There has been hue and cry about the added time given to Manchester United in their derby game. Manchester City have complained that they were robbed of a point. But let us just put the talk about added time aside. Complaining because your team had to play for a minute extra is all baloney to me. It is not as if one team is tied by the ropes and the other is asked to play. Both the teams are asked to play in the added time and both the teams have the chance to win the game. If one team loses, then they have only themselves to blame, not the clock.
This was exactly what happened in the derby game. Both the teams played for 5 minutes and 27 seconds going into injury time. During this time, both the teams had the chance to win the game; in City’s case, they had the chance to see out the game but instead kept giving the ball away to United and they were made to pay.
Manchester City’s and some of the media outlets’ complaints look even more ridiculous when you actually break down the time and see that the referee infact played only a second extra. Bellamy’s celebrations in added time took 56 seconds and 30 seconds are added for every substitution. So, that adds up to 5 mins 26 secs into extra time and Owen scored when the clock ticked 5mins 27 secs in added time. United complained about the time wasting tactics employed by Given in the added time and there is a possibility that the referee noted down that as well. So, all in all, City don’t have a case to complain against the added time.
Guardian ran a post to highlight the liberty given to United in added time in their home games. What Guardian fails to mention in their so called ‘revealing post’ is the reason for the additional time in the actual time added by the fourth official. It is really shameful that people working for a national newspaper aren’t aware of the rules themselves. The added time declared by the fourth official is the minimum time that would be played additional to the normal time. Guardian complained that in the last three years United have got 1.9 seconds additional in the added time when they were either losing or drawing. How silly of Guardian to come up with such a myopic point of view? Most of the teams coming to Old Trafford celebrate if they can take a point from the game, let alone winning it and in such circumstances it is only natural for the opposing teams to waste some time which go down in the referee’s watch as time to be added. Sports fans like to absorb as much as they can from the gazettes but it would do good if the papers can avoid printing such garbage.
7 comments:
Are you saying United don't get any preferential treatment at all by the refs at Old Trafford? Its not just about the added time. Its much deeper than that.
let it be dubious penalties
let it be petty fouls
let it be extra extra injury time
Old Trafford gets it all
The debate abt the added time in the derby is a waste of time. It's upto the ref to decide and he's made his decision. its' as simple as that.
but you gotto be kidding if you are denying the preferential treatment given to ManU at old trafford....week after week....
Can you guys back up your claims with some facts?
And can you highlight the preferential treatment given to Utd and not given to other teams at their respective home games.
It is pretty rich coming from Chelsea and Arsenal fans.
How many times has Terry been let off for a blatant hand ball and I read Chelsea were given extra injury time for their game against Stoke.
Arsenal were actually given more time in the match against United than the actual clocked time. No one seemed to care about that. Ever seen Henry offside at highbury, many times, ever seen an offside given against him, never. There is a joke on that which runs in London.
There is a tendency to magnify things when a team is at the top, media sells its papers that way as well. There have been things given against United at Old Trafford, but those miss the myopic sight of the media because they wont sell much if they are backing a hated team.
Duffu, since you love your stats so much, this one is for you
Last season for the games at stamford bridge, the opposing teams received cards for every 7.46 fouls they committed and Chelsea received cards for every 10.92 fouls they committed. Preferential perhaps ? no ?
This stat was released by the Premiership news after Scolari went on a rant saying that teams playing Chelsea are not giving cards.
* were not given cards* typo
Guess vivek is right with his opinion on the extra added time. It is not an undue advantage to any single team. Both the teams need to play the extra time and both the teams need to put in their efforts.
Only when a far inferior team loses to a superior there is a case to complain. I dont know about any other matches but the current manchester derby in discussion is not that case. If Mancity was not able to contain Manu for 1 more min then they need to blame themselves entirely.
I also agreee with Vivek about home teams getting the advantage at their stadiums. Though i feel referees are a tad more favorable to Manu regarding the issues raised by duffu other than extra time.:P
@Viv, You have been mentioning the Henry offside point for long.He wasnt given offside because he was not :).
Post a Comment