Alex Ferguson charged by the FA for improper conduct

Luxz0rz wrote:Don't think he should get punished.....free speech and all.

The FA bumlick the referees.....they can get their respect when they get the decisions right and no time sooner.

The-Reporter wrote:Fergie will recieve a 2 game touchline ban or if he appeals it a long-term one just heard on the radio.

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Plan D wrote:Can't put me finger on it, but there was a game at Old Trafford quite a couple of years ago, when a ref (Forgot his name) contreversially awarded a pen against Man Utd. This ref never referee'd another game at Old Trafford after that.

That just a coincidence is it?

Scott wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott wrote:What I find funny about all this is the blatant hypocrisy demonstrated by Ferguson and the Man United supporters on here.

If any team in the League gets obvious preferential treatment, it's Man United. No one can dispute that. Over the years, Man United have had dodgy decisions in their favour. So many, that it's actually impossible to list them off the top of my head. I mean, this season alone they already should have had Neville sent off twice, Rooney sent off once. They've had a penalty given for a Berbatov dive in a very important match. They saw Gerrard send off in the same match that Rafael Da Silva received no punishment for doing the same thing.

That's just this season. And believe you me, there will be more to come this season. There will be more dodgy decisions to help Man United on their way. Book-mark this post if you want. It happens every season, without fail.

Every other set of fans in the League can see how glaringly obvious it is. The only set of supporters who deny this are the Man United fans, blinded by their love for the team.

Anyway, the point of this post was, Man United get dodgy decisions going their way MORE than enough. So quit whining and bitching when a couple FINALLY go against you. It's actually a rarity that bad decisions go against Man United, so be grateful for goodness' sake.

I remember clearly how most of the Mancs on here laughed about getting that penalty against Liverpool in the FA Cup. You saw the funny side then didn't you?

It's not true though, unless you've actually sat down and watched every game with the critical, cooly unbiased eye of a man dedicated to finding out if any teams holds an advantage from the FA. You're just basing it on your own silly perceptions, what you read in the media, and what you hear in the pub. The reason United seem to get more decisions is that we are the biggest team in the country by far, and every decision relating to our club is magnified a thousand times.

Then again, maybe I've got it wrong, I certainly haven't looked at all the evidence. If you're making this claim that United are favoured by the authorities, I think that is a pretty extraordinary claim, and you shouldn't be making it without having some pretty substantial evidence. More than just 'everyone thinks it'.

If the FA truly favoured United though, I feel the following things would not have happened

• Ferguson being pulled up here
  
• Rio Ferdinand's 8 month ban
  
• Patrice Evra's 4 game ban for an incident taking place in a warm-down
  
• Rio Ferdinand's 3 game ban for an off the ball incident, and an additional ban for a 'frivolous appeal'
  
• Roy Keane being punished twice for the same offence - an overly aggressive tackle on Haaland where he thought the ball was there
  
• Ferguson receiving touch line bans and fines for criticising referees

Among other things. There really is no reason for the FA to favour United, other than paranoia from football fans with low IQs.

That's because they actually deserved those bans. If no punishment was given for those events, it would've been atrocious. FA aren't going to embarrass themselves like that.

I wasn't even talking about the FA anyway, I was talking about decisions that happen during the match.

Give me one team in this League that has had more dodgy decisions than Man United this season, go on.

Man United list of Dodgy decisions in 2010/11

Neville should have been sent off. Twice.
Rooney should have been sent off against Wigan.
Penalty via a Berbatov dive given in important FA Cup match vs Liverpool.
Gerrard sent off in the same match that Rafael Da Silva received no punishment for the same kind of incident.

+ more that I can't remember right now.

Seriously, give me a team that has had more than that this season ...

Plan D wrote:Can't put me finger on it, but there was a game at Old Trafford quite a couple of years ago, when a ref (Forgot his name) contreversially awarded a pen against Man Utd. This ref never referee'd another game at Old Trafford after that.

That just a coincidence is it?

"Very early in my Premier League career I sent Roy Keane off and incurred Fergie's wrath for doing so," said Winter

"In the course of the next two seasons I did not get a single
Manchester United game, even though I refereed every other Premier
League club at least five or six times. I was not afraid to stand up to him and I think he knew that.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Scott wrote:What I find funny about all this is the blatant hypocrisy demonstrated by Ferguson and the Man United supporters on here.

If any team in the League gets obvious preferential treatment, it's Man United. No one can dispute that. Over the years, Man United have had dodgy decisions in their favour. So many, that it's actually impossible to list them off the top of my head. I mean, this season alone they already should have had Neville sent off twice, Rooney sent off once. They've had a penalty given for a Berbatov dive in a very important match. They saw Gerrard send off in the same match that Rafael Da Silva received no punishment for doing the same thing.

That's just this season. And believe you me, there will be more to come this season. There will be more dodgy decisions to help Man United on their way. Book-mark this post if you want. It happens every season, without fail.

Every other set of fans in the League can see how glaringly obvious it is. The only set of supporters who deny this are the Man United fans, blinded by their love for the team.

Anyway, the point of this post was, Man United get dodgy decisions going their way MORE than enough. So quit whining and bitching when a couple FINALLY go against you. It's actually a rarity that bad decisions go against Man United, so be grateful for goodness' sake.

I remember clearly how most of the Mancs on here laughed about getting that penalty against Liverpool in the FA Cup. You saw the funny side then didn't you?

It's not true though, unless you've actually sat down and watched every game with the critical, cooly unbiased eye of a man dedicated to finding out if any teams holds an advantage from the FA. You're just basing it on your own silly perceptions, what you read in the media, and what you hear in the pub. The reason United seem to get more decisions is that we are the biggest team in the country by far, and every decision relating to our club is magnified a thousand times.

Then again, maybe I've got it wrong, I certainly haven't looked at all the evidence. If you're making this claim that United are favoured by the authorities, I think that is a pretty extraordinary claim, and you shouldn't be making it without having some pretty substantial evidence. More than just 'everyone thinks it'.

If the FA truly favoured United though, I feel the following things would not have happened

• Ferguson being pulled up here
  
• Rio Ferdinand's 8 month ban
  
• Patrice Evra's 4 game ban for an incident taking place in a warm-down
  
• Rio Ferdinand's 3 game ban for an off the ball incident, and an additional ban for a 'frivolous appeal'
  
• Roy Keane being punished twice for the same offence - an overly aggressive tackle on Haaland where he thought the ball was there
  
• Ferguson receiving touch line bans and fines for criticising referees

Among other things. There really is no reason for the FA to favour United, other than paranoia from football fans with low IQs.

That's because they actually deserved those bans. If no punishment was given for those events, it would've been atrocious. FA aren't going to embarrass themselves like that.

I wasn't even talking about the FA anyway, I was talking about decisions that happen during the match.

Give me one team in this League that has had more dodgy decisions than Man United this season, go on.

Man United list of Dodgy decisions in 2010/11

Neville should have been sent off. Twice.
Rooney should have been sent off against Wigan.
Penalty via a Berbatov dive given in important FA Cup match vs Liverpool.
Gerrard sent off in the same match that Rafael Da Silva received no punishment for the same kind of incident.

+ more that I can't remember right now.

Seriously, give me a team that has had more than that this season ...

Neville should have been sent off one against West Brom, against Stoke he committed only one bookable offence, admittedly he was booked for the wrong incident.
The referee was happy with his decision in the Wigan game, we can't dispute that
The Berbatov penalty was a penalty
Gerrard was rightly sent off

So that's 1 decision that's wrongly been given against United, maybe two. In the very same WBA game United should have had a penalty and didn't get one. Chelsea on Tuesday had a fortuitous penalty, should have had a man sent off, and Terry could easily have given away a penalty, that's 3 in one game. The reality is that every team gets some favourable decisions, if you've got an agenda against a particular club (which you clearly have) and when you're talking with people who hate Man Utd (likely given your location) you're bound to get a distorted view of it.

You're just wrong and too biased to realise it. If you're actually right, prove it, not with stupid little anecdotes and debatable decisions, with hard facts and statistics. I think though, if there really was a systemic bias towards United, someone would have noticed it other than people who hate Man Utd.

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

In the second half there were no injury delays and the medical team never went on the pitch once.

There was no time wasting by either side.

There was three substitutions in total in the 2nd half. So now we are on one minute 30 seconds (30 seconds per sub).

There were four goals in the 2nd half, (before the Owen stoppage time goal and the sub in stoppage time). That's another 30 seconds for each of the four goals.
That's a total of 2 minutes following the goals. So now with subs and goals taken into account the total is 3 minutes 30 seconds.

So where did the initial four minutes come from? I make it three minutes 30 seconds. Within the given 4 minutes, there was a substitution in the 93rd minute. An additional 30 seconds for the sub in extra time leads me to a grand total of four minutes 30 seconds.
If my mathematics are correct the referee should have blown the final whistle to signal the end of the game after 94 mins 30 seconds.

Micheal Owen's winning goal was timed at 95 mins 28 secs, almost exactly one minute after the match should have finished.

Referee Atkinson I assume then takes into account the excessive goal celebrations, following Owen's goal, (which is only applied by him and is based solely on his own opinion on events and remains questionable).

However allowing a full minute following Owen's goal he eventually blows the final whistle after 96 mins 58 seconds.......almost a full 3 minutes after the originally allotted 4 mins of added time.

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Ben wrote:

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

In the second half there were no injury delays and the medical team never went on the pitch once.

There was no time wasting by either side.

There was three substitutions in total in the 2nd half. So now we are on one minute 30 seconds (30 seconds per sub).

There were four goals in the 2nd half, (before the Owen stoppage time goal and the sub in stoppage time). That's another 30 seconds for each of the four goals.
That's a total of 2 minutes following the goals. So now with subs and goals taken into account the total is 3 minutes 30 seconds.

So where did the initial four minutes come from? I make it three minutes 30 seconds. Within the given 4 minutes, there was a substitution in the 93rd minute. An additional 30 seconds for the sub in extra time leads me to a grand total of four minutes 30 seconds.
If my mathematics are correct the referee should have blown the final whistle to signal the end of the game after 94 mins 30 seconds.

Micheal Owen's winning goal was timed at 95 mins 28 secs, almost exactly one minute after the match should have finished.

Referee Atkinson I assume then takes into account the excessive goal celebrations, following Owen's goal, (which is only applied by him and is based solely on his own opinion on events and remains questionable).

However allowing a full minute following Owen's goal he eventually blows the final whistle after 96 mins 58 seconds.......almost a full 3 minutes after the originally allotted 4 mins of added time.

Also, only season I've got stats for but in 07/08 when Man Utd were winning 178.29 seconds of injury time were added and 254.5 seconds when they were not.

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

Sean wrote:United Fans will NEVER admit they got preferential treatment, if the FA came out and said it they'd still argue against it.

Sean wrote:United Fans will NEVER admit they got preferential treatment, if the FA came out and said it they'd still argue against it.

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

Ben wrote:Wasn't Atkinson the referee that gave 3 minutes of extra injury time last season in the 4-3 against Man City?

Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

So you're defence is 'Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago'.

Im not the one trying to prove this by the way, its just that what you said about 7 minutes being added on was wrong.

kyro7 wrote:

Sean wrote:United Fans will NEVER admit they got preferential treatment, if the FA came out and said it they'd still argue against it.

You just said something you can't prove so who cares.

I've already said we get more than our fair share of decisions.

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:Pretty sure it wasn't that much..

That was proven on the same day that whoever the ref was, was right to to play 7 minutes added.

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Yeah and it was also proven bullshit. Nowhere, in the history of refereeing has someone added on time for 'celebrations' except for that game.

Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

How else do you prove that you lot get special treatment? Predicting the future?

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

How else do you prove that you lot get special treatment? Predicting the future?

Well there's points where we appear to have "special treatment", and there's also enough points were we clearly haven't. So you can't prove it.

Danny wrote:

Dan wrote:

Danny wrote:

JMB_94 wrote:

Danny wrote:Oh no

So you agree that he wasn't right to play 7 minutes added time?

No, thought he got it pretty much right. Couldn't care less, it was over a year ago. You're all so desperate to "prove" we basically own the FA you're bringing up rubbish from the past?

How else do you prove that you lot get special treatment? Predicting the future?

Well there's points where we appear to have "special treatment", and there's also enough points were we clearly haven't. So you can't prove it.