studs up challenge over the ball and could have broken Joe Allens ankle. Can we review all the big decisions and not just pick and choose, if this column is going to continue.


    Mark Holmes

    We discussed them, but nobody thought they were worth debating. They weren’t red cards.

    Every fan believes the world is biased against their club. It’s not true.



    So in your honest opinion you think a 2 footed jumping tackle is neither reckless nor dangerous? And the same goes for a studs challenge which goes over the ball and lands on the top of a players ankle. Because that is the criteria for the red card on those types of challenges. And they were both dangerous and reckless and thus worthy of the red card. But why am I debating or surprised from a fan of Ryan Shawcross who uses this type of challenge weekly.



    Homzy – The only one I would say was borderline red was Coloccini, by the letter of the law it was red, as it was two footed with stud showing, and I have seen players get their marching orders for less, I have also seen our players get red for the same, and have had to say fair enough it was a bad challenge. What was really bad about that decision was he didn’t even get a yellow for it. Anita, I thought was dangerous but would have not been happy if a Liverpool player had got a red for it, so no complaints on that one.


    Mark Holmes

    What sensible debating, liverpool_1986! There are four other people on the panel, not just me.

    Paxman, yes, the Colo one was definitely a worse tackle than the Anita one, but nobody even made a case for it being a red. In those instances, we don’t usually include them in thia review – there was a Watford penalty appeal that we left out for the same reasons. It’s certainly not because we hate Liverpool…there’s even a Liverpool fan on the panel!!



    Its interesting that the decision table isn’t all that dis similar to the actual table. Does this go to show that when you’re on top you get more decisions in your favour?



    The two footer from Coloccini was a red all day long. Regardless of whether he got the ball, it was excessive force and out of control. Two footed challenges need to be made an example of, regardless of whether or not the outcome of it is an injury.

    I think Schweinsteiger was lucky to stay on the pitch. I don’t think he’ll get a retrospective ban though, because it looked like Clattenberg saw it as he pulled them apart again. Seemingly if the referee sees it and makes a decision, then the FA take no further action, which is a mental rule, but we’ll benefit from that, because we’re ravaged with injury right now. As usual.

    I disagree on Fellaini though. He was running for the ball and Tomkins made a challenge which went under his studs. It’s easy to say he shouldn’t have done it in slow-mo, but look at it in real time, he’s running at pace to win the ball, there is a minute fraction of a second between Tomkins prodding the ball away and Fellaini trying to control it. Fellaini is a piece of work, but I don’t see malice in that one.


    Mark Holmes

    I went ‘no’ on Fellaini, but like I told Beni last week, I’m nearly always the one voting ‘no’!

    I think the Colo one looked a lot worse on the replay, but either way Liverpool were hard done by with the goal that should have stood.


    Colo’s tackle was nasty but I half agree with Holmesy that it looked worse in the replay. I say half be cause it was still a 2 legged studs in challenge. I think Colo is a nasty piece of work but no harm done to our player so Im not too upset. For once I’m also not that upset about the wrongfully disallowed goal as Liverpool didn’t deserve anything from that match and I think the loss will resonate better. Also I will say Mark, that I don’t think the FA (refs etc) are biased against Liverpool. I know you probably didn’t mean that literally but I have to say it since Jose is eating and drinking on this rubbish and it really irritates me. of course there have been a number of high and medium profile decisions and events that have happened to Liverpool that we’d disagree on but that crying bias week in and out is very much a Mourinho thing that has spread to a reasonable number of theirs fans. Obviously I want to see Liverpool get the results but the meaning behind Klopps “the refs thought we were too sh*t” is going to be worth a lot in the matches to come, if the players are listening.



    I think you should change the criteria, from goals/reds, to “game changing decisions”.
    For example, if you are 3 nil down and you get gifted an (incorrect) penalty and loose 3-1 then the (wrong) decision has not helped.
    However another, actual example, Spurs could have won their game near the end but for a very bad offside decision, This (wrong) decision was not in your review, as the ball was not put in the net (as the whistle had gone).



    You may not be Liverpool haters, but you’re certainly not Liverpool lovers either. If you don’t think Coloccini’s tackle was a red everyone should be happy that you are not referees.


    the specialone

    Homzy – Remember a couple of weeks ago when I came on moaning about how biased this new feature is,here I am again.As usual,TT failed to take a look at the penalty Giroud should have gotten after being clearly fouled and I’m not sure Kaboul I think it was who clearly fouled him not getting even a bit of the ball.TT yet again fail to highlight this.And us getting favourable decisions is not true at all.we should be in negative if I clearly had to study every incident we’ve been involved in.


    Sean the sailor

    Evra time, I’ve only see the felliani challenge once but how many times has he done that? It’s very similiar to colocinis tackle. I thought felliani was very lucky. Didn’t he go in with studs raised and two feet? I could be wrong as I only seen it once.

    No problem with the Moreno goal. We deserved absolutely nothing and the whistle had well gone before it was in the net.



    I cant believe some of these decisions by the officials-some of them are so easily detectable that even Ray Charles would see it-either they are totally dumb, have eyesight problems or for some reason they simply dont feel like making any decisions-bring in technology now, its takes less than a minute to check if a goal scored was legitemate or not shorter time than the players waste with their childish celebrating.



    Is the Special one Moanrinho? Oh there is a conspiracy against us, we are in negative for all the decisions I have seen that I have biasedly looked over with my Arsenal glasses on. Special one, as fans we are incapable of judging these decision from a non-biased point of view, I have seen fans argue about the same tackle one received by their team and one made by their team, and one should have been a red card for the opposition and the other shouldn’t have even been a free kick.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

You must be logged in to reply this topic.