Hi guys
Not really read or kept up with this thread too much but have read the last few pages and already had an idea of what it's about.
For what it's worth (nothing), I think this is a brilliant idea and if done correctly it will, not might, come up with all sorts of inconsistencies.
Football is the major sport that is most guilty, by far, of pandering to certain teams. I believe that a lot of it is through shear sycophancy, fear and intimidation and not deliberate corruption. However, it just does not go on to such a significant extent in other sports - and the examples that you will find in other sports are rare and almost exclusively limited to on field officials not having the strength of mind not to be influenced.
Unfortunately football has much more officials which conform to this stereotype and, even worse, in football it extends to those that officiate the game off the field.
I'd love to help but really would struggle to find the time to commit to something at the moment. Maybe in the future.
Anyway, I just wanted to say 'stick with it' and add my support to this. If done correctly and with good standards it could expose a sport that has become so up it's own orrifice and so entralled to certain influences that it has lost sight of the central remit of any sport - complete and utter even handed application of the rules.
You'll have to bear in mind though that in a couple of years time with the inevitible success, the game is so messed up that City will start to benefit from such pathetic bias. That's hardly the point though.
ps: why wouldn't League Cup games be included? FA bans apply to them (Adebayor banned for Fulham, etc). Willful misapplication of the deliberately included flexibility in the laws is out of order whenever it occurs.