Victim FC

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

Given that the clown ref literally had 2 minutes of watching a slow motion replay of Adama’s shirt getting pulled off his back, got instructed by his colleague that he had initially got it wrong and it was a foul, yet STILL chose not to give it, I genuinely think it’s either the single worst decision in the history of football or he deliberately cheated us.

It really is that simple. If anything, I don’t think we are complaining enough, it’s a truly staggering piece of refereeing.

Agreed, I don't think we're complaining enough either. @WalsallWolf the creator of this thread is delusional.

 

[Big Saft Kid]

Footballers are very superstitious

He was talking about fans

 

[Sussex Wolf]

He was talking about fans

Fans are also very superstitious!

 

[Big Saft Kid]

Fans are also very superstitious!

I know. I was pointing out the misquotation.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Fans are also very superstitious!

Not to mention gamblers. Blame anything but common sense for your loses!

 

[lobodelsur]

Interesting article sheds some light on how referees go about their business.

The impossible job: inside the world of Premier League referees

Players, pundits and fans complain bitterly that referees are getting worse each season – but is that fair?

www.theguardian.com

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

We are the victim of failure from refs to use VAR correctly they don’t even look at half of the decisions against us so why do we have VAR??

Conspiracy before our own eyes that’s true

 

[Fenrir_]

Interesting article sheds some light on how referees go about their business.

The impossible job: inside the world of Premier League referees

Players, pundits and fans complain bitterly that referees are getting worse each season – but is that fair?

www.theguardian.com

Biggest concern from that for me is we could have a mini-Marriner reffing us in a few years!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Interesting article sheds some light on how referees go about their business.

The impossible job: inside the world of Premier League referees

Players, pundits and fans complain bitterly that referees are getting worse each season – but is that fair?

www.theguardian.com

It’s an interesting read, and does provide some good insights. It does however come across, as the author alludes to late in the article, as one sympathetic to referees, and their challenges. Kind of a counter view to the one many fans, myself included, hold. Fair enough, to an extent, that’s good journalism and a useful counter perspective.

I’ll share a couple of observations from the article of interest for our MolMix debate on referees and our games.

One is that referees do give soft decisions to try to level up in a game when they recognise when they’ve made a mistake. Clattenburg is cited in the Champions League for this, but it’s clearly broader in scope as explained. In one sense, in terms of fairness, that’s good. In others, less so. Clattenburg actually says he did it not for fairness, but because of the players - “They would be easier to control after that.”. There is another example where a ref doesn’t give any of four potential penalties because he didn’t want to be fooled, but acknowledges after the game, that he should have given at least one of them. All this supports the criticism that referees are routinely making subjective decisions, sometimes influenced by their personal bias, and sometimes in order to manage the game rather than in the interests of fairness or impartiality.

The other observation, is that the article describes how the PGMOL refs get together every couple of weeks for training, and are under constant performance review, which has financial and other impacts. Again, that’s a double edged sword. It’s great from a professional development perspective, and I’m happy to see it. But it also provides regular opportunities for referees to air their grievances about clubs, players and managers informally amongst colleagues. As they are also punished for mistakes raised by clubs and confirmed by the independent review, it also provides a reason or incentive why referees might hold or develop grudges or bias against certain teams, players or managers.

None of this proves that any referees are biased in our games, but it does support the arguments that they are influenced by biases or preconceived opinions, do make subjective decisions, do have financial and other repercussions from clubs complaining, and do have regular opportunities to share their opinions and grievances amongst their peers.

 

[Contrarian]

How about we settle it objectively rather than spinning in subjective circles? How do Big 6 clubs behave in similar circumstances?

When Man U were a goal down in injury time and conceded a goal despite a blatant foul in the build up, how did they react?

When Liverpool had a player sent off early in a match for running towards the ref, how did they react?

When Arsenal were denied a cup tie winning goal for no visible reason , then found VAR not working, how did they react?

The catch is that, AFAIK, none of these incidents ever happened to Big 6 clubs. I wonder if that means anything?

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Biggest concern from that for me is we could have a mini-Marriner reffing us in a few years!

That is a great article. Full of little nuggets, Mike Dean worked in a chicken abattoir, Coady trains little kids to boo refs, many more! There are important things too though. I didn't realise assessors don't attend games any more, the fact that a yellow card might not be given to avoid angering players and then refs wonder why players are aggressive to them on the pitch, knowing you've made a mistake and then 'evening it up' (we know it happens but surprising to see it acknowledged).

There are a couple of fundamentals for me though. It is true that the biggest difficultly is that a lot of decisions are quite subjective. VAR has sought to irradicate that when in fact it just adds a different subjective opinion, no more likely to be correct. This is why Webb correctly (if we must have it at all) wants a high bar, indeed a clear error, not a misjudgement. Raul at Newcastle was a clear error, Semedo wasn't. The other thing is this idea that we need to accept the idea that because decisions are subjective they can't be consistent between games, that might be the refs view (I know @Jonzy54 has expressed that opinion) and I'm sure it's true, but it absolutely has to be the aim, read any forum and it's 'but what about x in game y'. When Mitrovic gets 8 games and Fernades is let off, what's that all about?

 

[Oldgold Wolfcub]

TOM COLLOMOSSE: VAR must start getting the big calls right

TOM COLLOMOSSE AT MOLINEUX: In the most dramatic Premier League relegation battle for many years, there is huge pressure on the officials to get the big decisions right.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I fully take on board his comment on that VAR was supposed to correct mistakes but this is impossible unless they change one major factor. Whilst you have the ruling a clear and obvious mistake it is biased. It should be judged purley on fact. For example was there a pull on the short? If a pull on the shirt is not within the rules the game it is a foul and should be a black and white decision. Because refs let it go a lot of the time does not make it right if questioned. It is not up to a man watching a tv to judge whether it was enough to be able to stay on his feet or fall over or even lose the ball.
Scrap the clear and obvious rule and then we can move on to look at other areas to improve the impartial way of looking at how we administer the game.
Another in my opinion is that players and managers hould be able to, with justification, be able to criticise a referees performance. If it is not justified it will make that accuser look stupid. if a referee can answer the claim it will add to their creditbility. Referees should be accountable.
Even if Webb apologises after every match it still means nothing if we get relegated because of poor decisions.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

How about we settle it objectively rather than spinning in subjective circles? How do Big 6 clubs behave in similar circumstances?

When Man U were a goal down in injury time and conceded a goal despite a blatant foul in the build up, how did they react?

When Liverpool had a player sent off early in a match for running towards the ref, how did they react?

When Arsenal were denied a cup tie winning goal for no visible reason , then found VAR not working, how did they react?

The catch is that, AFAIK, none of these incidents ever happened to Big 6 clubs. I wonder if that means anything?

Fair points, but when Newcastle had a ridiculous offside given against them to disallow a winner at Forest how did they react?

 

[Oldgold Wolfcub]

They will give any excuse to back the officials.

Even if the official backs into the player!!!

 

[Wolf316]

Fair points, but when Newcastle had a ridiculous offside given against them to disallow a winner at Forest how did they react?

They did but they also got one in their favour a week earlier with the Raul incident. How often do we get one in our favour?

 

[Fenrir_]

They did but they also got one in their favour a week earlier with the Raul incident. How often do we get one in our favour?

This is getting to be the thing for me. If it was genuinely incompetence and poor refereeing as to why we weren't getting these blatant decisions, surely we'd have had one or two controversial ones go for us? But they've all gone against us, I can't think of a controversial decision that has gone in our favour all season

 

[ewarwoowar]

They did but they also got one in their favour a week earlier with the Raul incident. How often do we get one in our favour?

as per your last sentence people say don`t worry it will even itself out,yeah like hell it will

 

[ombyman]

Have we hit the hat trick of apologies from Webb yet?

Wonder if we could exchange them for triple points like Tesco club card vouchers.

It could be an interesting table to see in the future:

2022/2023 Premier League

16 Leeds 34 points
17 Forest 33 points
-------------------
18 Wolves 30 points (but Howard Webb was sorry)
19 Southampton 28 points
20 Bournemouth 26 points

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Although i dont like the "victim culture" narrative,it is becoming a farce when on a weekly basis we see wrong decisions go against us
Webb has apologised on 3 previous occasions personally to JL, probably 4 by now, in the last few weeks
How can that be justified on any level?
Those decisions have cost us points and goals all crucial this season,i suppose we will get another apology when we are relegated by a point or on goal difference
You can understand JL getting angry and it effecting the team to a degree
We all say well these things even out over the season,well sorry this season they certainly are not in our case

 

[SingleMalt]

This is getting to be the thing for me. If it was genuinely incompetence and poor refereeing as to why we weren't getting these blatant decisions, surely we'd have had one or two controversial ones go for us? But they've all gone against us, I can't think of a controversial decision that has gone in our favour all season

That’s not how the law of averages works though. Things don’t even themselves out over a short period, but will require many, many iterations. Far more than you’d have over a single season, which is why the argument is entirely misleading and shouldn’t be given the time of day.

My opinion on this is there’s no conspiracy, just **** refs, bad luck in getting more than our fair share of **** refs and a fair bit of big team bias. That bias stems from weak refs wanting to avoid scrutiny from pundits in the media if they ever screw over a big side.

 

[Oldgold Wolfcub]

This is getting to be the thing for me. If it was genuinely incompetence and poor refereeing as to why we weren't getting these blatant decisions, surely we'd have had one or two controversial ones go for us? But they've all gone against us, I can't think of a controversial decision that has gone in our favour all season

And to those who think by pointing these things out instead of just sleeping on it........................JUst becasue you might be paranoid doesn't mean they aint after you.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

I also think it’s an easy cop out to look at the team and say they should be doing more.

Of course that’s right to a degree but this is the hardest league in the world. Like 12/13 other teams, we can go down, so if something as hugely influential as a referee is continuously against you, we’re obviously not going to be good enough to stay up.

It’s pretty easy to find 5/6 extra points for this team due to refereeing decisions (playing Arsenal & Newcastle a goal up and against ten men for a start).

And, if we had those points we’d basically be safe.

I believe there’s a failure to grasp how tight and competitive this league actually is. Fine margins decide most games and regularly having massive decisions go against you obviously has an impact.

Again, this does not mean players don’t deserve criticism, or the manager. But even now it would be perfectly fair to say we’re in a relegation battle because of officials.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

They did but they also got one in their favour a week earlier with the Raul incident. How often do we get one in our favour?

I can remember a few incidents when I expected VAR to intervene to our detriment but it didn’t, but I’m struggling to remember any recent incidents where we got a surprising intervention or decision in our favour. Some will argue that Dawson getting a yellow at the weekend was one, but as I said in reply to Hot Fuss, I didn’t think that was “lucky” because there are plenty of examples where similar tackles end up with red, yellow, or nothing at all ie it’s just inconsistent. As an extreme example, Pogba on Neves a couple of years ago wasn’t even deemed a foul and directly led to a goal which VAR didn’t overturn.

Pogba tackle on Neves ahead of Man United's controversial winner called 'leg-breaker' by Souness

Paul Pogba’s tackle on Ruben Neves ahead of Manchester United’s controversial winning goal against Wolves has been called a ‘leg-breaker’ by Graeme Souness. The Frenchman we…

talksport.com

 

[The Wolf In The North]

Of all the calls that have gone against us, including the nonsense with the disallowed cup goal and the non-penalty against Newcastle, the one that still rankles with me is the Lemina sending off.

The spurious 'third player' booking and 'aggressive running' excuses hold no water, as it's been clearly demonstrated ever since that such things haven't been adhered to again. It's not even inconsistency - it was a blatant one-time-only ruling, specific to that player and team and situation. And that's wrong.

If anything comes out of all this, it's that in this incident the referee took a decision upon himself that directly impacted us alone, because other clubs haven't had the same criteria applied, and that requires an investigation and answer.

 

[Jefe]

I can remember a few incidents when I expected VAR to intervene to our detriment but it didn’t, but I’m struggling to remember any recent incidents where we got a surprising intervention or decision in our favour. Some will argue that Dawson getting a yellow at the weekend was one, but as I said in reply to Hot Fuss, I didn’t think that was “lucky” because there are plenty of examples where similar tackles end up with red, yellow, or nothing at all ie it’s just inconsistent. As an extreme example, Pogba on Neves a couple of years ago wasn’t even deemed a foul and directly led to a goal which VAR didn’t overturn.

Pogba tackle on Neves ahead of Man United's controversial winner called 'leg-breaker' by Souness

Paul Pogba’s tackle on Ruben Neves ahead of Manchester United’s controversial winning goal against Wolves has been called a ‘leg-breaker’ by Graeme Souness. The Frenchman we…

talksport.com

I don't think Dawson's was a sending off offence. Challenges above the ankle like Jonny's, and deliberate stamps on grounded opponents, are reds. Dawson's challenge wasn't really either of those. Nor do I think his tussle with Bamford shortly after was worthy of a second yellow, though I understand why the gaffer hooked him.

There have been one or two where I was surprised VAR let us off the hook, but they really are few and far between. You get Newcastle fans pointing to Nunes' shirt pull in the box back in August, and salty Gooners on Twitter still unhappy that Luiz was sent off, dating all the way back to February 2021! (NVM that they should have had a man sent off this season as well for the last-man foul on Guedes...)

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

FA rules Wolves bear ‘significantly higher responsibility’ for Forest brawl

The Football Association has released written reasons for charges brought against Nottingham Forest and Wolves over their Carabao Cup quarter-final brawl, with the Molineux club deemed to bear “significantly higher responsibility”. Forest beat Wolves on penalties in the game on January 11, but...

theathletic.com

MGW celebrates in front of our fans. He then has a go at Cunha for daring to copy his celebration. The Forest players then celebrate in front of the away end despite having the rest of the stadium to do so.

But, it's Wolves who bear 'significantly higher responsibility' for the issues that night.

Obviously, I don't really care as it was just handbags, but that's quite the conclusion to reach from that night I must say.

 

[Ned]

If Nunes gets banned it confirms it’s all bent

Depends on the ref's report. If it's for foul and abusive language then nothing will get overturned. If it's for violent conduct then it already should have been rescinded.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

FA rules Wolves bear ‘significantly higher responsibility’ for Forest brawl

The Football Association has released written reasons for charges brought against Nottingham Forest and Wolves over their Carabao Cup quarter-final brawl, with the Molineux club deemed to bear “significantly higher responsibility”. Forest beat Wolves on penalties in the game on January 11, but...

theathletic.com

MGW celebrates in front of our fans. He then has a go at Cunha for daring to copy his celebration. The Forest players then celebrate in front of the away end despite having the rest of the stadium to do so.

But, it's Wolves who bear 'significantly higher responsibility' for the issues that night.

Obviously, I don't really care as it was just handbags, but that's quite the conclusion to reach from that night I must say.

What a surprise .. that isn’t. To coin a phrase “Am I bothered?”

 

[SuperGran]

FA rules Wolves bear ‘significantly higher responsibility’ for Forest brawl

The Football Association has released written reasons for charges brought against Nottingham Forest and Wolves over their Carabao Cup quarter-final brawl, with the Molineux club deemed to bear “significantly higher responsibility”. Forest beat Wolves on penalties in the game on January 11, but...

theathletic.com

MGW celebrates in front of our fans. He then has a go at Cunha for daring to copy his celebration. The Forest players then celebrate in front of the away end despite having the rest of the stadium to do so.

But, it's Wolves who bear 'significantly higher responsibility' for the issues that night.

Obviously, I don't really care as it was just handbags, but that's quite the conclusion to reach from that night I must say.

If MGW doesn’t do that celebration that melee at end doesn’t happen.
It was his fault he should have had a red card for threatening our players.

 

[Bill S Preston Esq.]

We are the victim of failure from refs to use VAR correctly they don’t even look at half of the decisions against us so why do we have VAR??

Conspiracy before our own eyes that’s true

Liverpool score a borderline offside goal and it's a three second check.

Wolves score and the PGMOL have got the surveyors in with lasers on tripods for six hours.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Depends on the ref's report. If it's for foul and abusive language then nothing will get overturned. If it's for violent conduct then it already should have been rescinded.

I really hope they don't allow this to get twisted.

When Nunes is sent off you can clearly see him saying 'I did not push' about four or five times. So he has clearly been told that this offence is for pushing the linesman.

 

[Ned]

Given that the clown ref literally had 2 minutes of watching a slow motion replay of Adama’s shirt getting pulled off his back, got instructed by his colleague that he had initially got it wrong and it was a foul, yet STILL chose not to give it, I genuinely think it’s either the single worst decision in the history of football or he deliberately cheated us.

It really is that simple. If anything, I don’t think we are complaining enough, it’s a truly staggering piece of refereeing.

Bang on. The ref clearly had the hump with us and our players and at the moment he went over to the screen was aware of our bench losing their heads on the sideline. He probably had the assistant in his ear saying what he thought had happened, I think Tony Roberts went mad and another coach too... He went over to the screen thinking "I'm not overturning **** for these ****ers" and kept with his on field decision despite watching a clear foul over and over again.

 

[SuperGran]

What a surprise .. that isn’t. To coin a phrase “Am I bothered?”

I’m ****ing fuming

 

[Ned]

I really hope they don't allow this to get twisted.

When Nunes is sent off you can clearly see him saying 'I did not push' about four or five times. So he has clearly been told that this offence is for pushing the linesman.

Same but I bet it gets twisted so the PGMOL don't have to admit yet another error from yet another awful official.

 

[Jefe]

FA rules Wolves bear ‘significantly higher responsibility’ for Forest brawl

The Football Association has released written reasons for charges brought against Nottingham Forest and Wolves over their Carabao Cup quarter-final brawl, with the Molineux club deemed to bear “significantly higher responsibility”. Forest beat Wolves on penalties in the game on January 11, but...

theathletic.com

MGW celebrates in front of our fans. He then has a go at Cunha for daring to copy his celebration. The Forest players then celebrate in front of the away end despite having the rest of the stadium to do so.

But, it's Wolves who bear 'significantly higher responsibility' for the issues that night.

Obviously, I don't really care as it was just handbags, but that's quite the conclusion to reach from that night I must say.

Hilarious. Gibbs-White sticks his fingers in his ears right in front of the Wolves fans, and the FA adjudge this to be "innocuous".
I'm sure he was just dealing with some obstinate wax.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Bang on. The ref clearly had the hump with us and our players and at the moment he went over to the screen was aware of our bench losing their heads on the sideline. He probably had the assistant in his ear saying what he thought had happened, I think Tony Roberts went mad and another coach too... He went over to the screen thinking "I'm not overturning **** for these ****ers" and kept with his on field decision despite watching a clear foul over and over again.

I noticed when he went over you can hear 'cheat, cheat, cheat' from those in the ground as well.

He definitely let his poor hurt feelings get in the way of him doing his actual job. It's disgusting, even if it 99% doesn't impact the result.

 

[JOSWolf]

Hilarious. Gibbs-White sticks his fingers in his ears right in front of the Wolves fans, and the FA adjudge this to be "innocuous".
I'm sure he was just dealing with some obstinate wax.

Which idiots decided this? Should be named and shamed.

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

IMO opinion here the only constant in any game is the incopetence and inconsistency of Refs and VAR. Not just for us for all teams in all games - although becasue we are invested in Wolves obviously the decisions 'affect' us more (same for other teams too though I suppose).

Watching Forest - Newcastle game the other night, not withstanding the absolutely mind bending decsion to disallow the Newcastle goal for offisde, there were at least 3 tackles deserved of a yellow in the first 15 mins from Forest. Ayew particularly, from behind and scissored the Newcastle player. Yates committed foul after foul after foul, with nothing. It was all in the matchday thread and watching it (as a nuetral) I sat thinking if I was a Newcastle fan i'd be ****ing livid.

Some of the decisions we have had recently are bordering on ridiculous, and I can understand why people are now getting to the point where they are feeling 'victimised' and I can understand that. That is human nature.

Are they singling us out - probably not - but it does certainly 'feel' that way, lots of odd calls against us in a short space of time. If we'd had those decisons months apart, it probably wouldnt feel like victimisation - we'd just put it down to them being crap.

Last thing that I have noted after Saturday, and reaching for the tin foil as it does seem odd - is the removal of the footage showing the AR walking back into Nunes - it has been removed 'by the copyright holder'.
Now I have looked to try and find this footage again, and I cannot see it anywhere in the highlight packages available. In some they dont even shown the Nunes red card - just ends after the goal.

So that footage WAS available, because it was posted on Twitter - but now it is nowhere to be seen after being removed by the copyright holder. I'm not one generally for conspiracy theories, but I have invested in a new roll of tin foil for some new headgear.

 

[lobodelsur]

I can't think of a controversial decision that has gone in our favour all season

The only one I can think of, off-hand, is Sa delivering a right-hook to a Leeds attacker on the first day of the season.

 

[Golden Arrow]

Of all the calls that have gone against us, including the nonsense with the disallowed cup goal and the non-penalty against Newcastle, the one that still rankles with me is the Lemina sending off.

The spurious 'third player' booking and 'aggressive running' excuses hold no water, as it's been clearly demonstrated ever since that such things haven't been adhered to again. It's not even inconsistency - it was a blatant one-time-only ruling, specific to that player and team and situation. And that's wrong.

If anything comes out of all this, it's that in this incident the referee took a decision upon himself that directly impacted us alone, because other clubs haven't had the same criteria applied, and that requires an investigation and answer.

Yes, "the third player" and "aggressive running" doesn't appear to have been carried through to other games of Association Football from what I've seen.
Perhaps clause 1.8.3 of Section 2.2.1 states it only applies to teams who have the letters "Wolverhampton" in their club name.