Mike Dean

[Lighty64]

Poch has never reacted like that, so you know something was said to seriously upset him. No idea what it was, I'm sure we'll find out in the coming days.

I do want to say though, that you can have a go at the referee and the players for bad performances respectively. Both Dean, and ourselves for the majority, were shocking.

VAR would have ruled their goal out when it checks the initial corner decision. Would it do the same for ours? Doubtful, because in every game 90% of players steal yards. Even in the first half a Burnley player wanted a corner when it CLEARLY went off for a throw. Used to respect and like Burnley for their old fashioned way they go about it, but last couple of games, yesterday especially, they tried their best to cheat as much as they could.

We were terrible ourselves too though, so got what we deserved in the end.

trouble is VAR wouldn't of ruled it out. they mentioned it after the game during the studio chat after 1 of the breaks, that VAR wouldn't of got involved in that as it would hold the game up checking every single disputed corner or throw in. VAR might of disallowed their 2nd as Woods might of been offside in the build up

 

[Dov67]

so here's my take.........been mentioned before, but again, as soon as social media went on about how Dean favours Spurs he HAD TO prove that was not the case. It started a 2 years ago at the emirates when he gave a free kick for nothing from which they scored, obviously.

I don't think you can look at Poch's reaction yesterday without considering what happened the week before with Michael Oliver, and Son. That whole performance was ridiculous to the point where i thought he might have booked Sanchez for scoring.

we are really up against it, no transfers, no stadium, injuries, rivals spending what they like, Sky playing games with our fixtures before champions league week, and referees who are so so bad at their jobs that it is not unreasonable to question their honesty.

I think yesterday was the straw that broke the camels back and Poch just lost his shit, and i love him for it.

when I saw him yesterday and last week my first thought was at last. Finally we have a manager who won't take this shit any longer. Been a bug bear of mine for a dozen years. Referees have always known you can shit on Spurs as much as you like and there will be no blow back. Do that to Fergie's Man U or any Mourinho team and they would unleash hell onto an offending referee. There has always been no cost to screwing us over. It has to stop. I want every ref to know at least sub-consciously when making a 50-50 decision that if you get it wrong there will be days of bad press and scrutiny.

Years ago under Harry, we conceded a ghost goal against Chelsea. Gomes let it through his legs. The lino couldn't possibly have seen it, so he guessed....he guessed and gave them a goal. Instead of going mental, Harry said afterward "he didn't mean to make a mistake"....FFS!!

 

[mickdale]

Reckon the FA will throw the book at Poch.
Gonna be an interesting week.

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

Reckon the FA will throw the book at Poch.
Gonna be an interesting week.

They've not given themselves a leg to stand on after only giving Klopp a shitty little fine for actually directly abusing officials to the worlds press.

 

[jurgen]

Genuine question, why are there so many northern-based refs in the league, especially those allocated the most games, is this related to the number of southern/London area based teams in the league now?

 

[spursfan77]

A little off topic. As far as I’m aware the rule is now that a goalkeeper can’t put the ball on the ground and then pick it up. If I’m wrong I’m sure someone will correct me. However during the game yesterday Heaton accidentally dropped the ball and then picked it up. Should a free kick have been given to us?

I hope you’re not expect Dean to know all the rules ???

 

[ljinko888]

The PL need to phase him out and bring some younger refs in. Same guys every year.

 

[Tucker]

People can blame Mike Dean until they are blue in the face, but we lost yesterday because we defended badly. End of.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

People can blame Mike Dean until they are blue in the face, but we lost yesterday because we defended badly. End of.

Go through the match threads. I'm pretty sure in every one there's reams of abuse and ****ing off of the referee no matter who it is, so when we win it's despite the ref

 

[CoopsieDeadpool]

People can blame Mike Dean until they are blue in the face, but we lost yesterday because we defended badly. End of.

To be fair, mate, I don't think many (any?) have blamed Mike Dean for the loss. It's been acknowledged that we were pretty shit.

I think the gist of the whole Mike Dean input, stems from the fact he didn't help matters by being a bias, clueless, self absorbed ****.

 

[Tucker]

To be fair, mate, I don't think many (any?) have blamed Mike Dean for the loss. It's been acknowledged that we were pretty shit.

I think the gist of the whole Mike Dean input, stems from the fact he didn't help matters by being a bias, clueless, self absorbed ****.

He really does like to make himself the centre of attention. There’s a few of us getting together to watch today’s matches, none of us can agree on any prem referees that are good enough.

Eg Michael Oliver reffing today, again loves being the centre of attention, and is often inconsistent. Today he seems to be letting players get away with bookable offences.

 

[WorcesterTHFC]

He really does like to make himself the centre of attention. There’s a few of us getting together to watch today’s matches, none of us can agree on any prem referees that are good enough.

Eg Michael Oliver reffing today, again loves being the centre of attention, and is often inconsistent. Today he seems to be letting players get away with bookable offences.

Someone ought to remind him that if the officials (in any sport) go unnoticed (and, presumably, not talked about), that's usually a pretty good sign that they've had a good game.

 

[wrd]

He really does like to make himself the centre of attention. There’s a few of us getting together to watch today’s matches, none of us can agree on any prem referees that are good enough.

Eg Michael Oliver reffing today, again loves being the centre of attention, and is often inconsistent. Today he seems to be letting players get away with bookable offences.

The refereeing system needs a giant overhaul, introducing VAR I feel might actually add to the problem with the way some of these refs carry themselves.

 

[N17 Kebab]

Presumably, Poch will disclose what he said when the inevitable charges against him are made? I guess that won’t be made public, but if he has said something as unprofessional as “legends” then I hope he will face some sanctioning.

 

[Geyzer Soze]

I thought he was a spurs fan. Remember him celebrating spurs goals haha ?

 

[shelfmonkey]

That HAS to be THE worst bit of officiating EVER in the history of football!

And it could only happen to Spurs!

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

I hate to fuel unnecessarily the Dean conspiracy more than I've already done in this thread, but I have to ponder why Dean has refereed 3 of our PL losses this season. He is obsessed with appearing unbiased to the degree that he is biased.

 

[Everlasting Seconds]

Fewer*

No it is probably less, because it is in reference only to "concede". You can't actually count "concede" when it stands on its own. So less of it is probably more accurate than fewer of it.

 

[ohtottenham!]

No it is probably less, because it is in reference only to "concede". You can't actually count "concede" when it stands on its own. So less of it is probably more accurate than fewer of it.

That would only make sense if you had an implied noncount object like "ground" "time"; as in concede ground, or concede time to someone. We're clearly talking about goals here, so "fewer" is correct. Think we should be "less" anal though, however much of an arsehole Mike Dean was yesterday.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

No it is probably less, because it is in reference only to "concede". You can't actually count "concede" when it stands on its own. So less of it is probably more accurate than fewer of it.

That would only make sense if you had an implied noncount object like "ground" "time"; as in concede ground, or concede time to someone. We're clearly talking about goals here, so "fewer" is correct. Think we should be "less" anal though, however much of an arsehole Mike Dean was yesterday.

I actually think both could be right, but I believe he meant fewer as he was referring to goals. Less goals is wrong, fewer goals is correct. However, had he meant ‘score more often and concede less often’ then he’d have been correct. It depends if @riggi was speaking about something qualitative (time) or quantitative (goals). I believe he intended the latter.