Numptyed
Well-Known Member
So its Al Fayed thats behind it!inbetween said:
Definitely corrupt.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A question for those who think corruption is happening.
- Thread starter Pigeonho
- Start date
I can see why some people think that there is corruption in the game, and I'm sure, maybe, down the years a ref or a manager or someone in the FA did something corrupt, it's possible.
But I don't believe that is'an on going, game to game thing, nobody would be brave enough to do it,
People would talk about it, someone would speak out, speak up, it just wouldn't happen I can't see it.
Refs in all sports eveywhere in the world make mistakes, they're human, they're not perfect, but we've it easy enough in football, you lot have no idea.
Try rugby for instance, football has clear enough rules, rugby has changed the rules a bit (I'm not going to bother explaining because if you know, well you'll know it's too complicated to explain) so a lot of it is now down to the interpretation of the rules from the ref.
One match one ref would pick on problem x, while another ref would ignore problem x and pick on problem y.
We then have Sky commentators going on and on giving their opinion and blatantly influencing refs, highlighting certain issues that a team were doing, and this actually has happened, refs fell for it and penalised and targeted that problem.
In GAA, twice, 2 years in a row, I saw the same ref, in the same fixture (which was at the time, the equivilant of Liverpool v United 5 years ago) two teams that drew massive passionate crowds, teams that always brought out the best in eachother, two years in a row, the same ref tried to play for a replay. Seconds left and a point between the teams and gave away 1 free that wasn't a free..he missed, and the year after, he gave a free for something he wouldn't have done up the field. Now strictly speaking the second year was down to your interpretation of the rule, which would have been fine and well if he gave a free in for every time it happened, but he didn't. Inconsistant would have been a polite way of putting it.
Or refs not penalising a certain top team when other teams get away with it.
Refs play for the big teams and rarely do they try and hide it.
Here, what I just mentioned that's just inconsistancy and perhaps borderline fixing.
Next up are the very illegal.
And as for the types of sports like boxing (fightfixing), swimming, horse riding (horses are drugged up but the riders knew nothing about it), athletics (every second athlete seems to be on something), cycling (nothing should need to be said when it comes to how bad this sport is), never mind the American sports, you look at the drug riddled players, and you think we have a problem?.
As an organisation, I'm not sure how much you all can see it, but it's a hell lot better run, and much more professional than a lot of sports. We're very lucky in that regards.
It has it's flaws, we all know that, and you want corruption I'm sure you look hard enough you'll find it at every level in every sport, all over the world, America to Europe, but all we can do and all the teams can do is play their game, and we support them because there's fuck all we can do about it, they are in the minority and if they're there they will get caught eventually.
Why we have such a massive problem on here with it is because there are so many dishonest players, if the only thing we can hold up as proof of corruption, is a player tricking a ref into giving a penalty one week, and another ref not falling for the same thing a week later, well, as an organisation, we're in good shape.
But if PLAYERS weren't too busy trying to fool refs all day long, and refs, as a result of that being hard to convince, there would be a lot less mistakes in the game.
That's as simple as it gets, stop cheating, and refs would be a lot more consistant.
And if we weren't so bloody obsessed with United all the time, we'd see that things do even themselves out and other teams, including very much ourselves here, get decisions for and against them, all the time.
At the end of the day, it is down to the 22 players on the pitch and a ref could be paid as much as he likes, there's no way he, or any manager or FA official, can prevent Scholes from turnign up at the edge of the box and and hitting a goal in after 88 mins of shocking play from United.
At the end of the day, 99% of the time, the better team, the players, win, and that's something nobody can control but the players. No ref can stop that, and no FA official can influence that.They might be able to control what teams qualify for the world cup, but they have very little say on what those 22 lads come up with on the pitch.
The officials may be trying to destroy this game every decision at a time, but they can't control what happens on the pitch, and if they could we would not be in the top 4 and English teams would not do so well in the CL.
But there's no point in worrying about something we can't change and appreciate how good we have it.
I'd recomend watching some of the best players in the world, play in the Premiership, week in, week out, it should serve as a bit of a comfort.
As an organisation as a whole, compare it to all the other sports, we really don't have much to complain about do we.
But I don't believe that is'an on going, game to game thing, nobody would be brave enough to do it,
People would talk about it, someone would speak out, speak up, it just wouldn't happen I can't see it.
Refs in all sports eveywhere in the world make mistakes, they're human, they're not perfect, but we've it easy enough in football, you lot have no idea.
Try rugby for instance, football has clear enough rules, rugby has changed the rules a bit (I'm not going to bother explaining because if you know, well you'll know it's too complicated to explain) so a lot of it is now down to the interpretation of the rules from the ref.
One match one ref would pick on problem x, while another ref would ignore problem x and pick on problem y.
We then have Sky commentators going on and on giving their opinion and blatantly influencing refs, highlighting certain issues that a team were doing, and this actually has happened, refs fell for it and penalised and targeted that problem.
In GAA, twice, 2 years in a row, I saw the same ref, in the same fixture (which was at the time, the equivilant of Liverpool v United 5 years ago) two teams that drew massive passionate crowds, teams that always brought out the best in eachother, two years in a row, the same ref tried to play for a replay. Seconds left and a point between the teams and gave away 1 free that wasn't a free..he missed, and the year after, he gave a free for something he wouldn't have done up the field. Now strictly speaking the second year was down to your interpretation of the rule, which would have been fine and well if he gave a free in for every time it happened, but he didn't. Inconsistant would have been a polite way of putting it.
Or refs not penalising a certain top team when other teams get away with it.
Refs play for the big teams and rarely do they try and hide it.
Here, what I just mentioned that's just inconsistancy and perhaps borderline fixing.
Next up are the very illegal.
And as for the types of sports like boxing (fightfixing), swimming, horse riding (horses are drugged up but the riders knew nothing about it), athletics (every second athlete seems to be on something), cycling (nothing should need to be said when it comes to how bad this sport is), never mind the American sports, you look at the drug riddled players, and you think we have a problem?.
As an organisation, I'm not sure how much you all can see it, but it's a hell lot better run, and much more professional than a lot of sports. We're very lucky in that regards.
It has it's flaws, we all know that, and you want corruption I'm sure you look hard enough you'll find it at every level in every sport, all over the world, America to Europe, but all we can do and all the teams can do is play their game, and we support them because there's fuck all we can do about it, they are in the minority and if they're there they will get caught eventually.
Why we have such a massive problem on here with it is because there are so many dishonest players, if the only thing we can hold up as proof of corruption, is a player tricking a ref into giving a penalty one week, and another ref not falling for the same thing a week later, well, as an organisation, we're in good shape.
But if PLAYERS weren't too busy trying to fool refs all day long, and refs, as a result of that being hard to convince, there would be a lot less mistakes in the game.
That's as simple as it gets, stop cheating, and refs would be a lot more consistant.
And if we weren't so bloody obsessed with United all the time, we'd see that things do even themselves out and other teams, including very much ourselves here, get decisions for and against them, all the time.
At the end of the day, it is down to the 22 players on the pitch and a ref could be paid as much as he likes, there's no way he, or any manager or FA official, can prevent Scholes from turnign up at the edge of the box and and hitting a goal in after 88 mins of shocking play from United.
At the end of the day, 99% of the time, the better team, the players, win, and that's something nobody can control but the players. No ref can stop that, and no FA official can influence that.They might be able to control what teams qualify for the world cup, but they have very little say on what those 22 lads come up with on the pitch.
The officials may be trying to destroy this game every decision at a time, but they can't control what happens on the pitch, and if they could we would not be in the top 4 and English teams would not do so well in the CL.
But there's no point in worrying about something we can't change and appreciate how good we have it.
I'd recomend watching some of the best players in the world, play in the Premiership, week in, week out, it should serve as a bit of a comfort.
As an organisation as a whole, compare it to all the other sports, we really don't have much to complain about do we.
Brum, Sunderland and Blackburn all concede within 5 mins at OT managed by Bruce, McCleish and Allardyce – enough said !
I find this part ridiculous. FFS, managers want to see their clubs win. There is no way managers would just simply not care about the game, the fact is also 11 players go out on the pitch as well. Chelsea must have put 7 past 4/5 teams last year, including Villa, that happens in football.
Sigh
Well-Known Member
Prestwich_Blue said:Perfectly serious unfortunately.Soulboy said:Is this yet another one of your wind ups! Or are you being serious here..
Any facts to support this, or is it just rumours? I would be very interested in this if it could be backed up...
Yes. Heard about that. I used to read a blog called Football is fixed which was an interesting read, e.g.
"Corrupt athletes win a few medals while some insiders are able to profit to some extent from a few tennis matches featuring coerced, and frightened, players. Compare and contrast with a certain Premiership manager whose average betting level was over £30,000 on EVERY Premiership match with just ONE bookmaker, a situation that the High Court decided was not in the public interest to pursue. Or, what about the behaviour of some of the dirty dozen Premiership referees who tilt their lack of professionalism to the the needs of certain betting markets? Or, what about issues relating to the global liquidity of the football betting markets where most major Premiership games feature £500 million - £1 billion betting markets?"
and so on. I just had a look at it seems to have been sanitized. Hadn't looked at it in over a year.
I don't think having professional refs has helped in terms of competance (we were told it would, just as we were told the PL and import of foreign players would improve home-grown talent, when it has done no-such thing...but it has helped put bums on seats around the world...), and actually puts refs under pressure. Obviously that was not the intent.
Aren't the rags going for their 19th this season? Time is of the essence isn't it? Aging squad. Aging manager. Glazers U.S. holdings stressed. Here come City.
wanderer72
Well-Known Member
The Future's Blue said:Very nice post Blue Mooner, and what I wanted to say but couldn't be arsed!
Not real corruption, just favouritism and bias.
Favouritism on this basis is indeed corruption, mate, but that is a side point. The real question is what can be done about it.
The fact of the matter is that any solution assumes firstly REALISATION that you have a problem in the first place, and this is why it is important that more people use their brains more often. Manipulators always depend on the "sheeple" obedience, and that is the first part of the problem that needs addressing. Let's raise our voices, FFS.
Pigeonho said:Serie A at that time was nowhere near as global and lucrative as the PL is right now. If this was happening, and there were clear signs it was too, surely someone would want to expose the biggest football story ever, especially a journo from the Sunday Tabloids?Dirty Harry said:It happened in Italy so why not here ?
Personally I think some go a bit far, but I tend to believe there is definitely a pecking order, an order we are moving up steadily.
It has happen on six separate occasions in Italian football, 2 of which they were the biggest league in the world.
However, I don't see it happening here, because I don't believe the myth that United get better decisions than others. I do believe that the top four do, but this is down to better players getting in more attacking positions than anyone buying anyone.
I also notice that people hold United to standards that they don't hold others to. Ithink of just as many dodgy decisions that we have been given, including three offside goals this season from Tevez, and blatant diving/playacting from Jo that went unpunished but nobody seems to think that we are buying referees off.
I support City though, so I can see those all together. I'm sure any honest fan of a club will be able to give you at least 5 examples every year of decisions that went for them.
This is paranoid madness with no statistical evidence to back it up.
wanderer72
Well-Known Member
Of course such things don't happen in England, England is very special. Also, English players are fair, good old chaps (Terry, Cole, Rooney, Beckham, Defoe...), foreign players are divers, as Sky has already explained it to us so well. In the FA the lads drink tea and shoot geese when not working hard to improve the game of football, while those bloody foreigners elsewhere can't live without their espressos and other homosexual habits, what's all that about???
Seriously though, I am not a statistics enthusiast to the extent that'd I'd expect even corruption to be proven by it (although you can surely find clear indicators to make you go "uhmmm" there), as it's also especialy about the TIMING of those "controversial" decisions, but I will agree with you it's not only Utd, actually not even only the top four (attacking football as an explanation?? Come on), but whoever is considered powerful enough. I'm sure a good share of people here hope City will one day become powerful enough to replace Utd in that respect as well, and I think it's just as wrong.
Seriously though, I am not a statistics enthusiast to the extent that'd I'd expect even corruption to be proven by it (although you can surely find clear indicators to make you go "uhmmm" there), as it's also especialy about the TIMING of those "controversial" decisions, but I will agree with you it's not only Utd, actually not even only the top four (attacking football as an explanation?? Come on), but whoever is considered powerful enough. I'm sure a good share of people here hope City will one day become powerful enough to replace Utd in that respect as well, and I think it's just as wrong.
Damocles said:Pigeonho said:Serie A at that time was nowhere near as global and lucrative as the PL is right now. If this was happening, and there were clear signs it was too, surely someone would want to expose the biggest football story ever, especially a journo from the Sunday Tabloids?
It has happen on six separate occasions in Italian football, 2 of which they were the biggest league in the world.
However, I don't see it happening here, because I don't believe the myth that United get better decisions than others. I do believe that the top four do, but this is down to better players getting in more attacking positions than anyone buying anyone.
I also notice that people hold United to standards that they don't hold others to. Ithink of just as many dodgy decisions that we have been given, including three offside goals this season from Tevez, and blatant diving/playacting from Jo that went unpunished but nobody seems to think that we are buying referees off.
I support City though, so I can see those all together. I'm sure any honest fan of a club will be able to give you at least 5 examples every year of decisions that went for them.
This is paranoid madness with no statistical evidence to back it up.
I agree with this, the thing is...best teams get media attention, any decision for them is highlighted in the media, any decisions against them is simply ignored or laughed at.
I'm sure if every match was looked upon over 90 minutes and big decisions were seen over, the results would be similar across most teams.
There's been stone waller penalties I've seen not given to United this season but just because they've won those games comfortably in the end, nothing is bought up.
wanderer72
Well-Known Member
That's not necessarily true. I am no fan of Pullis, but if I was a Stoke fan I'd be really pissed off with the refereeing this far this season, and primarily against other "small" clubs.
wanderer72 said:That's not necessarily true. I am no fan of Pullis, but if I was a Stoke fan I'd be really pissed off with the refereeing this far this season, and primarily against other "small" clubs.
Do you watch 90 minutes of Stoke every week to actually give your opinion some relevance or did you just miss the initial point?