We had a penalty that I believe was rightly ruled out because there was very little contact. However, it is rather strange that it was ruled out because many other penalties are given for that same situation.
Do you really have to contradict yourself? Their is nothing like "a rightly ruled out penalty." Was there contact? No. Havertz should've been booked for diving!
Some would argue that he was the last line and should have been sent off.
Those 'some' clearly knows nothing about officiating rules then.
Celebrate your win, don't dabble wrongly into officiating decisions out of emotion.
All I'm saying is that how many others have you seen get booked in that same situation that Havertz was in? Shouldn't officiating be consistent?
Officiating will never be consistent because referees are human beings operating under different conditions. Immediately Havertz hit the deck I concluded it was a penalty. After further reviews, it was glaring no contact was made. What's the penalty for a player who went to ground in the box without contact? Yellow card for simulation.
I remember telling the guy sitting next to me that if Ashley Young was in that position, he will stretch out his leg to tangle with that of Bissaka. Truth is Havertz expected a tackle, and he hit the deck hoping the tackle will come. He should've been carded for simulation but the referee was still smarting from having to overturn his wrong decision that he forgot about the right process.
My publication was pointing out the fact that officiating is inconsistent. Rules are supposed to be enforced consistently but in football they aren't.
That's also why I pointed out the hypocrisy in Man United fans of all people whining about referee decisions. I was further pointing out that if anything, the officiating in this match was consistent for both teams because they equally have a bone to pick about something that officials did.
The rules are clear, but they are also technical. That means interpretation will be different based on referee's technical competence. That's why some referees in their 30s are yet to officiate an EPL match while Michael Oliver did it in his twenties.
What's with the hypocrisy about Man United fans and referee decisions? I'm a United fans and I always tell people referees make mistakes. Even at the time when everyone was making noise about United being favoured, every single match being played in EPL back then had one referee error or the other. Was Ferguson's United playing those games too? But it's comfortable to claim United were more favoured because they were above others back then, just like it was comfortable for selling teams to quote United higher price for players because they used to be richer.
Like I always said, it will eventually even out. Every team will get their airy moments with the referee. So also, they will also get lucky at one point or the other.
For the match against Arsenal, the referee did well. The fact that I did not remember who the referee was shows how excellent his performance was. Referees are not supposed to dominate a match, if they do something definitely went wrong. I'll definitely remember his name if he made a glaring error. Arsenal won because it's their day, and I was actually surprised because I expected them to win more convincingly.