Jump to content

Our ‘Humility Season’ Awaits


Dorset

Recommended Posts

I’ll make no bones about it, to my way of thinking there is a certain fatalistic inevitability surrounding the forthcoming season and the curtain-raiser Community Shield did little to lift the gloom that has descended on me and, more importantly, my assessment of Chelsea’s short-term prospects. For this, Shed-Enders, will go down as the Premier League’s Mea Culpa Moment, a season when realisation suddenly dawns and a light shines on players that have been swearing rather a lot of late, arguing with officials excessively, tackling nastily and generally letting the side down.

As we are all aware, this introspection has been brought into sharp focus by the London Olympics and its all-embracing niceness, but, whilst you would think that football as a whole should bear the brunt of the flak any comparison will surely bring, the immediate point of reference is already there, ready and waiting, after the litigious airing of Premiership dirty line otherwise known [endlessly, in every regurgitating rag across the country] as the John Terry Court Case. No matter his innocence, forget the verbal culpability of others, JT is going to carry the weight of football’s burdensome regret more than most because the Media will ensure that he does. And, along with him, his club will suffer too.

Indeed, it has already started with the Daily Telegraph’s Henry Winter offering up an Olympic paean regaling his readership in a mishmash of mawkish contrition and homage, I kid you not, to assorted Manchester United players. Dear God, preserve us from agenda-driven articles such as this, placed as it was around a photo of JT and Frank arguing with Kevin Friend at Villa Park on Sunday. Anyone surprised that the first major game-changing controversial decision went against us? Thought not - death by ennui and innuendo in equal measure for every Chels fan, yet I fear we must prepare ourselves for a bucketful of the same over the months ahead.

Still, depressing though these thoughts may be, there might just be a light at the end of the tunnel, especially when you consider the recidivist mentality of the other performers in this currently cowed and tawdry tableau, otherwise known as the Best League in the World. Wayne’s isn’t going to stop turning as a result of Olympian ideology, nor will he stop mouthing off at referees having seen us pick up a bronze in the high jump. We may no longer carry a torch for him, but AVB could easily become one lit match away from tinderbox with Arsene aforethought. Forget the missing Cameroonian Olympic squad, Van Persie and Modric are looking for decent homes and you never know what dogs abuse might do to either if their grass isn’t allowed to be greener on another side. Then there’s Scholes, Rio, Anton, De Jong… seconds out on these guys and, if the going gets tough, they are all more than capable of blotting any referees notebook.

And that notebook reference brings us full circle, back to the nub of this particular matter and the tight knot of officialdom that will need to be fair-minded throughout the coming season, carrying their own Olympian flame from ground to ground without setting light to an individual team’s hopes with blatant bias masquerading as human error. Going too far? Not if you put your own bias to one side for a moment and take a look at - http://blog.emiratesstadium.info - specifically the Gunner site’s review of referees for Chelsea’s games last season. And yes, they do research on teams other than their own, having taken on board criticism that they couldn’t be regarded as neutral unless they did - it is why, by referral to the review on us, I’ve no qualms over Kevin Friend’s performance at the weekend, will forever be sceptical about Phil Dowd and always be downright apoplectic when it comes to Chris Foy!

In normal circumstances for the Chels, given a ubiquitous level playing field and the somewhat unlikely general perception of innocence until proven bad boys, a top three place beckons. Sadly, this criteria wont be met and the reality means increasing amounts of frustration against the top sides, with our patience tested to the full over decisions made and reaction to them analysed to an extent far exceeding our rivals. In short, humility is a virtue rarely seen on a football field at the best of times, but it will never be seen in the Premiership until every team is scrutinised in similar fashion and without applying myopic Media pressure, officialdom bias or tribal team prejudice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Always a delight to read your posts, Dorset. How privileged the Shed End is.

I fear you're correct as well. The trouble on Sunday was not that Ivan was sent-off but that it followed a series of fouls which had gone unpunished and City's physicality was being allowed, therefore Ivan was possibly lulled into a false sense of security. The ref was very quick to brandish his card in this instance though it was possibly a red card offence. It changed the game however, and if the ref had done nothing, or brandished a yellow, nobody would have been talking about it afterwards. I felt the ref was too keen, and far too reticent previously.

But listen, last season we went to Old Trafford and were on the receiving end of two poor offside decisions that cost us two goals. They were also given a penalty that never was, which they missed. When Wigan came to town, we had two offside goals given our way, Wigan surrounded the officials and delayed the re-start. An offence which had cost us a fine against QPR. Far from Wigan being punished, the media were all over it, and Wigan received an apology from the referee's chief. An apology, for two bad decisions. Unbelievable.

The subtext was, to any official watching, veer on the side of caution when awarding Chelsea a goal or we will be all over you like a rash. No wonder officials seem to favour opposing sides.

Having said that, we benefited from a big one at Wembley, and lo and behold, the media were all over it the next day ..

And the day after that, and the day after that ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot on Davey, it seems there are two different standards for red/yellow cards one for Chelsea and one for the rest of the league. And when we dare to complain or show frustration with the bias then the hammer really comes down.

Very inlightening post Mr. Dorset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



I fear you're correct as well. The trouble on Sunday was not that Ivan was sent-off but that it followed a series of fouls which had gone unpunished and City's physicality was being allowed, therefore Ivan was possibly lulled into a false sense of security. The ref was very quick to brandish his card in this instance though it was possibly a red card offence. It changed the game however, and if the ref had done nothing, or brandished a yellow, nobody would have been talking about it afterwards. I felt the ref was too keen, and far too reticent previously.

What preceded the tackle doesn't really matter, false sense of security or not, a 2 footed tackle like that in any game will/should be a red card. What would give him a false sense of security would have been him getting away with it and thinking he can do it in future. At least now he should learn his lesson and be thankful for not having to serve a ban for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What preceded the tackle doesn't really matter, false sense of security or not, a 2 footed tackle like that in any game will/should be a red card. What would give him a false sense of security would have been him getting away with it and thinking he can do it in future. At least now he should learn his lesson and be thankful for not having to serve a ban for it.

Afraid I have to agree. Two footed and studs showing is a red. However you cannot have a rule for one, and then another for the rest. What preceded did matter, not on the Ivanovich situation, but as to how the game panned out. There will never be an equal sense of equality when it comes to football, as to a degree, anything can be classed as human error. We can all but hope, some miraculous day, video refereeing, enters the football world.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Success at sport, as in most avenues of life, comes from overcoming the obstacles placed in front of you better than the opposition. However unfair and biased the refs may or may not be, it will rarely be a successful strategy to blame them for any lack of success.

Personally I think soccer lags way behind the times in its use of technology. In Australia we have 3 different professional football codes besides soccer and they all allow for video replay of important decisions where there is doubt. I think that just like in tennis or Gridiron or cricket the team should be able to ask for video replay of say 3 decisions a game. The time cost needs to be set against the cost of poor decisions.

Leaving that aside. Every successful team focuses on what it, as a team and as individuals, needs to do "now" to succeed. Blaming anyone other than yourself for lack of success means that you take your focus off what needs to be done to win the next moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Always a delight to read your posts, Dorset. How privileged the Shed End is.

I fear you're correct as well. The trouble on Sunday was not that Ivan was sent-off but that it followed a series of fouls which had gone unpunished and City's physicality was being allowed, therefore Ivan was possibly lulled into a false sense of security. The ref was very quick to brandish his card in this instance though it was possibly a red card offence. It changed the game however, and if the ref had done nothing, or brandished a yellow, nobody would have been talking about it afterwards. I felt the ref was too keen, and far too reticent previously.

But listen, last season we went to Old Trafford and were on the receiving end of two poor offside decisions that cost us two goals. They were also given a penalty that never was, which they missed. When Wigan came to town, we had two offside goals given our way, Wigan surrounded the officials and delayed the re-start. An offence which had cost us a fine against QPR. Far from Wigan being punished, the media were all over it, and Wigan received an apology from the referee's chief. An apology, for two bad decisions. Unbelievable.

The subtext was, to any official watching, veer on the side of caution when awarding Chelsea a goal or we will be all over you like a rash. No wonder officials seem to favour opposing sides.

Having said that, we benefited from a big one at Wembley, and lo and behold, the media were all over it the next day ..

And the day after that, and the day after that ..

Whilst I'm with you in feeling that we're often hard-done by, I think it's very easy to feel victimised and let it skew your view of things. Most clubs will feel that they've gotten the short end of the stick in terms of refereeing decisions (yes, even manure fans) - just look at the scousers who are adamant that there is an FA conspiracy against their club. The media may be c**ts, but officials, at the end of it all, do try hard to do their job to the best of their ability and remain impartial.*

Put yourself in Kevin Friend's shoes. The game's getting increasingly physical but you've been trying to keep a lid on it as it's only a friendly really, so you err on the side of caution with one or two rough challenges, but want to keep control of the game. Then you see Ivan go in with that challenge. You only get one look at it, and you know it has to be a red. Honestly, when I saw that challenge go in, I said "red" out loud. I saw the studs, and even though I felt that Ivan was in control, I know I would have been SCREAMING at the TV if the challenge were made by Kompany. I don't blame the ref at all.

I also thought Ramires' yellow was going to be a red as, on first viewing, it looked like he'd just gone for Nasri without going for the ball, though replays suggest it wasn't that clear cut.

Interesting stat someone gave me mid-way through last season: we've been awarded most penalties in the PL over the past few years. This doesn't mean that refs favour us, as it's natural that the better sides get more due to having the ball in the opposition box more etc. but I don't think we're as hard-done by the refs as we think, and constantly playing the victim does us no favours but just makes us more bitter and more likely to play the victim until we're Liverpool. It's the media who are c**ts, not the refs, imo.

*with the exception of one Mr. Webb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I hope there isn’t a Shed-Ender on here who will deny me a somewhat selfish return to this topic at the most opportune of moments, but I just couldn’t resist. Sadly, we’ve just witnessed a Super Sunday that encapsulated the joylessness of fixtures to come for us this season against top flight sides in the Premiership, whether it be with or without JT in the team. Much in the same way that Ashley’s evidence was deemed to ’evolve’ by those in authority who passionately wanted it to, so referees like Mark Clattenburg will judge Branna guilty of making contact deliberately, whilst at the same time ruling that Fernando could have ignored his, if he was really intent on taking a path to goal-bound righteousness.

You see, referees like Clattenburg can do this sort of thing because it is, for them, in matches such as ours against United yesterday, justifiable to do so in a sort of ’Good versus Evil’ context - an absolution for the Reformed Character [Young] when up against the Serbian Perpetrator, swiftly followed by a slaying of the Dragon Simulator [Torres] with one massive fell swoop of the red-carding sword of justice on both. Take that, you infidels… and with it a pox on the game in general and your magnificent comeback in particular!

Of course, a sport clearly lacking conclusive argumentative weight either way on the issue of minimal contact tackles (who the hell knows whether it‘s a dive or not for certain?), when guided by officialdom crusading in this manner, often requires those in control (in games not involving Chelsea) to somehow use ’balancing of the books’ diplomacy. Naturally enough, when WE are involved, this requirement can go out the window and being thus reduced to nine men, without raising a boot in anger on both dismissals, is acceptable anytime retribution is thought to be necessary - such as in the midst of a quite marvellous comeback that has all the makings of achieving a complete turnaround.

So, let us forget the official viewpoint, which is that referees, where they can, always attempt to treat the game as a spectacle rather than spoil it with a reckless use of cards, and instead dish out the rough justice regardless. Because it is, when all is said and done, our comeuppance season anyway and nobody is going to ask a pertinent question like when United last suffered the loss of two players to sendings-off in a Premiership season, let alone consecutive ones, are they? And even if they did, who gives a damn what that paranoid Chelsea fan thinks?

 

Footnote: Please excuse my lack of comment on Clattenburg’s alleged use of ‘inappropriate language’ and the racial overtones that appear to be part and parcel of this whole unsavoury matter. I certainly wouldn’t want it thought that I was ignoring what is an extremely important issue and in any event I’m sure that there are those far more qualified than I, such as the PFA, represented by Gordon Taylor, the Kick It Out campaigners, championed by Lord Ousley, Jason Roberts, Stan Collymore, Garth Crooks et al, who will now rush to comfort John Obi Mikel in his hour of need. Juan Mata as well, if he is the other player, must not be left out of a process that has to be seen to be inclusively supportive - Spaniards have feelings too, you know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • 5 months later...

Sadly, it is perhaps ‘timely' to have yet another revisit to this post, Shelley, because I felt exactly the same way as you (expressed on another thread today) when Chris Foy was named as referee for Sunday’s semi-final. And, for those of you who think this might merely be a bit of a flimsy excuse for bumping my original topic for a second time, I would draw your attention to the reference to http://blog.emiratesstadium.info in the penultimate paragraph, more specifically to that website’s extensively compiled evidence damning Chris Foy for his biased performances against us last season, never mind during this one!

With hindsight, it has to be a source of lingering regret that the club did not lodge the strongest of protests regarding Foy immediately after that QPR game, perhaps we might then have at least given Mike Riley something to think about before he [predictably] appointed the Merseyside official to ref a second domestic Cup semi-final involving us. Then again, it is Mike Riley we‘re talking about here, so there is about as much chance of him taking notice of balanced argument and statistics as there is of this current batch of visually impaired whistleblowers awarding a first Premiership penalty against ManU this season, if at all in the foreseeable future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow - horrific and damning evidence against Foy in the article from last season here:

http://blog.emiratesstadium.info/archives/24256

 

Pretty good condemnation by the Arsenal fans who compile the evidence:

 

Well this ref is the perfect match for Stoke. Poor football skills matching poor foul spotting skills maybe? What a very favourable bias for Stoke.  Amazing.

He also seems to have a bit of  a soft spot for United in his referee’s hart.  I tend to see that the worse the football was from some teams (Norwich is an exception it seems) the more favours he gave those teams.

And he certainly has no soft spot in his heart for Chelsea who are the team that got most against them when he was in charge. Also Arsenal is on the bad end of things. As is Swansea, another more football playing team.Teams_vs_PGMOL_ICD_WT_ChrisFoy.png

(That table compares correct v incorrect calls in games he reffed last year)

if we look at the team he favoured we see that those scores are totally out of order in their positive bias in favour of Bolton, Manchester United, Norwich,  QPR and Stoke.

FINAL CONCLUSION

So what did we see in the games we reviewed? A ref that has no real clue about what a foul is or not. And on top of that he is extremely biased for the home teams and extremely biased in favour of teams that try to kick and bit or bend the rules to their benefit.

Based on the games we reviewed we cannot call him a referee that is fit enough to be in the PL.  He looks to be an in-competent home ref with a bit bias in favour of Manchester United and some teams who try to play outside the rules.

I cannot find any reason to keep this ref in the PL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up