- + Ll Blynch voted on a point for the debate Are ASBOs Effective?
- + Jdickins voted on a point for the debate The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK
- + Murphy Becca joined Debatewise
- + Alexis Skitini voted on a point for the debate Legalise drugs worldwide
- + Ll Blynch voted on a point for the debate Are ASBOs Effective?
- + Jdickins voted on a point for the debate 1-child policy for every single country in the world!
- + Jdickins edited the debate 1-child policy for every single country in the world!
- + Garbypizzaro joined Debatewise
- + Rhoda Doku joined Debatewise
- + Moilt Evomot joined Debatewise
- + Elefweiree Law joined Debatewise
- + Zedspeni Asype joined Debatewise
- + Jdickins voted on a point for the debate The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK
- + Jdickins joined Debatewise
- + Rahina joined Debatewise
- + Dillas2 joined Debatewise
- + Qualaypak joined Debatewise
- + Menareangrynow voted on the debate Are women superior to men?
- + Jdickins voted on a point for the debate The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK
- + Lisa1985 joined Debatewise
- + Jdickins voted on a point for the debate The death penalty should be reinstated in the UK
- + Ll Blynch voted on the debate Are ASBOs Effective?
- + Terri Re joined Debatewise
- + Ll Blynch edited the debate Are ASBOs Effective?
BENITEZ WAS RIGHT – MANCHESTER UNITED GET AWAY WITH MURDER.
On the 9th of January, the Liverpool manager, Rafael Benitez, hit out in a public statement about what he sees as the unfair position of the Manchester United manager, Sir Alex Ferguson. Claiming that Ferguson and Manchester United have a privileged position as virtually ‘untouchable’ by the FA, Benitez added that “he is the only manager in the league that cannot be punished for these things [rudeness to referees and so on]”. But to what extent is this true? Indeed, are Benitez’ arguments simply the "ridiculous" uttering of an essentially jealous man?
Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
Yes, because... Ferguson has regularly escaped punishment
Ferguson[1] has, indeed, often evaded punishment. On January 2008, for instance, despite a claim by Reading fans that he had aimed an ‘up yours’[2] signal at them, Ferguson avoided an enquiry, suggesting that ‘all I was doing was expressing my relief at winning one of our hardest games of the season’.[3]
- ^ "Being Alex Ferguson", 2008
- ^ www.readingfc.ca/lies.html
- ^ http://www.manu.com/info.html.php
See history of changes to this point
Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
Yes, because... Benitez has not been without support in his attack
Whilst dismissed by Ferguson merely as the ‘absolutely ridiculous’ statement of an ‘an angry man’, Benitez has not been without his supporters. Former top referee Graham Poll told the Daily Mail how ‘Benitez has articulated what referees have been thinking for years – that Sir Alex Ferguson can say what he wants and then FA will allow him to get away with it’, adding that his two match ban for the altercation with Mike Dean was forced on the FA and implying that, had Dean not forced their hand, Ferguson might again have evaded punishment.
Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
No, because... Benitez is missing the point and getting himself caught up in Ferguson’s infamous ‘mind games’
Unfortunately, whatever one may think of the rights and wrongs of Benitez’ argument, he has essentially succumbed to Ferguson’s legendary mind games. Or, as BBC’s blogger, Derek Ronson deftly put it, like ‘the daftest trout in the pond, [he] has risen to the Ferguson's fat maggoty bait’. Despite Benitez’ attempts to ‘talk the talk’, his team’s ability to ‘walk the walk’ during their match with Stoke seemed somewhat compromised. By enabling himself to fall foul of Ferguson’s ‘fat maggoty bait’, he has, perhaps, opened himself up to the possibility of the same fate as Keegan after his equally passionate public statement in April 1996.
See history of changes to this point
Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
No, because... Ferguson has felt the firm hand of the FA in the past.
Ferguson is not as ‘untouchable’ as Benitez suggests, serving, for instance, a two game touchline ban and paying a £10,000 fine for remonstrating with referee Mike Dean, in November 2008, as well as having received a two game touchline ban and £5,000 fine for ‘foul and abusive’ language to referee Mark Clattenburg during a defeat by Bolton in November 2007. Moreover, after branding Atkinson's performance "not acceptable", Sir Alex Ferguson (and Carlos Queiroz) were charged with improper conduct after Manchester United's FA Cup quarter-final loss to Portsmouth in 2008.
Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
No, because... Ferguson s fully entitled to talk about what he sees as the injustices of the game
Whether or not the discussion of fixtures was simply to push Benitez over the edge, Ferguson is entitled to his opinion, and should hardly be prevented from expressing it – whether disingenuous or not. Indeed, one might argue that he has a point about the potential for a pro-Arsenal bias in the work of Nicholas Stewart QC on Patrice Evra’s disciplinary hearing.
Vote on this debate: Benitez was right – Manchester United get away with murder.
Modified:
06 Apr 2010
Point 1. Ferguson has regularly escaped punishment
Ferguson[1] has, indeed, often evaded punishment. On January 2008, for instance, despite a claim by Reading fans that he had aimed an ‘up yours’[2] signal at them, Ferguson avoided an enquiry, suggesting that ‘all I was doing was expressing my relief at winning one of our hardest games of the season’.[3]
Point 2. Benitez has not been without support in his attack
Whilst dismissed by Ferguson merely as the ‘absolutely ridiculous’ statement of an ‘an angry man’, Benitez has not been without his supporters. Former top referee Graham Poll told the Daily Mail how ‘Benitez has articulated what referees have been thinking for years – that Sir Alex Ferguson can say what he wants and then FA will allow him to get away with it’, adding that his two match ban for the altercation with Mike Dean was forced on the FA and implying that, had Dean not forced their hand, Ferguson might again have evaded punishment.
Point 1. Benitez is missing the point and getting himself caught up in Ferguson’s infamous ‘mind games’
Unfortunately, whatever one may think of the rights and wrongs of Benitez’ argument, he has essentially succumbed to Ferguson’s legendary mind games. Or, as BBC’s blogger, Derek Ronson deftly put it, like ‘the daftest trout in the pond, [he] has risen to the Ferguson's fat maggoty bait’. Despite Benitez’ attempts to ‘talk the talk’, his team’s ability to ‘walk the walk’ during their match with Stoke seemed somewhat compromised. By enabling himself to fall foul of Ferguson’s ‘fat maggoty bait’, he has, perhaps, opened himself up to the possibility of the same fate as Keegan after his equally passionate public statement in April 1996.
Point 2. Ferguson has felt the firm hand of the FA in the past.
Ferguson is not as ‘untouchable’ as Benitez suggests, serving, for instance, a two game touchline ban and paying a £10,000 fine for remonstrating with referee Mike Dean, in November 2008, as well as having received a two game touchline ban and £5,000 fine for ‘foul and abusive’ language to referee Mark Clattenburg during a defeat by Bolton in November 2007. Moreover, after branding Atkinson's performance "not acceptable", Sir Alex Ferguson (and Carlos Queiroz) were charged with improper conduct after Manchester United's FA Cup quarter-final loss to Portsmouth in 2008.
Point 3. Ferguson s fully entitled to talk about what he sees as the injustices of the game
Whether or not the discussion of fixtures was simply to push Benitez over the edge, Ferguson is entitled to his opinion, and should hardly be prevented from expressing it – whether disingenuous or not. Indeed, one might argue that he has a point about the potential for a pro-Arsenal bias in the work of Nicholas Stewart QC on Patrice Evra’s disciplinary hearing.