Is football corrupt?

[Plain Speaking]

Technology (in the manner that you describe) allows you 2 attempts at being corrupt. It actually makes it easier. They could have ruled out both of City's goals without the need for an explanation.

I disagree. If you have watched how video technology has made rugby, cricket
and tennis much fairer in their decisions. There is much more chance of making mistakes/cheating when you make decisions in an instant and their is no way to correct or check your call.

You're forgetting the option that a perfectly good goal could be ruled out by a VR. Are the players going to charge into the stands & start banging on the doors to argue a decision? If an on-field ref doesn't make a call then the VR could make the call - against your team.

This doesnt happen in any other sport. Reviewing a decision gives much fairer results. The Video refs dont just jump in and over rule the ref they have to be called in to help. Do you watch other sports like rugby? The review system generally is superb.
I generally agree with danburge82:

Video refs for:
1. Red card/no red card decisions
2. Penalty/no penalty decisions
3. Check questionable incidents directly leading to a goal (offside/foul/handball etc)
4. Goal line incidents.
Nothin more, nothing less.
... We need a video ref. .

For me too only contentious goals, sending offs and penalties.

 

[Bojinov The Bull]

I've always said that the problem with referees is that a lot of the time decisions are 50/50, a referee could decide its a penalty, another could blow for full time, one referee could give a yellow card, another a red card. The problem you have is that by the letter of the law you could make a case for either scenario but depending on how a referee feels about a certain team will definitely influence his decision.

Nobody is completely impartial, if you were refereeing Arsenal v Norwich being a City fan and Arsenal were level on points with us, a decision comes at the end of the game for a possible penalty to Norwich to make them possibly win, would you give it? Yes you would.

I'm not saying there is a cover up at any level in the FA, UEFA or FIFA im just purely talking about it from a referees personal point of view.

The only way forward is to follow the lead of tennis. Give teams 2 challenges each for any decision they choose in a game, you dont get more whether they are right or wrong though and then you look at the decision on the screen and a 5th official decides.

 

[chris_m]

It's UEFA. It's not just us. Ask Dinamo Zagreb fans. Ask other fans from teams in countries that UEFA don't like. And we're one they've especially taken a dislike too.

It wasn't just the goals, Blind and Boerrichter were given clean slates to do what they wanted, Dzeko was given offside or handball, every time he touched, yes, one or two maybe, but that many. Ridiculous. It was obvious.

UEFA=Mafia.

 

[CBlue]

Football has been corrupt for a long time.

We need machines to replace linesmen for calling offside.

Cameras to do referees jobs.

Simple.

Simple? I believe you are.

How does a machine determine if a player is interfering with play or is "active"?
Who interprets the laws of the game. You do know that a referee is only giving his opinion on those laws? How does a camera give an opinion?

 

[Blue Tooth]

Ref bottled it...right in line with play...must have seen the shirt pull
...can't see how he did not...very poor.

 

[AllyShaw10]

Now I know what it feels like on RAWK. Did the officials gift Ajax 2 goals, No.

The offside was 50/50, granted Balo should have had a pen.

And there us Mr Nolan who had a perfect goal disallowed at the weeked........... shit that doesn't fit the corruption agenda.

Spot on - you can find anything if your looking for it.

 

[CBlue]

I disagree. If you have watched how video technology has made rugby, cricket
and tennis much fairer in their decisions. There is much more chance of making mistakes/cheating when you make decisions in an instant and their is no way to correct or check your call.

You're forgetting the option that a perfectly good goal could be ruled out by a VR. Are the players going to charge into the stands & start banging on the doors to argue a decision? If an on-field ref doesn't make a call then the VR could make the call - against your team.

This doesnt happen in any other sport. Reviewing a decision gives much fairer results. The Video refs dont just jump in and over rule the ref they have to be called in to help. Do you watch other sports like rugby? The review system generally is superb.
I generally agree with danburge82:

Video refs for:
1. Red card/no red card decisions
2. Penalty/no penalty decisions
3. Check questionable incidents directly leading to a goal (offside/foul/handball etc)
4. Goal line incidents.
Nothin more, nothing less.
... We need a video ref. .

For me too only contentious goals, sending offs and penalties.

Rugby, cricket, tennis, blah blah blah...
These are all games that are start/stop. Football is continuous - in theory a game can be played with 2 stoppages in 90 minutes - half time & full time. Why would a ref stop the game to ask someone to overrule his opinion on a decision he didn't give? Take the Torres sending off against the rags - despite the VR from all angles, there are still differences of opinion.<br /><br />-- Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:13 pm --<br /><br />

I've always said that the problem with referees is that a lot of the time decisions are 50/50, a referee could decide its a penalty, another could blow for full time, one referee could give a yellow card, another a red card. The problem you have is that by the letter of the law you could make a case for either scenario but depending on how a referee feels about a certain team will definitely influence his decision.

Nobody is completely impartial, if you were refereeing Arsenal v Norwich being a City fan and Arsenal were level on points with us, a decision comes at the end of the game for a possible penalty to Norwich to make them possibly win, would you give it? Yes you would.

I'm not saying there is a cover up at any level in the FA, UEFA or FIFA im just purely talking about it from a referees personal point of view.

The only way forward is to follow the lead of tennis. Give teams 2 challenges each for any decision they choose in a game, you dont get more whether they are right or wrong though and then you look at the decision on the screen and a 5th official decides.

I think you are describing bias rather than corruption.

 

[Pam]

Incompetence and partiality, not corruption.

 

[CBlue]

Now I know what it feels like on RAWK. Did the officials gift Ajax 2 goals, No.

The offside was 50/50, granted Balo should have had a pen.

And there us Mr Nolan who had a perfect goal disallowed at the weeked........... shit that doesn't fit the corruption agenda.

Spot on - you can find anything if your looking for it.

Bollocks, if anything it supports the corruption agenda. If the referee was told to ensure that City don't lose & was given 10k to ensure that was the case - is that not corruption? The people who are conducting this corruption aren't interested in who's playing & their long term league aspirations, they are interested in the odds. Sticking a couple of million quid on West Ham to win is going to draw a little bit of attention!

 

[andyhinch]

Incompetence and partiality, not corruption.

Your been very balanced, nice to see