I have felt the same for some time. I get the feeling that Premier football has become a big money production , which might sound innocent, except it relies on massive worldwide audiences , and it’s real money, top money revolves around what TV, the Premier business entity who ever they actually are and half a dozen mega wealthy clubs, the rest get paid well to be bit players, my fear is the referees are to close to what the TV and Business entity want from them. No one yet can be sure of where corruption occurs , but money can move even perceptions of corruption.

With respect Willo maybe that’s not how referees should be viewing the situation.
A foul is a foul, the game is stopped , the offended lose momentum , only a booking after say three or four will stop it becoming a whole 90 minutes of advantage being gained by stopping the game with a foul. There should be a debate over how any team, and lots do ,get through a game having committed 20. fouls with one very late booking. It’s all very well dealing with technical infringements This should be dealt with As it happens Ayew did what players do every week on his first booking, I think it was the Villa, game someone did it ,no booking , the Liverpool player meant to hit him, he didn’t ,as it happened how’s that for working pathetic rulings over.?

The introduction of more Fergie time this season is yet another thing that favours the so called big teams with their huge squads. Also longer to turn around a result that may be considered a bit of an anomaly as you've alluded to.

Yep a bit like giving free kicks on the half way line, to balance the books,which seems to happen most games against the big boys

Yes, in the end both the penalty decisions were correct. What was unacceptable was the gross, almost embarassing imbalance and unfairness involved in the dishing out of cards.

I assume you will now either claim that every decision to award or not to award a card at yesterday's game was correct; or retreat to your normal fall-back position, i.e., that referees make mistakes, but without conceding that Madley made any. Perhaps for good measure you will claim that he refereed "with aplomb", even though I've told you before that that word doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

I have always asserted that referees err from time to time having to make split-second decisions under pressure in a fast moving game.

I have concluded that had we not conceded a goal in the dying embers of the game there would not be the furore about the performance of Andy Madley.
His performance will of course be the subject of 'Forensic' analysis as are the performances of referees throughout the PL.

Finally, I am comfortable with my use of "Ablomb" in the context you highlighted.