Last night saw another 3 bookings to add to the total of 64 this season. Even though Fulham are a footballing rather than physical side somehow we have reached this inglorious milestone.
Look at the officiating we get - Anthony Taylor a referee on a power trip, booking Fulham players for the slightest transgression while allowing violent conduct by James Toney to go unpunished. Taylor, the worst referee in football in my opinion, went out of his way to dramatically trounce across the pitch to warn Marco SIlva about protesting too much.
I was anticipating he would send off Alexander Mitrovich so he would miss the Arsenal game next, forecasting he would book him for arguing as he did, to set up the second yellow. Mitro however was street-wise and did not give Taylor any chance to censor him further. But in effect, it castrated Mitrovich who was reduced to a ghost of himself while Brentford could play their physical pressure game unhindered and unlike Fulham received no cautions.
The penalty was also predictable as he wanted to cancel Fulham's goal from a rare free kick he did award to us. It was one of the softest penalties this season. According to the media Anthony Taylor was a ref that was allowing more physical contact to be made - remember Graeme Souness' remarks it was "a man's game" after a Taylor officiated encounter. But yesterday saw 29 fouls given, 17 fouls against Fulham. He killed the match for the travelling and viewing Fulham fans alike with his whistle-happy interference. it was in plain words, RUBBISH!
Taylor is the classic example of what is wrong with Sky's Premier League - they want to completely control it and dictate which teams are given preferencial treatment, rather than let the best teams rise to the top. Whatever your opinions about the World Cup, it was refereed far more fairly as the refs were told to make the tournament important as a viewing spectacle, so plenty of 'shocks' were allowed which kept the competition exciting. This would never be permitted in the EPL. They put certain clubs first so teams like Fulham are given very little chance to break through which we see manager Silva getting more and more frustrated with.
One expect's more of the same next Sunday as Arsenal are rewarded for diving at every instance, and Arteta can do anything on the touchline or even on the pitch, that Marco Silva cannot.
Come on Nick, Brentford were at home and clearly the better team and there is no doubt a feature of our play is that we are getting stuck in and the yellow cards come as no surprise. Let us not try to blame the ref. for our defeat.
If Mitro was fit and in form, Palhina was playing and Cairney was available you probably wouldn't even notice the ref.
Quote from: filham on March 07, 2023, 05:40:30 PM
Come on Nick, Brentford were at home and clearly the better team and there is no doubt a feature of our play is that we are getting stuck in and the yellow cards come as no surprise. Let us not try to blame the ref. for our defeat.
If Mitro was fit and in form, Palhina was playing and Cairney was available you probably wouldn't even notice the ref.
I do catch your drift but Taylor was so diabolically bad even Marco had to smile and even chuckle to himself when the ref walked away having finished his 'you will shut up' monologue. Taylor's get out of gaol card for not booking Lukic a second time was that the Brentford player hadn't got the ball under control but the real embarrassment for him was his failure to send Toney off for an out of control and ultimately reckless challenge. Taylor had made his decision before the tackle had even been completed - watch a replay if you can and see Taylor's instinctive reaction as Toney goes in - it was just one of several poor decisions he made in the night.
Palhinha would have been playing but for a hatful of undeserved yellows of which I would estimate at least half should not have been given because the top six get away with similar fouls without cards every week via these exact same officials. A level playing field would be rather nice for a change and might alter how the table might look somewhat.
While there is no disputing the result or the poor performance. I think it is fair to say the referee wasn't great. But I don't want to sound like a Brighton fan when they lost to us and blamed everything on the referee. However the penalty, half we been given it, would have been a bit embarrassing. The referee and his bluster did appear to be one for the cameras. But then the refereeing, VAR and the rest continue to make the best league in the World a victim of amateur officials who half the time look confused as what the rules are.
If Mitro goes down like that against Arsenal, he'll be booked for simulation rather than being given a penalty.
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
(https://i.ibb.co/PckwkrF/Fqotp7n-WYAErj-BF.jpg)
Found this on twitter. Didn't even see that Lukic got a nasty scar on his leg too from the Toney foul (you can actually see in the video that he hits his leg before his head). I hope he gets a retrospective ban, but I very much doubt it.
Does anyone know if refs can see "highlights" of their performance at half time?
Quote from: onecupsoon on March 07, 2023, 07:46:02 PM
Does anyone know if refs can see "highlights" of their performance at half time?
Doubt it as most have selective vision or are as blind as bats
I was going to post before the match that Taylor will try to send off Mitrovich or Leno so as to affect the upcoming Arsenal game. I envisioned the scenario of Mitro being booked for something he said, which nobody could refute. Then any minor foul Taylor instantly send him off. Leno would be the other 'asset' Fulham would be diminished further to the absense of Paulinha. Fortunately Mitro was wise but so hamstrung he faded almost completely thereafter. Still keeping him on puts the fear of God among our enemies.
Football refs are so protected from scrutiny the public cannot hear what they discuss with VAR, unlike the honest ones in rugby who truly want to get to the correct decision, and hearing them communicate enhances the entertainment, rather than the lengthy blank silence patrons get in football.
The Beautiful game has turned Ugly.
We need to teach our players the secret Masonic handshake so they can introduce themselves to the referee before the game and guarantee they will not get a card. It is such a simple thing to do, unfortunately we seem to fail to learn this every time it happens, which is approaching a million times this season already. We need to employ Nick as our anti-booking guru, he would spot this sort of trick a mile off, and take appropriate action.
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
The performance of Mr Taylor was abismal some of the cards issued were a joke and why The bookies friend wasn't sent of for his uncontrolled lunge at Lukic is totally beyond belief!!!
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
To say that someone is overachieving can simply be a referal to previous and/or common expectations. I believe very few (people here included) thought that Fulham would be in with a decent chance for a European spot with less than a third of the season to go. Thus, overachieving compared to expectations. To say someone is overachieving doesn't have to mean that the achievment is not deserved, but rather that it is contrary (in a positive way) to expectations. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the word at all in relation to Fulham this season. It means we are doing very well.
Quote from: Sting of the North on March 08, 2023, 09:08:57 AM
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
To say that someone is overachieving can simply be a referal to previous and/or common expectations. I believe very few (people here included) thought that Fulham would be in with a decent chance for a European spot with less than a third of the season to go. Thus, overachieving compared to expectations. To say someone is overachieving doesn't have to mean that the achievment is not deserved, but rather that it is contrary (in a positive way) to expectations. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the word at all in relation to Fulham this season. It means we are doing very well.
Ok, but I still don't like it.
It's a semantic point, but I would say we're exceeding expectations rather than overachieving.
The bookings point is an interesting one as we receive far more yellow cards than you'd expect at face value. A simplistic yellow cards to fouls ratio shows we get a yellow card every 4.36 fouls, whereas for comparision Chelsea are at 5.48, Brentford 6.48 and Man City 7.55. We are top (or bottom, I guess) of this particular table. Of course this does not adjust for the seriousness of the fouls amongst many other variables, but it does indicate that referees are more likely to punish our players on top of the original foul than they are other teams. Case in point being Palhinha's yellow card for excessive celebration, something many other players have escaped any consequences for.
From a semantics perspective I would say that "exceeding expectations" is a basic definition of the word "overachieve" and thus there is no real difference. At least that is my understanding.
As for cards, I haven't watched too much of other teams regularly but I have to say that we have had a seemingly disproportionate amount of unwarranted yellow cards. So many times our players have been carded for basically nothing. Sometimes actually nothing. Palhinha shouldn't be close to a suspension, for example.
Looks like the stats back up this perception somewhat.
Good post Nick. I was appalled by the ref and was left very annoyed at the end of it. I am still annoyed this morning. I dislike many of the referees but most of all VAR which must affect their performances.
Brentford's anti football really got to me. Wimbledon reincarnated??
Quote from: SerbianLad on March 07, 2023, 07:35:32 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/PckwkrF/Fqotp7n-WYAErj-BF.jpg)
Found this on twitter. Didn't even see that Lukic got a nasty scar on his leg too from the Toney foul (you can actually see in the video that he hits his leg before his head). I hope he gets a retrospective ban, but I very much doubt it.
That picture ... Taylor is warning Lukic .. one more challenge like that, recklessly attacking Toney with your leg and head, and you'll be in the book young man.
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 09:11:35 AM
Quote from: Sting of the North on March 08, 2023, 09:08:57 AM
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
To say that someone is overachieving can simply be a referal to previous and/or common expectations. I believe very few (people here included) thought that Fulham would be in with a decent chance for a European spot with less than a third of the season to go. Thus, overachieving compared to expectations. To say someone is overachieving doesn't have to mean that the achievment is not deserved, but rather that it is contrary (in a positive way) to expectations. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the word at all in relation to Fulham this season. It means we are doing very well.
Ok, but I still don't like it.
It was definitely meant as a compliment.
082.gif
Quote from: HammerHead on March 08, 2023, 05:41:04 PM
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 09:11:35 AM
Quote from: Sting of the North on March 08, 2023, 09:08:57 AM
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
To say that someone is overachieving can simply be a referal to previous and/or common expectations. I believe very few (people here included) thought that Fulham would be in with a decent chance for a European spot with less than a third of the season to go. Thus, overachieving compared to expectations. To say someone is overachieving doesn't have to mean that the achievment is not deserved, but rather that it is contrary (in a positive way) to expectations. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the word at all in relation to Fulham this season. It means we are doing very well.
Ok, but I still don't like it.
It was definitely meant as a compliment.
082.gif
Sky just showed Bruno Fernandez antics against Liverpool, how on earth did they allow him to kick opponents, push the Lino & feign injury?
The ref was inconsistent last night. Toney's challenge has a nasty outcome, but looked unintentional where as lukic knew what he was doing. Overall I felt we got away with avoiding another suspension and ultimately the better team won.
To suggest that referees are biased against Fulham is nonsense. They are simply inconsistent and VAR is imperfect. No one has an agenda against us and I doubt Anthony Taylor plotted to help Brentford out ahead of our game with him.
Quote from: Sting of the North on March 08, 2023, 09:08:57 AM
Quote from: alfie on March 08, 2023, 07:15:27 AM
Quote from: HammerHead on March 07, 2023, 07:12:18 PM
Fulham is one of the most hard working teams in the league,
Yes you play physical but not dirty, it's a badge of honor and the reason you're overachieving.
Overachieving? We are where we are with the points we have earned. Why is it that a team have got some good players and a good coach in place they are overachieving.
To say that someone is overachieving can simply be a referal to previous and/or common expectations. I believe very few (people here included) thought that Fulham would be in with a decent chance for a European spot with less than a third of the season to go. Thus, overachieving compared to expectations. To say someone is overachieving doesn't have to mean that the achievment is not deserved, but rather that it is contrary (in a positive way) to expectations. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the word at all in relation to Fulham this season. It means we are doing very well.
But 'overachieving' sort of implies that we're playing above the level we are normally capable of, and thus will not keep the level we've achieved up - so next season, or even this, if we start to struggle, people could say 'Well, they overachieved before, this is really their level.'
'Overachieving' has an implicit criticism in it, I think.
David Coote will be the ref for Arsenal game. He was the referee in the Chelsea win. I remember him from the Championship as well, can't remember which games though, some might not have even involved Fulham, but I always thought he was a decent ref. Hopefully he'll do a better job than the supposed best referee in the league Anthony Taylor, although that shouldn't be hard.
Quote from: Ruislip White on March 08, 2023, 08:24:08 PM
To suggest that referees are biased against Fulham is nonsense.
I agree.
The whole notion that referees are much poorer at officiating now than in the past seems to me to be based on a false premise: the evidence provided by television cameras.
Had Monday night's game taken place, say, 50 years ago, most on this forum would have known little, if anything, about Mr Taylor's standard of refereeing. I was at the game and, along with every other of our supporters, didn't know whether the award of a penalty was the correct decision because it happened suddenly in a busy goalmouth at the far end of the pitch. The only opinion I was able to form was that it didn't look clear cut. Nor did I know whether Toney's challenge deserved a red card because, again, it wasn't clear to see exactly what contact the Brentford striker made with Lukic in an incident that happened in a split-second. All I could think at the time was that it looked as if it might have been dangerous play.
And 50 years ago, with no television cameras present, that would have been it. Those of us in attendance would have come away from the game with question marks next to those two decisions and never known whether the referee was right or wrong. And the overwhelming majority who were not at the match would have had even less of an idea still - their only clue perhaps coming from a brief mention in a radio report or a line in the newspapers, neither of which would have stirred the emotions anywhere near as much as having the opportunity (as we all now have) to view these key moments many times from different angles in both real-time speed and slow motion.
Having refereed at lower levels myself, I have no doubt Taylor wanted to make the correct decisions (because that is all I, and every other referee I ever spoke with, wanted to do). I have no doubt he had no intention whatsoever to be biased against either team. However, even officials who are competent enough to referee at the highest level will (just like the high-level players they share the field with) not always be at their best. As far as I am concerned, to suggest Taylor was purposely seeking to favour Brentford is utter rubbish.
Ruislip White and Arthur make valuable points about integrity and then spoil it with the words 'nonsense and utter rubbish' based upon their beliefs about what they think they know about themselves and others.
As Richard Feynman said the easiest person in the world to fool is yourself. I have also refereed but I didn't last very long because my heart got me into trouble which was not why I became a referee.
Integrity cannot be manufactured or described as a want or a wish - neutrality is either heartfelt and automatically processed like skillfully shifting through the gears of a vehicle with careful clutch control or it is a feigned desire to appear to be so doing. We know these fallibities about human nature and the fact some people really did at one time believe witches could be fairly tried and proven guilty by the means they used and, at other times, true religious beliefs could be extracted by inquisition, torture, and execution. Were these people for real or just fooling themselves? A referee is no different - they are just another fallible human being.
In football did declining standards of regulation lead to VAR or was its arrival just a desire to look to be doing something that looked like an improvement? Box ticking takes ever more victims because it doesn't measure reality other than for lazy people with lazy minds. Only the subject - in this case Anthony Taylor - can know if their integrity is intact. I am humble enough to say it looked to me as if he was trying to prove something and that means he was acting and not being honest. I am probably wrong but that is what makes me human just like Mr Taylor gifted with the means to utter nonsense and talk rubbish.
Quote from: toshes mate on March 09, 2023, 05:11:19 AM
Ruislip White and Arthur make valuable points about integrity and then spoil it with the words 'nonsense and utter rubbish' based upon their beliefs about what they think they know about themselves and others.
As Richard Feynman said the easiest person in the world to fool is yourself. I have also refereed but I didn't last very long because my heart got me into trouble which was not why I became a referee.
Integrity cannot be manufactured or described as a want or a wish - neutrality is either heartfelt and automatically processed like skillfully shifting through the gears of a vehicle with careful clutch control or it is a feigned desire to appear to be so doing. We know these fallibities about human nature and the fact some people really did at one time believe witches could be fairly tried and proven guilty by the means they used and, at other times, true religious beliefs could be extracted by inquisition, torture, and execution. Were these people for real or just fooling themselves? A referee is no different - they are just another fallible human being.
In football did declining standards of regulation lead to VAR or was its arrival just a desire to look to be doing something that looked like an improvement? Box ticking takes ever more victims because it doesn't measure reality other than for lazy people with lazy minds. Only the subject - in this case Anthony Taylor - can know if their integrity is intact. I am humble enough to say it looked to me as if he was trying to prove something and that means he was acting and not being honest. I am probably wrong but that is what makes me human just like Mr Taylor gifted with the means to utter nonsense and talk rubbish.
That is an impressively written post! Bravo
Quote from: toshes mate on March 09, 2023, 05:11:19 AM
Ruislip White and Arthur make valuable points about integrity and then spoil it with the words 'nonsense and utter rubbish' based upon their beliefs about what they think they know about themselves and others.
My reference to integrity was to opine that I had 'no doubt he (Taylor) had no intention whatsoever to be biased against either team'. What, therefore, is illogical about a corollary that brands as 'utter rubbish' the suggestion 'Taylor was purposely seeking to favour Brentford'? Nothing.
For sure, I have expressed an opinion in unusually strong terms. I have done so because I am confident of it and, thus, am prepared to appear gullible if it transpires Taylor was not impartial. But an opinion is all that it is.
I see you hold a different view: 'I am humble enough to say it looked to me as if he was trying to prove something and that means he was acting and not being honest.'
I am struggling as to how the inclusion of the words 'it looked to me' demonstrate humility. They simply confirm it's your opinion. Now I might consider myself to be many things if I were accusing a referee of dishonesty, but 'humble' wouldn't be one of them, especially if I then qualified my assessment with the admission I am 'probably wrong'. (Although I guess such an instantaneous step backwards does endorse Feynman's maxim.)
By all means, post your second and third paragraphs and let the forum make of them what it will, but your opening paragraph is wasted.
Quote from: Arthur on March 09, 2023, 05:05:44 PM
Quote from: toshes mate on March 09, 2023, 05:11:19 AM
Ruislip White and Arthur make valuable points about integrity and then spoil it with the words 'nonsense and utter rubbish' based upon their beliefs about what they think they know about themselves and others.
My reference to integrity was to opine that I had 'no doubt he (Taylor) had no intention whatsoever to be biased against either team'. What, therefore, is illogical about a corollary that brands as 'utter rubbish' the suggestion 'Taylor was purposely seeking to favour Brentford'? Nothing.
For sure, I have expressed an opinion in unusually strong terms. I have done so because I am confident of it and, thus, am prepared to appear gullible if it transpires Taylor was not impartial. But an opinion is all that it is.
I see you hold a different view: 'I am humble enough to say it looked to me as if he was trying to prove something and that means he was acting and not being honest.'
I am struggling as to how the inclusion of the words 'it looked to me' demonstrate humility. They simply confirm it's your opinion. Now I might consider myself to be many things if I were accusing a referee of dishonesty, but 'humble' wouldn't be one of them, especially if I then qualified my assessment with the admission I am 'probably wrong'. (Although I guess such an instantaneous step backwards does endorse Feynman's maxim.)
By all means, post your second and third paragraphs and let the forum make of them what it will, but your opening paragraph is wasted.
The whole thing was wasted on you but thanks anyway.
