oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
FALCONCITY said:
Care to enlighten us,from whom this message came from ??
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.
Mark Clattenberg
- Thread starter southstand117
- Start date
Care to enlighten us,from whom this message came from ??
BlueTony
Well-Known Member
oakiecokie said:BlueTony said:oakiecokie said:So please explain how Kompany and Yaya finished the full game.
Quite simple, they would have been 0-2 down ( see my edited post re the Silva pen ) and the play would have been totally different from then. Those tackles would not have been needed, have you ever played football? These things change the whole game.
Derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr yes ! And you point being ??
Thats like saying, if only if we had continued playing like we did in the opening 20 minutes things would have been different.
Yes,we could still have been beaten by two counter attacking goals.
Shit happens in football.
Ever played ??
33 years as a keeper (and have made players give up because they did'nt want to face me again). My point was the Silva nailed on penalty ( even ratboy admitted it was ) would have changed the game. If you have ever played you would know that every kick of the ball you saw after that would not have happened they would have all have been different from the chelski kick off onwards.
80s Shorts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,616
oakiecokie said:FALCONCITY said:Totally agree with Chris from London. in any walk of life, where there is money there are people at it. Football is not immune from corruption and last night proved it. if the ref was consistent in all decisions last night then city would have been 2 up and chelsea would have been down to 10 men after half an hour. everything that happened after this would not have happened if you know what i mean. Decisions change games and they certainly did last night. I don't care what anybody says, Clattenburg knew it was a penalty but chose not to give because he was under instuction. I have read De niros post on this and again i agree with everything he says as well.
Care to enlighten us,from whom this message came from ??
From the Russian mafia of course. Get with the programme for gods sake ;-)
oakiecokie
Well-Known Member
80s Shorts said:oakiecokie said:FALCONCITY said:Totally agree with Chris from London. in any walk of life, where there is money there are people at it. Football is not immune from corruption and last night proved it. if the ref was consistent in all decisions last night then city would have been 2 up and chelsea would have been down to 10 men after half an hour. everything that happened after this would not have happened if you know what i mean. Decisions change games and they certainly did last night. I don't care what anybody says, Clattenburg knew it was a penalty but chose not to give because he was under instuction. I have read De niros post on this and again i agree with everything he says as well.
Care to enlighten us,from whom this message came from ??
From the Russian mafia of course. Get with the programme for gods sake ;-)
It`ll be from the FA.Oh hang on isn`t Agent Bernstein .....<br /><br />-- Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:36 am --<br /><br />
BlueTony said:oakiecokie said:BlueTony said:Quite simple, they would have been 0-2 down ( see my edited post re the Silva pen ) and the play would have been totally different from then. Those tackles would not have been needed, have you ever played football? These things change the whole game.
Derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr yes ! And you point being ??
Thats like saying, if only if we had continued playing like we did in the opening 20 minutes things would have been different.
Yes,we could still have been beaten by two counter attacking goals.
Shit happens in football.
Ever played ??
33 years as a keeper (and have made players give up because they did'nt want to face me again). My point was the Silva nailed on penalty ( even ratboy admitted it was ) would have changed the game. If you have ever played you would know that every kick of the ball you saw after that would not have happened they would have all have been different from the chelski kick off onwards.
Thats my point !!
Had we been given the penalty award who could say that City would still have won after possibly being 0-2 up and then again who says that we would have scored ?
It matters not one iota,the bottom line remains we lost and shit happens.
If you`ve played football that long then you should know that.
Mugatu
Well-Known Member
Re: Was there something more sinister happening last night?
I think so Chris yes, but I accept that I'm an eternal optimist and I probably can't even allow myself to think that it can happen. I'll do my best to explain why I think that way.
Having followed Pierluigi Collina's thoughts on the game for some time, I know that he stated in his autobigraphy that he had seen some attempts at a form of corruption in his days, not at league or club level, but at International level where a couple of smaller countries football authorities would offer nice hotels, nights out at casinos with the tab paid for etc for visiting FIFA officials, but that he (rightly) believed that integrity was the cornerstone of any FIFA match official, and he believed that all of his contemporaries viewed it in the same light. He used to steer well clear of these approaches and had no knowledge of anyone accepting the offers.
His belief was that ANY breach of integrity even on a tiny scale, a free meal, a complimentary limo ride, anything, could be potentially career ending and damaging to the game. Believe it or not, match officials love the game as much as any fan or player.
Added to that is the scrutiny that officials are under... now I have to admit that I am not privy to whether the FA have sight of Mark Clattenburg's bank accounts, but going by the writings of Collina and others (including David Elleray) they are under pretty close scrutiny.
I do take your point that corruption has happened in cricket (by players remember, no suggestion that officials had a hand in the recent Pakistan betting saga) but players are in a far better position to influence or throw a game, certainly in terms of benefitting a betting syndicate.
Just my thoughts. I'd like to think today's officials are well above corruption, but I suppose there will always be doubt in some minds.
Chris in London said:Mugatu said:Oh good, another new "Clattenburg is bent" thread. We've not had one for 4 minutes now.
I agree with you that knee-jerk 'blame the ref, if we lost he must be bent' threads aren't really helpful, but you are somebody who has reffed in the game, so let me ask you this: do you think that Premier League football is compeltely free from corruption?
I think so Chris yes, but I accept that I'm an eternal optimist and I probably can't even allow myself to think that it can happen. I'll do my best to explain why I think that way.
Having followed Pierluigi Collina's thoughts on the game for some time, I know that he stated in his autobigraphy that he had seen some attempts at a form of corruption in his days, not at league or club level, but at International level where a couple of smaller countries football authorities would offer nice hotels, nights out at casinos with the tab paid for etc for visiting FIFA officials, but that he (rightly) believed that integrity was the cornerstone of any FIFA match official, and he believed that all of his contemporaries viewed it in the same light. He used to steer well clear of these approaches and had no knowledge of anyone accepting the offers.
His belief was that ANY breach of integrity even on a tiny scale, a free meal, a complimentary limo ride, anything, could be potentially career ending and damaging to the game. Believe it or not, match officials love the game as much as any fan or player.
Added to that is the scrutiny that officials are under... now I have to admit that I am not privy to whether the FA have sight of Mark Clattenburg's bank accounts, but going by the writings of Collina and others (including David Elleray) they are under pretty close scrutiny.
I do take your point that corruption has happened in cricket (by players remember, no suggestion that officials had a hand in the recent Pakistan betting saga) but players are in a far better position to influence or throw a game, certainly in terms of benefitting a betting syndicate.
Just my thoughts. I'd like to think today's officials are well above corruption, but I suppose there will always be doubt in some minds.
Fuzzmaster101 said:Nope, just honest.trublue55 said:Fuzzmaster101 said:I thought he was pretty decent tonight.
Are you related?
you appear to be in a minority of one, however i will accept you are honest, and as such may i suggest a visit to Specsavers
bluelol
Well-Known Member
Re: Was there something more sinister happening last night?
Having read through most of the post's this is the one most accurate for me, however the most important part of the game last night as well as other games in the past are being greatly affected by the officials and this cannot be right.
Whilst I realise that the officials job can't always be easy due to the nature of the game now which has moved on so much but, the stakes are much higher and feel they also have to move with the times.
Ja Salford Blue said:NO, we need to stop with these daft conspiracy theories, it is making us look very very bitter!
Should we have had a penalty? Yes
Should Meireles have been sent of? Yes
He got these two decisions wrong no question!
However
Was chelsea's a penalty? Yes
Was it a sending off? Yes
Could Kompany have been sent off? Yes
Could Yaya have been introuble for his little spat with Mata? Yes
And most importantly, should we have had the game killed off in the first 20mins? YES
I'm sorry lads but we only have our selves to blame for not getting at least a point!
So lets stop with all this shit that the FA have got it in for us and lets remember who the head of the FA is? thats right David Bernstien. A CITY FAN!
I'm going to take the positives from last night.
1) for the first 25 mins we played some of the best football we have this season
2) for large parts of the game we reduced Chelsea to stick 11 men behind the ball in their own half at home!
3) they celebrated at the end (fans & players) as if they had won the world cup, this shows how far we have come
3) we have now played the scum, spurs, liverpool and chelsea away, and we are still 2 points clear
4) we will now get the chance to see how the lads will react to a defeat and a bit of pressure
Having read through most of the post's this is the one most accurate for me, however the most important part of the game last night as well as other games in the past are being greatly affected by the officials and this cannot be right.
Whilst I realise that the officials job can't always be easy due to the nature of the game now which has moved on so much but, the stakes are much higher and feel they also have to move with the times.
Bluemanc100
Well-Known Member
got a tweet this morning from the FA which has to be a fuckin' joke, about training as a referee, apparently 1 in 1000 footballers don't make it but 1 in 100 Referees do
I sent them a right snottogramme back and told them that is Clattenberg was an indication of Refs at the top level they needed to sort their shit out and get video technology in
raging I was................
I sent them a right snottogramme back and told them that is Clattenberg was an indication of Refs at the top level they needed to sort their shit out and get video technology in
raging I was................
Mugatu
Well-Known Member
Bluemanc100 said:I sent them a right snottogramme back and told them that is Clattenberg was an indication of Refs at the top level they needed to sort their shit out and get video technology in
I bet they shit themselves, let us know how you get on as I can see video referals coming in by Saturday thanks to that. Good on you blue, someone had to tell 'em.
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,328
Re: Was there something more sinister happening last night?
Interesting.
I take your point about cricket corruption not involving the umpires, but I suppose one difference between cricket and football is that the easiest target for the corrupt in the cricket world is probably the players. Even at test level, international players are not that well paid (though on a shedload by normal standards) and so are perhaps moire vulnerable to financial inducements. In the cricket trial, there was evidence about threats to players' families back in pakistan, etc, and at least one of the players convicted was a lad of 18 whom you would assume was fairly impressionable. (He was the one who was spared jail.)
We know that there have been betting scandals in football before: I think it was Dennis Wise who admitted that he had been given a backhander to make sure the ball went out for a throw in in the first 30 seconds of a game (From the kick off he just Row Zedded the ball). That of course helped a syndicate who had money on when the first throw in would be. Then there are more explicit cases like Grobbelaar of direct match fixing.
But these days in football, at least at PL level players are generally extremely well paid, and so there is little financial motive for them to accept bribes in exchange for influence on the game, whether at match fixing level or even just in terms of putting the ball out for a throw in from the kick off.
Referees however look objectively like the weakest link: they are startlingly underpaid in terms of the amount of money swilling around the game and in terms of the importance of their role within the game: their individual influence on the game is probably greater than any of the players. Certainly, you would expect a ref to be able to influence the outcome of a game more than Grobbelaar could.
Put it this way, there is at the moment no evidence of any match fixing going on in the premier league, but IF that evidence was ever uncovered, it wouldn't be a surprise to see that it invovled referees.
Like you, I really hope that match fixing is simply not part of the premier league. Like someone else said, if it is, what's the point? But there are a lot of people who refuse even to contemplate the possibility that the game might be corrupt. That IMO is just naieve.
Mugatu said:Chris in London said:Mugatu said:Oh good, another new "Clattenburg is bent" thread. We've not had one for 4 minutes now.
I agree with you that knee-jerk 'blame the ref, if we lost he must be bent' threads aren't really helpful, but you are somebody who has reffed in the game, so let me ask you this: do you think that Premier League football is compeltely free from corruption?
I think so Chris yes, but I accept that I'm an eternal optimist and I probably can't even allow myself to think that it can happen. I'll do my best to explain why I think that way.
Having followed Pierluigi Collina's thoughts on the game for some time, I know that he stated in his autobigraphy that he had seen some attempts at a form of corruption in his days, not at league or club level, but at International level where a couple of smaller countries football authorities would offer nice hotels, nights out at casinos with the tab paid for etc for visiting FIFA officials, but that he (rightly) believed that integrity was the cornerstone of any FIFA match official, and he believed that all of his contemporaries viewed it in the same light. He used to steer well clear of these approaches and had no knowledge of anyone accepting the offers.
His belief was that ANY breach of integrity even on a tiny scale, a free meal, a complimentary limo ride, anything, could be potentially career ending and damaging to the game. Believe it or not, match officials love the game as much as any fan or player.
Added to that is the scrutiny that officials are under... now I have to admit that I am not privy to whether the FA have sight of Mark Clattenburg's bank accounts, but going by the writings of Collina and others (including David Elleray) they are under pretty close scrutiny.
I do take your point that corruption has happened in cricket (by players remember, no suggestion that officials had a hand in the recent Pakistan betting saga) but players are in a far better position to influence or throw a game, certainly in terms of benefitting a betting syndicate.
Just my thoughts. I'd like to think today's officials are well above corruption, but I suppose there will always be doubt in some minds.
Interesting.
I take your point about cricket corruption not involving the umpires, but I suppose one difference between cricket and football is that the easiest target for the corrupt in the cricket world is probably the players. Even at test level, international players are not that well paid (though on a shedload by normal standards) and so are perhaps moire vulnerable to financial inducements. In the cricket trial, there was evidence about threats to players' families back in pakistan, etc, and at least one of the players convicted was a lad of 18 whom you would assume was fairly impressionable. (He was the one who was spared jail.)
We know that there have been betting scandals in football before: I think it was Dennis Wise who admitted that he had been given a backhander to make sure the ball went out for a throw in in the first 30 seconds of a game (From the kick off he just Row Zedded the ball). That of course helped a syndicate who had money on when the first throw in would be. Then there are more explicit cases like Grobbelaar of direct match fixing.
But these days in football, at least at PL level players are generally extremely well paid, and so there is little financial motive for them to accept bribes in exchange for influence on the game, whether at match fixing level or even just in terms of putting the ball out for a throw in from the kick off.
Referees however look objectively like the weakest link: they are startlingly underpaid in terms of the amount of money swilling around the game and in terms of the importance of their role within the game: their individual influence on the game is probably greater than any of the players. Certainly, you would expect a ref to be able to influence the outcome of a game more than Grobbelaar could.
Put it this way, there is at the moment no evidence of any match fixing going on in the premier league, but IF that evidence was ever uncovered, it wouldn't be a surprise to see that it invovled referees.
Like you, I really hope that match fixing is simply not part of the premier league. Like someone else said, if it is, what's the point? But there are a lot of people who refuse even to contemplate the possibility that the game might be corrupt. That IMO is just naieve.