"City have the best defence in the league, and even City have had penalties awarded against them this season."
And that has what to do with United's defence?
"How can a team with 3rd rate defence that makes Arsenal's shambolic defending in most games this season look like world class defending NOT concede a single penalty?"
We had the best defence last season, and most of our "3rd rate" defensive performances were extremely concentrated at the start of the season. Also, most of our bad defensive performances seemed to be associated with standing off too much, which isn't the kind of thing that leads to penalties. Even then, bad defence doesn't automatically equal penalties.
"Additionally, Man U had their best defensive line-up (Rafael, Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra) in midweek's match against a midtable Hammers side and still shipped TWO goals. Now explain to the forum why they haven't had a penalty awarded against them when all other teams have had penalties against the season, unWisey?"
The first sentence and the following question are not linked. Their defence allowed 2 goals in in one game, therefore I have to answer why they haven't had penalties in every other game?
"Please don't tell us that all those shirt-pulling and grabbing other teams attackers by waist in a sumo-like fashion most especially commited by Vidic inside Man U's penalty box don't deserve a penalty award. "
About as much as the shirt-pulling that other defenders do and also get away with? If penalties were given for that, I'd think it fair enough. I don' think the fact it hasn't been caught indicates the sinister "not adding up" you're talking about.
"As Allardyce said, "referees favour Man U"."
I agree, and I've posted before about how and why referees unconsciously favour big teams. It adds up to me.