http://www.101greatgoals.com/videodisplay/manchester-uniteds-chicharito-stars-cocacola-zero-commercial-8787211/

Guess who's the new face of coca cola.

*Cougar*:

stop embarrassing yourself before i call you a simpleton.

when fergie ignores the media(bbc), he gets fined. when he speaks to the media, he gets fined. can this man ever win? where is the consistency? in this day and age of freedom of speech, a manager gets fined for speaking his mind? how is the fa any different from gaddahfi of libya in their dictatorship? referees make horrible decisions that have cost managers their job, decisions that have made managers tear up players' contracts and yet the fa don't want them accountable for their senseless decisions? players give interviews, managers give interviews. why can't the referees be made to give interviews why they make some decisions - i think they will earn their respect by doing that.

as for fergie's comments, what did he say that hasn't be said before by the other managers in the league?

tony pulis – “Surprised to see Mike Dean back on one of our games with his record against Stoke.” No punishment.

roberto mancini – “It’s normal – the big club usually has different treatment.” No punishment.

sir alex ferguson – “We want a fair ref, a strong ref anyway, we didn’t get that. When I saw who was reffing it I feared the worst.” 5 match ban, £30k fine

i ask again, where is the consistency?

sir alex ferguson banned from the dug-out in wembley(against man city) by the fa, whose new chairman is david bernstein. . .the ex-man city chairman! how dramatic!!!

SAF's comments are much greater threats to a ref integrity than the other 2 u posted.

Pulis: . . "Giving is last performance in out last game. i'm surprised to see him again". . sensible thing to say

Mancini:. .  what is wrong with that?

SAF comments in other words. . "That referee is always like that against us. i knew it was going to happen, he's not a fair referee, he favours the oppositon"

Like i said. . UTD cant be complaining cos just days before. . a refereeing decision favoured them. .  so why make it look like the world is against you when suddenly one goes against you?. .  shit happens!. .  Deal with it!

debosky:

What is the record Pulis is talking about? Pulis' statement is open to interpretation, and is simply saying he is 'surprised'. Without a direct accusation, he can easily backtrack.

Its open to interpretation and you are interpreting in a way as to give him as much benefit of doubt as possible. Yet d Fa in this instance interpreted SAF statement in a way as harsh as possible to justify a hefty punishment. How is what Redknapp said earlier this season about Howard Webb seemingly giving us favorable calls at O.T, after Nani's disputed goal interpreted as okay, but then this is some terrible breach of standards.

montelik:

Its open to interpretation and you are interpreting in a way as to give him as much benefit of doubt as possible. Yet d Fa in this instance interpreted SAF statement in a way as harsh as possible to justify a hefty punishment. How is what Redknapp said earlier this season about Howard Webb seemingly giving us favorable calls at O.T, after Nani's disputed goal interpreted as okay, but then this is some terrible breach of standards.

I dunno about the exact Redknapp quotes, but Pulis' quote was intelligent - he leaves it open to numerous interpretations. Unfortunately, Fergie's statement cannot be interpreted in any other way - he feels the referee [b]IS [/b]not fair and was worried about this even BEFORE the game. Note the emphasis on IS - this implies that this wasn't a result of some mistakes, but an inherent bias in the referee. There is no way in hell the FA could let that slide and continue to employ Atkinson - either they agree and fire the ref, or they come down heavily on Fergie.

debosky:

What is the record Pulis is talking about? Pulis' statement is open to interpretation, and is simply saying he is 'surprised'. Without a direct accusation, he can easily backtrack.

open to interpretation? must you be a tool for the sake of fun all the time? anyways, this is the full-script of tony pulis' interview:

The Potters boss admitted he was "disappointed and surprised" regarding Dean’s inclusion for the fixture, and revealed that he held lengthy discussion with the Premier League and the Referees Association during the week.

“Three or four times we’ve had him, and we’ve had three players sent off,” Pulis told BBC Sport.

“We spoke to the Referee's Association and sent them a letter.

“We’ve had Mike [Dean] a few times this year and it just hasn’t seemed to have fallen our way when he’s refereed our games.”

Pulis was left angered by Dean’s decision to dismiss Dean Whitehead for two bookable offences, just weeks after handing a straight red to defender Andy Wilkinson in the match against Portsmouth.

He added: “We had him a few weeks ago at Portsmouth and he sent Wilkinson off, [for a challenge] which was very, very innocuous, which we thought was a poor decision.

“We were so surprised to see him back on one of our games with the record he has got against us.

"We sent them [Premier League and Referees Association] a load of stats, I spoke to Mike Riley, the referee's top man and voiced my concerns.

a manger blurts this out and debosky says tony pulis is intelligent. . . . it must be said it is not humanly possible for any arsenal fan to be smart.

Another statement open to interpretation, and an expression of a personal opinion. Different treatment with respect to what? Officials? Timing of games or what? Without a direct accusation against an official, he can easily backtrack as well.

stop talking like a twit. unless you have a sub-zero iq, mancini is directly implying the referees favour the big teams which also implies the referees are biased against the smaller teams. how is that any different to what sir alex ferguson said concerning atkinson? mancini has clearly questioned the integrity of the referee he was talking about here. every time a manager comes out to say the big teams get the big decisions, they are clearly saying the officials are biased against the small teams. there's no other meaning to that statement.

This is an explicit statement saying that he never expected the referee to have a fair game and that the referee is NOT fair - it deserves a ban and a swift one at that. If the biggest coach in the land is allowed to mouth off at officials in that manner, refs all over the country are going to be in trouble.

An oblique or even partly indirect comment would have escaped censure, but saying the ref is NOT fair means he should never ref again. Unless you expect the FA to agree with a comment that one of their best officials should be stopped from reffing games.

the beauty of this is everybody admitted atkinson had a stinker against chelsea. people who have never liked fergie all said for the first time, fergie was right to voice out atkison was rubbish in that game. so what else is there to say?


roberto martinez says if it had been a wigan player who did what rooney did he would have been sent off, whelan(wigan's chairman) says flat out that united are treated differently to every other club. they didn't even get a mention let alone get fined. saf says atkinson is a weak referee and he gets hammered. the fa are fuckin spastics!

Whatever, d punishment is going away. Every one knows this was a hit job. D FA has just set a standard that it cannot apply consistently else no manager/club official/player would ever give post match comments. But this whole topic don tire me.

Moving forward, without Vidic on saturday, I fear for what Kevin Davies may do to our center back pairing. I really hope we can get Fletcher back cos neither Carrick nor Scholes can provide d needed assistance and protection from d middle.

montelik:

Whatever, d punishment is going away. Every one knows this was a hit job. D FA has just set a standard that it cannot apply consistently else no manager/club official/player would ever give post match comments. But this whole topic don tire me.

Moving forward, without Vidic on saturday, I fear for what Kevin Davies may do to our center back pairing. I really hope we can get Fletcher back cos neither Carrick nor Scholes can provide d needed assistance and protection from d middle.

vidic will start on saturday. i dunno why you guys believe whatever fergie says concerning his players fitness. only on monday, he said nani is back and might take part against marseille. on tuesday, nani started!!!

Didn't d same fergie say vida would be available for Marseille, yet vida didn't make it.

debosky:

There is a difference in saying the referee got many calls wrong and saying that he is not a fair referee. The latter implies that he is intentionally showing bias towards the opposition, while the former is saying he made mistakes, something no one is immune from.

Fergie isn't in Atkinson's head so he can't attack his fintegrity as a referee - he should simply have said the ref screwed up, which is what Wenger said after Barca to the cameras, although he said some more juicy things to the ref in person.

Unfortunately, Fergie lost his head a bit and used the wrong phrase and the FA got a much desired opportunity to 'nail' him and show they aren't weak. There's hope though, Arsene got a 12 match ban in 2000 and appealed so it was reduced to a 1 match ban.

A question for you,Mr. debosky.
If a manager sees a series of calls going against him,can you blame him for implying he was unfair?There's no need to get idealistic here.You should know that when botched calls make a difference between 0 and 3 points,the aggrieved party will always be bitter.The way I see it,Fergie is calling Atkinson's competence into question.
When you think it was the same Atkinson who screwed United last season,I have no reason to believe he is anything but fair.

*Cougar*:

a manger blurts this out and debosky says tony pulis is intelligent. . . . it must be said it is not humanly possible for any arsenal fan to be smart.

Clearly you are dyslexic. Pulis went through the proper channels and expressed his concerns to the refereeing body. He took offence at specific decisions and never declared the official unfair or biased towards the opposition. he said 'it just hasn't fallen our way', meaning that somehow (by chance/coincidence) things haven't gone their way, this is different from claiming an official is not fair.

stop talking like a twit. unless you have a sub-zero iq, mancini is directly implying the referees favour the big teams which also implies the referees are biased against the smaller teams. how is that any different to what sir alex ferguson said concerning atkinson? mancini has clearly questioned the integrity of the referee he was talking about here. every time a manager comes out to say the big teams get the big decisions, they are clearly saying the officials are biased against the small teams. there's no other meaning to that statement.

Mancini is expressing a general opinion, which is difficult to measure. He said there is 'different' treatment - that is subject to many interpretations. Maybe he is saying that the status of the big teams affects officials in general, or that they have a bigger say in the game as a whole. That is completely different from saying that an official cannot be trusted to carry out his duties because he is inherently not fair.

People often say things go 'against them' - without saying the official is intentionally acting against them.

the beauty of this is everybody admitted atkinson had a stinker against chelsea. people who have never liked fergie all said for the first time, fergie was right to voice out atkison was rubbish in that game. so what else is there to say?

Say he is rubbish by [b]questioning the specific decisions alone [/b]and don't question his integrity by saying he is not a fair referee. It seems you're too dim to appreciate the distinction.

roberto martinez says if it had been a wigan player who did what rooney did he would have been sent off, whelan(wigan's chairman) says flat out that united are treated differently to every other club. they didn't even get a mention let alone get fined. saf says atkinson is a weak referee and he gets hammered. the fa are fuckin spastics!

Saying Utd are treated differently is one thing, claiming an official is biased and unfair is another. Fergie said he is not fair - anyone who is not fair is not fit to be a referee.

montelik:

Didn't d same fergie say vida would be available for Marseille, yet vida didn't make it.

which should tell you fergie is the master of spewing porkies! i don't take him serious until i see the team list one hour before the kick-off. he might start jaap stam on saturday. you never know with alex.

(Eastbay):

A question for you,Mr. debosky.
If a manager sees a series of calls going against him,can you blame him for implying he was unfair?There's no need to get idealistic here.You should know that when botched calls make a difference between 0 and 3 points,the aggrieved party will always be bitter.The way I see it,Fergie is calling Atkinson's competence into question.
When you think it was the same Atkinson who screwed United last season,I have no reason to believe he is anything but fair.

tony pulis got away with this. . . .“We were so surprised to see him back on one of our games with the record he has got against us".

(Eastbay):

A question for you,Mr. debosky.
If a manager sees a series of calls going against him,can you blame him for implying he was unfair?

This is not just a ‘manager’ - this is the most successful manager in the country and the longest serving. For someone with his experience, he should know how to air things in the proper channels and not make inflammatory statements in public.

If officials are not fair, football is doomed - the gravity of the claim is unacceptable, especially when there were contentious decisions that went Utd’s way as well in that particular game.

If Pulis can complain to the referee’s body, that is how Fergie should’ve pursued his complaint.

There's no need to get idealistic here.You should know that when botched calls make a difference between 0 and 3 points,the aggrieved party will always be bitter.The way I see it,Fergie is calling Atkinson's competence into question.
When you think it was the same Atkinson who screwed United last season,I have no reason to believe he is anything but fair.

Being bitter is allowed, after all, Wenger is probably the most bitter coach in world football . But then again, even in the bitterness, you should have some sense and restrict your commentary to the game at hand. We are still human beings and not animals so we can exercise some self control.

debosky:

Clearly you are dyslexic. Pulis went through the proper channels and expressed his concerns to the refereeing body. He took offence at specific decisions and never declared the official unfair or biased towards the opposition. he said 'it just hasn't fallen our way', meaning that somehow (by chance/coincidence) things haven't gone their way, this is different from claiming an official is not fair.

english language is not your stronghold. a manager said he was surprised to see a match official based on his previous record against them and you tell me tony pulis didn't question referee's integrity even before the ball was kicked? damn. . . .you are thick!

Mancini is expressing a general opinion, which is difficult to measure. He said there is 'different' treatment - that is subject to many interpretations. Maybe he is saying that the status of the big teams affects officials in general, or that they have a bigger say in the game as a whole. That is completely different from saying that an official cannot be trusted to carry out his duties because he is inherently not fair.

which also means there is a bias! it's either you say it or you don't say it. there's no half-way measure here. if mancini expresses big teams are treated differently then it means the referee is unfair towards the small teams.

People often say things go 'against them' - without saying the official is intentionally acting against them.

if it goes against them, who made the call that went against them? jehovah jireh blew his whistle from heaven?

Say he is rubbish by [b]questioning the specific decisions alone [/b]and don't question his integrity by saying he is not a fair referee. It seems you're too dim to appreciate the distinction.

if the decisions keep going against fergie not once, not twice then it's fair to say the referee is not a fair referee. remember, fergie cited the events of the same fixture last season which atkinson was also in charge of. can lightning strike twice?

Saying Utd are treated differently is one thing, claiming an official is biased and unfair is another. Fergie said he is not fair - anyone who is not fair is not fit to be a referee.

and atkinson is not fit to be a referee. every sane human being in this country agreed to that. chelsea fans were pissed off, united fans were pissed off. the same thing happened last season. . . .united were denied a penalty when terry fouled valencia in the box. chelsea fans were aggrieved when atkinson failed to send johnny evans off for drop-kicking didier drogba. fans often say it evens out but in the real scheme of things, they were two horrible decisions. two wrongs don't make a right. atkinson is not fit to be a referee. . . .qed!

@debosky,
Until the FA does what is right by disciplining errant refs,they will keep getting caught in this storm of trying to protect incompetent refs.
Teams have been relegated due to bad calls.Let the FA hold refs more accountable for their goofs.Only then will this controversy die.
That's what your lazy cohort lalaboi fails to realise,focusing only on Fergie's post-match remarks and shying away from the ref's shocking performance.Instead the paddywack is persisting in his
one-sided reasoning.
Attack on personality is really not the point.The refs want respect yet they ruin tons of games by bad calls.You can't eat your cake and still have it.It's just not possible.If Atkinson did a decent job of interpreteing simple football rules,Fergie wouldn't have been justified in attacking his (non-existent) personality(if that's what you people call it.I simple see it as Fergie rightfully taking out his
frustration on an incompetent sod.
Since Atkinson managed to be at the centre of identical games with bottled calls ,I have NO pity whatsoever for his sorry arse.
BTW Pulis' comments pour a lot of cold water on your argument.He also is implying that Mike Dean was unfair.Did he get a ban?You tell me.

debosky:

Clearly you are dyslexic. Pulis went through the proper channels and expressed his concerns to the refereeing body. He took offence at specific decisions and never declared the official unfair or biased towards the opposition. he said 'it just hasn't fallen our way', meaning that somehow (by chance/coincidence) things haven't gone their way, this is different from claiming an official is not fair.

Mancini is expressing a general opinion, which is difficult to measure. He said there is 'different' treatment - that is subject to many interpretations. Maybe he is saying that the status of the big teams affects officials in general, or that they have a bigger say in the game as a whole. That is completely different from saying that an official cannot be trusted to carry out his duties because he is inherently not fair.

People often say things go 'against them' - without saying the official is intentionally acting against them.


Say he is rubbish by questioning the specific decisions alone [/b]and don't question his integrity by saying he is not a fair referee. It seems you're too dim to appreciate the distinction.

Saying Utd are treated differently is one thing, claiming an official is biased and unfair is another. Fergie said he is not fair - anyone who is not fair is not fit to be a referee.

I am tired of this topic and this will be my last comment on d matter, hopefully. You are not being consistent. Where did SAF say Atkinson [b]intentionally acted against United? He never explicitly said so, instead you (or d FA) are interpreting his remarks to mean that was what was in his mind. Yet for Pulis, Mancini, Daglish, Redknapp and other mangagers the interpretation is not so harsh as to make such damning assumptions.

You say Mancini was expressing a general opinion (so was SAF). But d fact is if we use d same standard of interpretation that was used to interpret SAF comments and subsequent punishment, then there is no way what Mancini said is not calling d integrity of referees and d FA into question.

What we have here is a case of using one standard interpretation for some and a different one for others.

You can't pick as choose d interpretation standards you use just to justify selective punishment. But that is what d FA has done here.

debosky:

This is not just a ‘manager’ - this is the most successful manager in the country and the longest serving. For someone with his experience, he should know how to air things in the proper channels and not make inflammatory statements in public.

And Arsene Wenger is allowed to rail at UEFA?
Please come off the ideal horse.You expect a game where emotions have been invested to become a zombie parade and people pretend like nothing happened?
What is inflamatory in complaining about a ref who has managed to ruin a fixture for consecutive seasons?If you and your posse refuse to admit Atkinson had a bad day,then there's no point arguing.We might as well cellotape everybody's mouths and ask the press not to grant post-match interviews too.

debosky:

Being bitter is allowed, after all, Wenger is probably the most bitter coach in world football . But then again, even in the bitterness, you should have some sense and restrict your commentary to the game at hand. We are still human beings and not animals so we can exercise some self control.

Boy,stop this abeg.Pursue what?He's speaking to the media and telling them that Mike Dean gets a Stoke player sent off each time he officiates games involving Stoke.How is that different?And how did the FA deal with Mike Dean afterwards?Did they tell you?Was he demoted to the lower division?
Arsene Wenger has no right to be bitter.If he changed his philosophy,he would have seen results by now.End of.

(Eastbay):

@debosky,
Until the FA does what is right by disciplining errant refs,they will keep getting caught in this storm of trying to protect incompetent refs.
Teams have been relegated due to bad calls.Let the FA hold refs more accountable for their goofs.Only then will this controversy die.
That's what your lazy cohort lalaboi fails to realise,focusing only on Fergie's post-match remarks and shying away from the ref's shocking performance.Instead the paddywack is persisting in his
one-sided reasoning.
Attack on personality is really not the point.The refs want respect yet they ruin tons of games by bad calls.You can't eat your cake and still have it.It's just not possible.If Atkinson did a decent job of interpreteing simple football rules,Fergie wouldn't have been justified in attacking his (non-existent) personality(if that's what you people call it.I simple see it as Fergie rightfully taking out his
frustration on an incompetent sod.
Since Atkinson managed to be at the centre of identical games with bottled calls ,I have NO pity whatsoever for his sorry arse.
BTW Pulis' comments pour a lot of cold water on your argument.He also is implying that Mike Dean was unfair.Did he get a ban?You tell me.

thank you very much. this is not the first time united would lose a game away from home. beaten fair n square against wolves, liverpool and west ham. there were games united won and fergie even said he thought the opponents deserved a point. what he wants is fair officiating not some tools like debosky talking rubbish.

@ montelik

SAF said Atkinson was unfair - if a referee is unfair, he is intentionally making decisions against you. There is no other interpretation.

There was nothing general about Fergie's comments - they were specific and targeted at the integrity of Atkinson. Mancini didn't say he was terrified even before the game, neither did he say officials will win Chelski the title.

There is a difference between fairness and making errors - Fergie should've made that distinction and he would've gotten away with his comments.

debosky:

@ montelik

SAF said Atkinson was unfair - if a referee is unfair, he is intentionally making decisions against you. There is no other interpretation.

There was nothing general about Fergie's comments - they were specific and targeted at the integrity of Atkinson. Mancini didn't say he was terrified even before the game, neither did he say officials will win Chelski the title.

There is a difference between fairness and making errors - Fergie should've made that distinction and he would've gotten away with his comments.

tony pulis said so about mike dean, was he charged?

(Eastbay):

@debosky,
Until the FA does what is right by disciplining errant refs,they will keep getting caught in this storm of trying to protect incompetent refs.
Teams have been relegated due to bad calls.Let the FA hold refs more accountable for their goofs.Only then will this controversy die.
That's what your lazy cohort lalaboi fails to realise,focusing only on Fergie's post-match remarks and shying away from the ref's shocking performance.Instead the paddywack is persisting in his
one-sided reasoning.
Attack on personality is really not the point.The refs want respect yet they ruin tons of games by bad calls.You can't eat your cake and still have it.It's just not possible.If Atkinson did a decent job of interpreteing simple football rules,Fergie wouldn't have been justified in attacking his (non-existent) personality(if that's what you people call it.I simple see it as Fergie rightfully taking out his
frustration on an incompetent sod.
Since Atkinson managed to be at the centre of identical games with bottled calls ,I have NO pity whatsoever for his sorry arse.
BTW Pulis' comments pour a lot of cold water on your argument.He also is implying that Mike Dean was unfair.Did he get a ban?You tell me.

E be like say UdonDeyMadtAbi??

lalaboi:

we had David luiz playing 90mins in that game cos the ref failed to do is job.

MEhn. . Theres a better way to deal with your frustration, . Go hug transformer. . Maybe then, your eyez go clear wella!

@ debosky

Okay fair enough. I disagree and can not agree with an interpretation where saying something wasn't fair immediately equates to saying he is intentionally against you. Also you forget that in d same sentence as "fair" was "or strong". Why is d interpretation so insistent on only considering d word "fair" not d fact that SAF amended it with "or strong" in d very same sentence?   Which is my point, that d FA are intentionally interpreting d statement in d worst light possible to justify an overly draconian punishment. A standard they didn't apply to other instances and comments. Inconsistent.

*my last comment on this crap, hopefully*

@lalaboi,
Still haven't put back your brain where your rectum presently resides,eh?
As long as you fail to mention Atkinson's cock-ups,there's no point arguing with you and your position on this matter in null and void.But then you've managed to make no sense all day so I'm not surprised.

lalaboi:

MEhn. . Theres a better way to deal with your frustration, . Go hug transformer. . Maybe then, your eyez go clear wella!

It's you and your forefathers who are frustrated.Go and smoke more we.ed and your eyes/brains will reason better.

O boy . . i taya oh. . . Am i typing in arabic or sumn? .

@ montelik Fergie opened the door and they gladly walked through it.

*Cougar*:

tony pulis said so about mike dean, was he charged?

Pulis said he was worried about incidents involving Dean in their games, he didn't say Dean was the cause. That's why he intelligently said[i] it just hasn’t seemed to have fallen our way when he’s refereed our games.[/i]

Another way of saying I'm not sure if Dean is the problem, but it bad decisions seem to coincide with him reffing our games.

There is no way the FA could hit him for that, he made it vague enough that he could validly say he was referring to a coincidence of bad decisions and Dean, or simply pointing out that Dean had made some poor decisions against them.

Furthermore, he referred it to the refereeing body, so he has used the official channels.

Again, this is COMPLETELY different from saying a referee is by nature not fair. Fergie said he hoped they would get a fair referee and they didn't.

The only implication is that Atkinson is intentionally unfair - that is deserving of a ban.

Aannnnyyywayyy,

Saturdays' Defenders looks like
Fabio
Smalling
Brown
Evra

Apparently Evans is fit, wouldnt be the work option at RB as I worried Fabio will be eaten up by Bolton.

Also, Park is likely to be fit for saturday,while Anderson is back to training.

Watchin Bebe and Obertan play for the reserves now . . . and Morrison is taking all the shine. Smh

We are losing and Bebe just got subbed in the 61st minute for Pogba.
At least he opened the scoring.

CL QF draws today. I am relatively sure we will get one of spanish or italian sides, meaning madrid, barca or milan. Personally I am no too concerned, as I still believe this squad is not strong enough to compete for d CL, d Fa cup as well as a now tightened PL all at d same time.

montelik:

CL QF draws today. I am relatively sure we will get one of spanish or italian sides, meaning madrid, barca or milan. Personally I am no too concerned, as I still believe this squad is not strong enough to compete for d CL, d Fa cup as well as a now tightened PL all at d same time.

We're certainly spreading ourselves too thin squadwise. Just not strong enough.I's still prefer we dont get an English team though.

Im really worried about the Bolton game.

Also we arent winning the Champions league so we might as well draw Barcelona now.

We got Chelsea, worst possible draw. So boring playing them 3 times in the space of a month. urrgh

Chelsea it is . . . .bring it on

chamotex:

Chelsea it is . . . .bring it on

Can Atkinson be the ref over the two legs?