Torres sent off and Hernandez's offside goal
 

I actually feel sorry for Chelsea. They came back from 2-0 down and then the referee (Mr Clattenburg) destroyed them. I don't particularly like Chelsea. In fact, they have my three least favourite players in the league since Joey Barton went to France (John Terry, Ashley Cole and Frank Lampard). But the referee's performance today was shocking. These decisions do have a tendency to happen in favour of Man Utd (particularly at Old Trafford). But even so. Unbelievably, I think I hate Man City and Man Utd more than Chelsea now. I didn't think that'd happen.

bmac
 

Absolutely agree the ref should have worn a red shirt but i think Chelsea trying to play the racist card also stinks, most footballers cant even spell racism, suppose we have the planks the Ferdindand brothers fpr starting all this off.

The Chelsea game highlighted how bad decisions can affect a game. The problem is, every team gets them, every team wins and loses games because of them. Offside goals run rife throughout every league in every country, with goals being given when clearly offside or goals being disallowed for offside when replays show they were onside. Apart from just offside decisions, we all remember the Reading vs Watford goal where the assistant ref gave the goal without the ball having gone into the goal at all!

The same can be said for sending off players, we've all see tackles that deserved a straight red get nothing and then tackles that deserve a yellow get a straight red. Every team is affected by these.The Torres sending off could have gone either way. It looks like there was a slight touch on Torres but he over egged his dive. The Man Utd defender looked guilty as sin so a red card either way could probably be justified.

What I don't like is the after match hounding of the referee by Chelsea players which continued, apparently, into the dressing room. Nor do I like the Chelsea allegation against the ref for the use of "words that could be interpreted to have a racial implication". If it happened, then fine, the official must be held to account but it seems strangely coincidental that these allegations are made after losing a fractious game of football (and as mentioned within the current climate!)

Even worse, I don't like Di Matteo's comments last night after beating Utd in the Capital Crap Cup that they "would have done the same three days ago if it hadn't been for refereeing decisions"

It really starts looking like bad sportsmanship, no one like losing, especially when incorrect decisions are involved but to rip out the kitchen sink, throw a strop, attempt to get the official banned for life and start crying about "unfairness" every time a camera is put in front of your face is starting to grate the nerves of many I suspect, me included.

I find it ironic that Di Matteo gets criticism for this in the British press and yet Mourinho is lauded, despite the fact he more or less forced Anders Frisk, the referee in the Chelsea v Barcelona game in 2005 to retire. Claiming he invited Rijkaard into his room at half time based on nothing, so subsequently Chelsea fans sent him death threats, is hardly something to be lauded.

I also find the scepticism to the Clattenburg comment strange. Why would Chelsea say it if they can't prove it? I mean, unless they didit to prove that they are tough on racism (Terry's still their captain. Why wasn't he sacked, Mr Abramovic?). But if they can't prove it, they look really stupid. Apparently, it wasn't even Mikel that heard it.

Great points BnG :-)

it is a rather strange set of circumstance, even more so how long it's taking. You'd think if there would be clear evidence somewhere given the officials are miked up, etc. Time will tell.

Mourhino was loved by the British press which always made me wonder why he was given glowing headlines when he "sneaked" into the Chelsea dressing room in a laundry bin (alleged) whilst on a touchline ban yet Wenger gets slammed for sending a text.

Oh the wonderful world of football!

I really don't like Mourinho. I just don't think that coming out with a few funny lines give you the right to behave that badly. Whereas the British media clearly do.

With Chelsea, if they have no proof, they will look really bad. Top flight football clubs are always meant to be thinking about their 'brand' (another American buzz-word British sport has attempted to adopt). If so, if Chelsea have not evidence, what are they thinking? If they do, then why hasn't anyone heard what Clattenburg supposedly said other than a few Chelsea players? It just doesn't make sense to me. Hopefully, it wont drag on forever like the Terry-Anton Ferdinand thing. Terry's defence in that was laughable, but Chelsea stuck to it. Maybe they are that stupid?