Mike Dean - maybe controversial.....

But I thought he actually had a really good game overall. Apart from the ridiculous penalty he gave them, I thought he reffed it well. Played some excellent advantages, and then wasn't scared to bring it back if said advantage didn't work out too well. I think we were all apprehensive pre-match knowing it was him, but I'll be honest, the lack of confidence in him was unfounded.

There, I've said it.

 

I've posted this elsewhere but why did Leeds first yellow card come after about their tenth foul, yet Connor got booked for his first one? Always irks me off that some players/teams get more leeway than others when it comes to yellow cards.

 

The key to having a good game is getting the big decisions right. He didn't do that. You could say he handled the rest of the game well but don't think he had any other difficult decisions to make.

 

He did try and let the game flow I think. Maybe a little too much. Got one massive decision badly wrong though. He shouldn't be making those decisions unless he's 100% sure, which he can't have been because it didn't happen.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

 

black fella with a beard for them, committed 4 or 5 fouls no card i dont think, conors yellow was 1st challenge and not a yellow for me. Roberts handball outside box yes, but the fella headed it towards his hand from 2 yards, how can he get his hand out the way in 0.5 seconds

 

The bloke nearly single handedly cost us the win through pure incompetence!

He turned what was looking like becoming a rout into a close finish.

Deserves zero praise whatsoever. You just cant get decisions like that wrong it really is poor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I thought he handled the game well until the penalty (and said so to my mate while at the game), bar taking until the second half to book one of their players.

The penalty and some of the decisions after that were laughable though.

 

Conor's was a blatant yellow card. He knew it, that's why he was bollocking the defence. To say otherwise is just downright bias.

 

Maybe it was a yellow ordinarily,but given what he'd let go prior to and after Connors yellow for his first foul, then it was at best inconsistent and worst incompetent. There should never be one rule for one and one rule for another.

 

This ^^^



Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

I must confess, I was very wary of his reputation. He soon put me right though. 8 and a half minutes before he gave the first foul of the match. He had the confidence to let the game flow, and there was less of players going to ground at the slightest touch in order to win a foul. The game benefitted as a result and it was superb entertainment for the most part. In fact I was so entertained that I was involved, which does not happen as much as it should these days.

 

He was no better nor worse than the majority of inept referees that we have had last few seasons .
Difference is he came from a supposed elite group of referees others were deemed lower league expected to be inconsistent.
Only thing to draw on this is they are choosing to judge the incidents on the occasion/ team etc rather than each individual incident without fear or favour.

 

Wasn't the worst ref we've had this season by a long shot and yet still managed to get one potentially game changing decision wrong. Just goes to show the standard of refs we've had this season.

Also thought Leeds should have had their man sent off for the two footed lunge in second half. Worse than Hammill's by a long way -it certainly gave the ref a decision to make, and he just waved play on.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

The lack of coverage given to the 'penalty' across the many media mediums I have read is scandalous.

 

Some of these decisions really make you wonder who's pulling the strings and briefing referrees.

His penalty decision last night for example. Too far behind to play for him to be certain, and apparently his linesman didn't flag, yet he gave it and it could have been a gamechanger.

Great for the neutral watching it on sky, which begs the question, are they refereeing based on what they see, or on what makes for good TV?

Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

Tbh the game Imo was not a difficult one to ref. He at times seemed to want it all to be about him. Most if not all 50/50 decisions went the way of Leeds. I love him to explain how he could give a pen from 30 yards away behind the ball. He guessed and guessed wrong to Leeds benefit. Pandered to the do called big club. Some say incompetent I say cheat.

 

We should be used to it, but it's still grates!

Sent from my SM-G850F using Tapatalk

 

Shouldn't have to get used to it. Bottom line is league would prefer Leeds up there challenging than little old Barnsley who no one gives a hoot about.

 

I thought he was okay, until he started making decisions! Had he been consistent between Conor's yellow and the dirty and petulant (persistent cynical and preventative fouling, ball throwing, blocking free kicks from being taken) I would agree that he was going reasonably okay for the first hour or so.

Then he got the bit between his teeth and showed his true colours with potentially game-changing ego-trip howlers. It was also then that I noticed just how far he was persistently behind the game, shockingly distant from play a lot of the time for a so-called elite (or any) ref.

(As I write Michael Oliver just given a penalty for the exact same 'challenge' as Armstrong didn't get one for last week).

 

It was handball though, so he can't not give a foul. The positioning is down to the linesman.