David Coote | Charged with making indecent video of a child (p57)

[dadnlad]

Twattenberg - Contracts with Bookies and threatening business rivals

Dean - Contract with bookies

Bobby Madeley - Suspended for 'personal issues'

PiGMOL was rotten as fuck under old mother Riley. It seems to be the same under Webb. Then again being ex SYP I'm not surprised.

Deans horse racing syndicate with GPC

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

There was a ref called Dave Coote
In his mouth he firmly planted his foot
He called Klopp a ****
There ensued a witch hunt
And now he's been given the boot.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Twattenberg - Contracts with Bookies and threatening business rivals

Dean - Contract with bookies

Bobby Madeley - Suspended for 'personal issues'

PiGMOL was rotten as fuck under old mother Riley. It seems to be the same under Webb. Then again being ex SYP I'm not surprised.

Riley only got that role when he had to be moved from refereeing duties. Keith Hackett was his predecessor and he was shoved aside against his will to accommodate Riley. Also around the same time, Styles & Bennett left and there was the Clattenburg saga.

I'm told that was the result of certain 'disclosures' but anyone who saw Clattenburg's performance in that infamous Merseyside derby, as well as Riley's in the united v Arsenal game, surely can't be in any doubt that corruption was involved.

 

[Inter Me Nan]

This thread has reinvigorated my hatred of Klopp & the murderers.
Thank you.

 

[jimharri]

Hope he's got an account with Indeed. His career as a referee is over.

 

[VOOMER]

Would you be fine if a Ref told the same about Guardiola and you turn around a couple years backlog to find contentious decisions against Man City?
Would you accept it?

Sniff, sniff, sniff

 

[TedofChume]

Riley only got that role when he had to be moved from refereeing duties. Keith Hackett was his predecessor and he was shoved aside against his will to accommodate Riley. Also around the same time, Styles & Bennett left and there was the Clattenburg saga.



I'm told that was the result of certain 'disclosures' but anyone who saw Clattenburg's performance in that infamous Merseyside derby, as well as Riley's in the united v Arsenal game, surely can't be in any doubt that corruption was involved.

I have firmly believed for years that professional football is controlled by the Eton Old Boys, and that "controversy" of any kind is important



Ultimately, it occupies the back pages and suppresses all other sports whenever it can. So:



Referees making big mistakes

Controversial rule interpretations

The various incarnations of offside/handball

VAR



It's all "marketing" at the end of the day.



Originally you had the "homer" Referee who simply was bias towards the home team. The logic, if the home team win, the fans will be back next week in bigger numbers, so give them the advantage. This increases attendances and therefore revenue for all. It's fairc ecru home team gets the advantage.



Once you've established this "commercial" system, it's very easy to "help" ensure matches and competitions go to the wire forc title relegation and promotion.



They control the fixture lists, how often to poignant fixtures get thrown up or potential title deciders land on am FA Cup weekend almost certainly to be postponed.. and played at the end of the season?



Everytime we see rules and decisions that make no sense whatsoever they never "destroy" competition and interest in the game, they always galvanise and open up options to increase interest.



It's not just English football, it's worldwide. Remember Barcelona getting thumped in the first leg and winning the return leg by a cricket score. A few years later the Referee admitted being bribed. It's just how it is.



Liverpool were 11 pts clear at the start of 2019, City put in a unbelievable run to win the league. Yet it is a mystery how City lost at Newcastle. City were 1-0 up KDB took a quick free kick for Aguero to make it 2-0. The Referee then booked KDB disallowed the goal and rammed home various bias decisions to build the confidence of Newcastle to go on and win the game.



A few years later City are losing at Newcastle and have to win to keep on Arsenal's coat-tails, just enough time is added for 0scar Bobb to get the winner.



This is what they do, they manage the spectacle for entertainment. If you ran the Prenier League and wanted to make as much money as possible wouldn't you do the same?



Remember the FA, the Premier League and Football League are all limited companies, set up to make a profit.



The FA has 1045 shareholders. It owns the IP of the game ie the rules. The same shareholders own the Scottish, Welsh and NI FAs.



IFAB make.the rules and haa 8 members, four permanent England, NI, Scotland, Wales plus four transient members, with the FA having the deciding vote.



FIFA, UEFA, CONMEBOL, ONCACAF, AFC, FCA and Oceana must all licence the IP/Rules off IFAB/FA one way or another.



These Eton Old Boys created the game we all love and still control it with an iron fist to this day.



Every single "odd" decision is carefully calculated to mamage and control the asset.

 

[normskih]

Riley only got that role when he had to be moved from refereeing duties. Keith Hackett was his predecessor and he was shoved aside against his will to accommodate Riley. Also around the same time, Styles & Bennett left and there was the Clattenburg saga.

I'm told that was the result of certain 'disclosures' but anyone who saw Clattenburg's performance in that infamous Merseyside derby, as well as Riley's in the united v Arsenal game, surely can't be in any doubt that corruption was involved.

I can’t bring to my memory the Merseyside derby but the quite ridiculously refereed utd v arsenal match will live long in my memory. Quite how that match stood without replaying I will never know.

 

[Pubteam Lomas]

I can’t bring to my memory the Merseyside derby but the quite ridiculously refereed utd v arsenal match will live long in my memory. Quite how that match stood without replaying I will never know.

It was corrupt to the core. Rooney should've been outed for his blatant cheating that night but he was England's golden boy.
Arsenal weren't allowed to win that game. They could've found the back of the net 10 times and Riley would have found a reason to disallow every one of them.

 

[give it to gordon]

A hint of coercion??

You just have to listen back to that arrogant cvnt Klopp's press conferences to see the scouse twats trying to either apply pressure to influence ref's performances pre-game, or listen to his post match antics where he hangs certain refs out to dry for their 'below-par' performances; followed by PiGMOL removing certain refs from their games, the only question that needs answering is "was the coercion implied or inferred?"

I can remember saying to my old man when pisscan was still at the rags ' refs should refuse to ref utd games the way pisscan behaves '

 

[cheekybids]

Riley only got that role when he had to be moved from refereeing duties. Keith Hackett was his predecessor and he was shoved aside against his will to accommodate Riley. Also around the same time, Styles & Bennett left and there was the Clattenburg saga.

I'm told that was the result of certain 'disclosures' but anyone who saw Clattenburg's performance in that infamous Merseyside derby, as well as Riley's in the united v Arsenal game, surely can't be in any doubt that corruption was involved.

Did you say PGMOL turned up at a fans forum in 2012 & were sworn to secrecy? It’s 12 years now, is it ok to tell us? (Apologies in advance if I’m wrong)

 

[cheekybids]

It was corrupt to the core. Rooney should've been outed for his blatant cheating that night but he was England's golden boy.
Arsenal weren't allowed to win that game. They could've found the back of the net 10 times and Riley would have found a reason to disallow every one of them.

& the pundits are fucking knee deep telling the brain dead it’s all fair.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Did you say PGMOL turned up at a fans forum in 2012 & were sworn to secrecy? It’s 12 years now, is it ok to tell us? (Apologies in advance if I’m wrong)

We were sworn to secrecy beforehand but I've written about it since. Riley was a really nice guy but his powers of critical thinking weren't desperately impressive.

For one thing, he talked about allocating refs to games and how they tried to avoid any conflicts of interest. He tried to illustrate that using the example of Lee Mason, who had declared himself as a Bolton fan (although he was 100% a united fan). Then someone pointed out that Mason had reffed a game at Old Trafford where the rags were playing QPR (and where Mason made a shocker of a decision in awarding a penalty to united which involved both an offside and a dive). As Bolton & QPR were in a relegation battle, how could that not be a very obvious conflict of interest? You could see from Riley's expression that this had never occurred to him.

The other thing was me asking a question about the then-rule over DOCGSO, which was an automatic red card, even if it resulted in a penalty. In the OT incident I described above, QPR's Sean Derry was sent off (even though he was entirely innocent). Whether he was innocent or not, the point I made was that the penalty restored the goal-scoring opportunity whereas a red card would be appropriate if the incident occurred outside the area, such as when Ronald Koeman fouled David Platt in the 1994 World Cup qualifier. Or if the foul in the area warranted a red card in itself.

Riley replied that PGMOL had talked about that but they'd decided that if players knew they wouldn't get a red card for a foul in the area, they'd wait until the opposing player was in the box. We all laughed and he looked puzzled until it was pointed out that the ref could give a penalty if the foul was in the box.

The collective level of intelligence at PGMOL didn't strike me as being particularly high.

 

[BigJoe#1]

We were sworn to secrecy beforehand but I've written about it since. Riley was a really nice guy but his powers of critical thinking weren't desperately impressive.

For one thing, he talked about allocating refs to games and how they tried to avoid any conflicts of interest. He tried to illustrate that using the example of Lee Mason, who had declared himself as a Bolton fan (although he was 100% a united fan). Then someone pointed out that Mason had reffed a game at Old Trafford where the rags were playing QPR (and where Mason made a shocker of a decision in awarding a penalty to united which involved both an offside and a dive). As Bolton & QPR were in a relegation battle, how could that not be a very obvious conflict of interest? You could see from Riley's expression that this had never occurred to him.

The other thing was me asking a question about the then-rule over DOCGSO, which was an automatic red card, even if it resulted in a penalty. In the OT incident I described above, QPR's Sean Derry was sent off (even though he was entirely innocent). Whether he was innocent or not, the point I made was that the penalty restored the goal-scoring opportunity whereas a red card would be appropriate if the incident occurred outside the area, such as when Ronald Koeman fouled David Platt in the 1994 World Cup qualifier. Or if the foul in the area warranted a red card in itself.

Riley replied that PGMOL had talked about that but they'd decided that if players knew they wouldn't get a red card for a foul in the area, they'd wait until the opposing player was in the box. We all laughed and he looked puzzled until it was pointed out that the ref could give a penalty if the foul was in the box.

The collective level of intelligence at PGMOL didn't strike me as being particularly high.

I personally knew and worked with the linesman involved in that incident. Ceri Richards a nice guy, he never run the line in a Premier League game again.

He never ever, not once called a mistake by a Premiership referee to me. Always had an explanation.... an extreme Dermot Gallagher.

 

[richardtheref]

We were sworn to secrecy beforehand but I've written about it since. Riley was a really nice guy but his powers of critical thinking weren't desperately impressive.

For one thing, he talked about allocating refs to games and how they tried to avoid any conflicts of interest. He tried to illustrate that using the example of Lee Mason, who had declared himself as a Bolton fan (although he was 100% a united fan). Then someone pointed out that Mason had reffed a game at Old Trafford where the rags were playing QPR (and where Mason mad

e a shocker of a decision in awarding a penalty to united which involved both an offside and a dive). As Bolton & QPR were in a relegation battle, how could that not be a very obvious conflict of interest? You could see from Riley's expression that this had never occurred to him.

The other thing was me asking a question about the then-rule over DOCGSO, which was an automatic red card, even if it resulted in a penalty. In the OT incident I described above, QPR's Sean Derry was sent off (even though he was entirely innocent). Whether he was innocent or not, the point I made was that the penalty restored the goal-scoring opportunity whereas a red card would be appropriate if the incident occurred outside the area, such as when Ronald Koeman fouled David Platt in the 1994 World Cup qualifier. Or if the foul in the area warranted a red card in itself.

Riley replied that PGMOL had talked about that but they'd decided that if players knew they wouldn't get a red card for a foul in the area, they'd wait until the opposing player was in the box. We all laughed and he looked puzzled until it was pointed out that the ref could give a penalty if the foul was in the box.

The collective level of intelligence at PGMOL didn't strike me as being particularly high.

I went to a refs meeting once when Riley was the guest speaker and I concur with all of the above. Came across as being wet.
Went to a similar meeting with Webb and, at least, he came across a lot better. However, he now seems to tow the party line.
Hackett when he attended was a pompous knob lwith a huge chip on his shoulder.
Lee Mason came to try and give a talk to inspire young refs. He did anything but and then charged the RA £300.
Kevin Friend came the night before he was due to ref a newcastle game and had at least 8 pints which I would assume is not best practice. His advice was to always carry eye drops so as not to appear hung over

 

[Newman Noggs]

We were sworn to secrecy beforehand but I've written about it since. Riley was a really nice guy but his powers of critical thinking weren't desperately impressive.

For one thing, he talked about allocating refs to games and how they tried to avoid any conflicts of interest. He tried to illustrate that using the example of Lee Mason, who had declared himself as a Bolton fan (although he was 100% a united fan). Then someone pointed out that Mason had reffed a game at Old Trafford where the rags were playing QPR (and where Mason made a shocker of a decision in awarding a penalty to united which involved both an offside and a dive). As Bolton & QPR were in a relegation battle, how could that not be a very obvious conflict of interest? You could see from Riley's expression that this had never occurred to him.

The other thing was me asking a question about the then-rule over DOCGSO, which was an automatic red card, even if it resulted in a penalty. In the OT incident I described above, QPR's Sean Derry was sent off (even though he was entirely innocent). Whether he was innocent or not, the point I made was that the penalty restored the goal-scoring opportunity whereas a red card would be appropriate if the incident occurred outside the area, such as when Ronald Koeman fouled David Platt in the 1994 World Cup qualifier. Or if the foul in the area warranted a red card in itself.

Riley replied that PGMOL had talked about that but they'd decided that if players knew they wouldn't get a red card for a foul in the area, they'd wait until the opposing player was in the box. We all laughed and he looked puzzled until it was pointed out that the ref could give a penalty if the foul was in the box.

The collective level of intelligence at PGMOL didn't strike me as being particularly high.

The thing that stuck in my mind at that meeting was that he used two examples of how different people have different opinions on the same incident. Both involved City, one of which was Vinnie getting sent off against united for an innocuous challenge. I can't recall the other one but what stayed with me is that both contentious calls went against City.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Mate, you're (IMHO) 100% correct.
Organised football has always been simply entertainment for the great unwashed.
Marketing? Demand? Popularity? Success? Capitalism?

It's inevitably now been effected by outside factors and morphed into (at least in the heady echelons of the Premier League) absolutely HUGE business. But it's effectively showbusiness.

It's organised, dramatized entertainment, of this I'm certain.

 

[Blue Mist]

I went to a refs meeting once when Riley was the guest speaker and I concur with all of the above. Came across as being wet.
Went to a similar meeting with Webb and, at least, he came across a lot better. However, he now seems to tow the party line.
Hackett when he attended was a pompous knob lwith a huge chip on his shoulder.
Lee Mason came to try and give a talk to inspire young refs. He did anything but and then charged the RA £300.
Kevin Friend came the night before he was due to ref a newcastle game and had at least 8 pints which I would assume is not best practice. His advice was to always carry eye drops so as not to appear hung over

Eye drops so as not to appear hung over and a hanky to make it appear that you have a cold...... after you've done 4 grams of Bolivias finest ?

 

[jimharri]

..... The collective level of intelligence at PGMOL didn't strike me as being particularly high.

Referees not being the sharpest knives in the kitchen drawer? You can't begin to imagine my surprise.

 

[Blue Maverick]

Whatever happens to him hope he looks after himself, this could all go very wrong for him and maybe rightly so but not to the extent where he may think enough is enough if you know what I mean.