David Coote

[Zabbasbeard]

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.

Indeed. For all his faults, he cannot be in a good place and hopefully he is getting good support to avoid that.

 

[jimharri]

 

[Nightmare Walking]

Those statistics are poinless without context.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

What the fuck is 'best win %'?

Why are there only 4 teams shown?

Utterly meaningless and purposefully trying to insinuate that we are somehow complicit in cheating.

 

[cheekybids]

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.

Thanks mate.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Always liked him :)

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not sure if it’s been posted, but filming someone when they are off their tits and chatting shit as a consequence, and allowing it to end up in the press, is an absolute ****’s trick, irrespective of who it is.

 

[Shirley]

Stadium astro iirc are based in Malaysia which is rag and dipper land

 

[Nightmare Walking]

Not sure if it’s been posted, but filming someone when they are off their tits and chatting shit as a consequence, and allowing it to end up in the press, is an absolute ****’s trick, irrespective of who it is.

I'm so glad there was no such thing as camera phones, when I was partying.

 

[East Level 2]

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.

IIRC the decision to send off Vinnie against the rags in the cup highlights the difficulty of being a ref and the subjective nature of the laws of the game.
There are four possible outcomes to a potential foul:
No foul; play on,
Foul and free-kick,
Foul, free-kick and yellow card,
Foul, free-kick and red card.
Obviously the free-kick becomes a penalty if the offender is defending in his own penalty area.
A panel of refs were asked which of the four options was the correct outcome and each option received a similar number of votes. How can we get consistent decisions (which is what most of us want) if qualified referees give such a wide range of opinions?