Invasion of the Moral Crusaders

(Image from here)

It's Thursday and people are still going on about Sir Alex and Alan Wiley. Today's crop brings us the stupidest of the lot though. Lawrence Donegan on The Guardian blog:

As numerous commentators have pointed out over the past few days, this was classic Ferguson stuff – more of an act than anything else. His team had just been outfought and outplayed by a surprisingly strong Sunderland and rather than have that be the focus of the post-match discussions he chose instead to cause a rumpus about the referee. I believe the technical term is "diversionary tactic".

Having identified the United manager's motivation, many of the same commentators then decided to move on without considering the consequences of his actions, which are not insignificant.

Is he joking? It's Thursday, and everyday this week I've pointed out the hysterical nature of the comments attacking Sir Alex, yet people have "moved on" apparently. I suppose he has to say that to justify writing such out of date rubbish. He continues, quoting some fine upstanding columnist who also hasn't managed to move on:

"Every time Ferguson lacerates a match official, he puts in a marker for the future and it seems to pay off. The minutes stretch to infinity at Old Trafford," Giles wrote. He's right, of course. Every time Ferguson opens his mouth in such a fashion, hoping to gain an unfair advantage, he is damaging the game.

He's wrong, of course. Do I have to link back to the stats which show Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea all get more injury time than us (maybe I should, but I'm not going to, laziness...)? And self-evidently we didn't get enough injury time against Sunderland, consequently the argument that there is a cumulative effect from all of Sir Alex's previous comments can not, in any way, be true. And "damaging the game" WTF?! Is he joking, again? Talk about taking your stupid moral outrage to the extreme. What? He goes further down the road to stupidity:

Now Wiley find himself to be the centre of attention. He's a referee, so presumably he should be able to withstand the scrutiny. But others in the same position have not, most infamously Anders Frisk, who retired from the game after being unfairly maligned – to put it mildly – by José Mourinho.

For Frisk, the tipping point was the death threats from fans and the sense that he would never again officiate a match without his integrity being questioned. Mercifully, Wiley hasn't been threatened by anyone

"Mercifully?!" (I'll say it again...) Is he joking? The thought that someone might receive death threats from being called a little unfit meaning that we had a few less seconds to grab a winner against Sunderland seems a touch unlikely, and to suggest it is merciful that they haven't is akin to writing the sentence, "Mercifully, I haven't seen any pigs flying..." And the comparison with Anders Frisk and Mourinho is a little offensive (I'm not going to go for moral outrage, its a little offensive, a little stupid - it's not "damaging the game..."), here's what Mourinho said about Frisk:

"The referee was inefficient. It was an adulterated result. When Deco [now at Chelsea] produced a ridiculous dive in the area the referee didn't show him a yellow card. When I saw Rijkaard enter the referee's changing-room at half-time I couldn't believe it. When Drogba was sent off I wasn't surprised."

Insinuation cheating from the referee. Sir Alex said the referee was a bit unfit, while at the same time admitting we were poor and probably didn't deserve the win (as a diversionary tactic (which everyone seems to claim it is) the criticising of the referee would have worked better if Sir Alex hadn't actually called our performance "poor" in pretty much the same breath...). Where's the comparison?
It comes to something when you have to turn to The Sun for something "fair and balanced." First off they have Dave Bassett, shrugging his shoulders at all the fuss:

Sir Alex isn't saying that referees are being underhand. He is saying what he genuinely feels and he should be allowed to do it.

Sir Alex is entitled to say Alan Wiley isn't fit enough. And if the stats at ProZone seem to contradict this, Alan Wiley is entitled to use them to hit back.

Football is all about opinion. Fans love to debate matches in the cafe, pub or restaurant.

All talk about Alan Wiley being so upset he may retire early is nonsense. He's an experienced ref and would not have survived so long if he was mentally weak.

David Cameron and Gordon Brown can call each other useless, but no one can criticise the ref. That's absolute rubbish.

Admittedly the same page has Jeff Winter being a nutjob, but at least there's balance.
The other story in The Sun has some concerns about the behaviour of referees:

The referees have defended Wiley, urging the FA to ban boss Ferguson from any contact with his team on a match day.

It would be an unprecedented move and one United believe the game's rulers are being pushed towards by underhand tactics from the refs.

United understand that statistics on Wiley's performance, revealed in the media, were not given directly by the company which compiles them.

A source close to the club's hierarchy told SunSport: "The manner in which this is being put across is that they are exerting undue pressure on the FA when the disciplinary process has begun.

"Some of the statistics being used are confidential.

"United have been assured these statistics were not provided to the media by the companies which compile them.

"There is serious concern at how the refereeing fraternity is meddling with the disciplinary process."

Whether or not the quotes are sourced from where they are said to be the, the point is still valid.

As a further example of the stupidity of the paper's general position of moral outrage at every little thing let's look at Paul Pogba. Given all the lies, insinuations, moral hand-wringing that was in the papers at the time let's look at what happened yesterday:

The Old Trafford club have now also been exonerated in the Pogba case after a single judge of the players’ status committee dismissed Le Havre’s accusations against United.

In their submission to Fifa, Le Havre asserted that a 'non-solicitation agreement’ had bound the club and Pogba to committing to a contract once he had become eligible to do so under French employment law.

United countered that the agreement had not been legally ratified and had no effect outside France. The club also claimed that, as an amateur, Pogba could not be bound to a contract and that the player and his parents had refused all contractual offers from Le Havre.

With Fifa rejecting Le Havre’s case and finding that there “was no reason to indicate that Manchester United had breached the Fifa regulations on the protection of minors (article 19), in its attempts to secure the acquisition of the player”, the club are now able to consider Pogba for selection at any level.

I'm sorry? What was that? Was that an apology for all the rubbish everyone printed at the time? No, didn't think it was...

Time to stop ranting... There's some positive quotes from Owen Hargreaves today:

"It is difficult to say an exact date but I do feel I can see light at the end of the tunnel now," the 28-year-old told M.E.N. Sport in his first newspaper interview since returning to England.

"Coming back to Manchester was a big step. Having people from United around me also makes me realise I am getting closer.

"I am coming back and I am coming back for good, not for a week or two. I am coming back to have a massive effect and to play well and for us to win titles.

"I want to get back as soon as I can but it is not about getting back for one game or for one day, I want to come back and be back for another six or eight years.

There's some quotes from Martin Edwards, taken from a new book, which do the rounds today. The fullest version is here. The other papers all concentrate on the doubts he raises about the Glazer's and the debt, but omit the qualifying statement:

I thought that time would tell whether they would be good owners and I still think that. I don't think they have done anything drastically wrong so far.

It's also humorous to see The Sun's account including the quotes defending recommending selling the club to Sky, without expressing their interest (The Sun and Sky being owned by Rupert Murdoch).
Carrick and England also gets a lot of mileage today. Some quotes from Carrick. I'll just quote a little from The Sun's report:

The Geordie midfielder has a Premier League winner's medal from each of the three seasons since he joined United from Tottenham in July 2006 and has also lifted the Champions League trophy.

By contrast, those keeping him out of the England side - Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard and Gareth Barry - can muster only three of those medals between them.

There have been two Premier Leagues for Lampard, one Champions League for Gerrard and nothing for Barry.

Finally, a transfer rumour, Maicon:

Maicon's agent believes Manchester United have upped their interest in the Inter Milan defender but insists there are no offers on the table.

The Brazil international joined Inter from Monaco in 2006 and has developed into a key player in the Nerazzurri team since Jose Mourinho took over two years ago. ...

"United's interest in my client is not something new," he told Tuttopremier.it. "They have been following him for a while.

"Now it seems to me that they are pressing for him but I don't think there has been any concrete offers yet."