CheLOLsea

[genome]

Don't make it wrong either.

Opinions, interpretations, win some, lose some. Refereeing ability has not changed over the years.

Chelsea are in a dire mess. Only more cash will save their season, at best for a Europa league spot. Probably would of suited them better finishing 3rd in their group and attempting to win that for champions league qualification next year!!

So your logic is - officials making mistakes aren't making mistakes.

Guess that ghost goal Reading scored at Watford wasn't a mistake. The ref got that spot on.

[paultheroyal]

[No Fixed Abode]

Yep you guys are. Imagine showing so much angst about a team that isn't even in your division!

[genome]

I'm not sure angst is the correct term.

Laughter at the expense of, on the other hand... rattLOLed much.

[No Fixed Abode]

I'm not sure angst is the correct term.

Laughter at the expense of, on the other hand...

I stand corrected. But it definitely warrants disrupting your weekend to come str8 on here after a Chelsea defeat.

[genome]

We're usually already on here gr8 m8, perhaps posting on Reading's match threads if we're not at the match ourselves.

[No Fixed Abode]

We're usually already on here gr8 m8, perhaps posting on Reading's match threads if we're not at the match ourselves.

Ah ok - even worse.

[genome]

I have no idea how you've come to that conclusion, but fill your boots. You shouldn't care what people think of Chelsea so much, why does it bother you?

[No Fixed Abode]

I have no idea how you've come to that conclusion, but fill your boots. You shouldn't care what people think of Chelsea so much, why does it bother you?

I love it tbf. If we were no good people wouldn't talk about us.

[Silver Fox]

That's been disproved by this thread of late surely?

[Zammo]

I have no idea how you've come to that conclusion, but fill your boots. You shouldn't care what people think of Chelsea so much, why does it bother you?

I love it tbf. If we were no good people wouldn't talk about us.

[No Fixed Abode]

That's been disproved by this thread of late surely?

You might have a point. But as there's no ViLOLOLa thread etc etc........you don't.

[Ian Royal]

But the FA set a precedent with the Gerrard decision as they came out and explained why it was given.

Much like the FA rescinding Gabriel;s red for kicking out at Costa. They've now put themselves in a situation whereby they can't send anyone off for the same offence. And if the ref does so - it has to be rescinded.......

You can't just pick any single incident that's happened and say it sets a precedent so all decisions should go the same way.

You may as well say that the referee awarding a goal to Reading for missing by two yards sets a precedent so every shot that goes within two yards of the goal should be given as a goal.

You need to understand that decisions aren't black and white, there's a sliding scale involving subjectivity. The closer you get to the center point, the the decision making is going to vary as different people will have marginally different interpretations and/or views of similar (but not identical) incidents.

If you want to develop AI and robotics sufficient to guarantee the exact same standards applied to all matches, then give it ago. Until then, get over that some decisions aren't clear as to what the right call should be after the fact and with multiple angles and slow-mo, let alone in an instant, live at full speed.

Get worked up about glaring mistakes, not marginal judgment calls. Oh and while you're at it, direct you're ire at the real culprits for your team's shitness. The players, fans, owner and management.

[Nameless]

There is absolutely no way you will ever have a situation where myopic, ignorant, deluded people will ever agree with every decision made by referees. It's just not going to happen.
But it will also always be the case that referees will make fewer mistakes than players.

By the way you have to laugh at the idea that 'similar' incidents should be dealt with identically. Of course they shouldn't. If identical incidents happened you might have a case, but every event needs to be judged on it's own merits not by comparing it with some random event that in hindsight might seem to a desperate manager or an internet troll to be a bit the same.

[No Fixed Abode]

But it was good to see everyone on Fletch and Sav yesterday agree the Remy incident should have been a penalty.

All except Howard Webb. And that people, is where the problem lies.

[Froomes]

But it was good to see everyone on Fletch and Sav yesterday agree the Remy incident should have been a penalty.

All except Howard Webb. And that people, is where the problem lies.

Correct, if people are agreeing with Robbie Savage then we do have a very big problem indeed.

[Royal Rother]

But it was good to see everyone on Fletch and Sav yesterday agree the Remy incident should have been a penalty.

All except Howard Webb. And that people, is where the problem lies.

Yep. Pundits who know fcuk all about refereeing are causing a big problem by undermining the officials with their half-baked opinions and frame by frame dissection of incidents.

Embarrassing that they should even be allowed air-time to express an opinion when it has become totally clear over many years that not one of them has any more than rudimentary knowledge of the Laws of The Game.

The fact that the best referee this country has produced for a couple of decades agreed with the decision should hopefully be enough for everyone to shut the fcuk up about it and take their balls home.

That's what you were saying right?

[No Fixed Abode]

No need for that essay.

"I don't like Chelsea" would have sufficed.

[Royal Rother]

I don't like pundits.

[sandman]

Thought Savage's opinion didn't count?