Referees Are Biased Against Manchester United, But Standards Are Slipping League Wide

Referees Biased Against Manchester United

Refereeing has always been a contentious topic in football, but recent seasons have seen an uptick in debate around officiating, particularly when it comes to Manchester United.

High-profile games often leave fans questioning whether the officiating standards in the Premier League are up to par, but the stats show some pretty damning evidence where United are concerned.

Then again, they seem to show the overall quality of refereeing is in decline too, and while the introduction of VAR has many positive factors, it could be causing referees to be less decisive.

I wrote this off the back of Manchester United’s 2025 clash with Arsenal in the 3rd Round of the FA Cup. There were some horrible decisions made but United defied the odds to squeeze through on penalties. Many felt this was justice done. I will use this game as a launchpad to discuss the issue more broadly.

Manchester United and Penalties

One key area of concern has been the drastic change in penalty decisions involving Manchester United.

From the 2018/19 to 2020/21 seasons, United were awarded 12, 14, and 11 penalties respectively. These numbers plummeted to 5, 3, and 7 in the next three seasons following comments from Jürgen Klopp and Frank Lampard, who publicly highlighted United’s penalty record.

Klopp remarked,

“I heard that Manchester United had more penalties in two years since Ole has been here than I have in five and a half years.”

Lampard’s comments were similarly pointed, referencing United’s penalty tally as disproportionate.

The result? A 60% drop in the number of penalties awarded to United, from an average of 12.3 penalties per season pre-2021 to just five per season after. While some argue this reflects a change in United’s attacking play, others believe these public criticisms influenced referees subconsciously or otherwise.

It’s an incredible swing, especially when looked at side by side with penalty decisions that went against them at the other end of the pitch.

Dubious Decisions and VAR Inconsistencies

The FA Cup game against Arsenal summed up United’s fortunes with refereeing decisions pretty well.

The penalty awarded against Harry Maguire for the slightest of touches on Kai Havertz was baffling. His reaction afterwards, and that lf his team mates, says a lot. Maguire usually accepts these things with his head down and his hands on his hips. This time he was raging, screaming at the referee and then going for Havertz. A mini brawl ensued. Players don’t react like that when decisions are justified. Altay Bayındır saved the penalty, and even the commentators said that “justice had been done there”.

Meanwhile, Bruno Fernandes suffered a studs-up challenge from behind via Gabriel Jesus that went unpunished. Jesus injured himself in the process and took Fernandes’ boot off, but it was Fernandes who was carded for dissent after no foul was given. Instances like these raise questions about consistency, especially when a red card was issued to Fernandes in a Premier League game against Tottenham a few months earlier for a much lighter challenge. In fact, the card was overturned days later by the PGMOL—but by then, the damage was done, and United had lost the game 3-0. They were only 1-0 down when the card was given.

Similarly, the penalty awarded against Diogo Dalot in the game against West Ham, which contributed to Erik ten Hag’s eventual sacking, exemplifies the inconsistencies. The on-field referee didn’t initially deem it a penalty, yet VAR intervened, overturning the original decision despite widespread agreement among pundits and fans that it was a harsh call.

So when there’s no VAR, such as in the FA Cup, we could really use it, but when there is it can be inconsistent.

VAR Lowering Refereeing Standards

Is VAR Good for Football
Credit: Footy.com Flickr

The issues extend beyond Manchester United.

VAR was introduced to improve decision-making accuracy, yet its implementation in the Premier League has been divisive. Statistics from the 2018 World Cup showed referees achieving 96% accuracy pre-VAR and 99% with VAR. By comparison, Premier League referees before VAR had an accuracy rate of just 82%, which improved to 96% post-VAR. While the improvement is significant, the baseline—82%—is alarmingly low for the self-proclaimed “best league in the world.”

A notable trend is the reluctance of referees to make big decisions on the pitch. The average number of on-field red cards has decreased by 24% since VAR’s introduction, and while the number of penalties has increased, the number given by the referee has decreased 8%. In other words, referees now prefer to let VAR handle contentious moments because they know they will catch less flak for it. This hesitancy has led to situations where referees seem to rely on VAR as a safety net, compromising the flow and integrity of the game.

The impact shows in games like big FA Cup matches where refs no longer have VAR as a crutch to lean on, we get terrible decisions as in the Manchester United vs Arsenal game.

Human Error or Something More?

Referee human error

The integrity of refereeing has also been called into question by admissions from high-profile referees.

Mike Dean, speaking on a podcast, admitted to avoiding a VAR review during a Chelsea vs. Tottenham game to protect his on pitch colleague, Anthony Taylor, from further criticism. He literally said:

I didn’t want to send him up because he is my mate as well as a referee. And I didn’t want to send him up because I didn’t want any more grief than he already had.

So instead of making the right decision for the game, he tried to protect his friend. That is totally unacceptable and a damning indictment of the standard of officiating.

Similarly, Mark Clattenburg revealed he awarded a dubious penalty in the 2016 Champions League final to “balance the game” after a contentious offside decision earlier. Basically, he let a goal stand that was marginally offside early in the game, so when a 50/50 penalty decision came up later, he gave it based on his earlier mistake.

He said:

“I was very fortunate in this final two or three minutes after halftime and presented with a really 50-50 penalty on Torres very clever getting in front of Pepe to draw a foul and Is it a foul? It’s very subjective. It’s one that you wouldn’t want to settle the game on, that’s for sure. And I gave it because it gives the balance back.”

Once again, he wasn’t making the right decision, he was making the decision that got him off the hook. The ref’s job is not to balance the game, it’s to officiate. To make impartial decisions based on the rules. It’s not impartial if you are basing your decisions now on something that happened 15 minutes ago.

These anecdotes highlight a troubling willingness among referees to prioritise personal relationships or reputational concerns over fairness and impartiality.

Final Thoughts

While it’s easy to focus on individual grievances, such as the undeniable bias against Manchester United over the last few seasons, the broader issue is the overall standard of refereeing in England. Every club will have their own versions of what happens to United.

The Premier League should consider recruiting and training referees to match the quality seen in major international tournaments. Tools like semi-automated offsides and more streamlined VAR processes could help improve decision-making.

At the heart of the matter is the need for accountability and transparency. Fans of all teams can point to a litany of poor decisions that have affected their clubs. If the Premier League wants to call itself the best league in the world, officiating in England must follow suit.