Ref Watch City Games - 2023/24

[Moss Side's Finest]

But Hooper had told us through Webb & we are speculating it’s bullshit.

I don't believe Webb told us ANYTHING apart from a load of old bumf. He had to say something because the TV show was already booked in. The reality is, he said something without telling us anything.

The facts are, it was a horrendous decision from Hooper. He had to make conscious decisions/actions to do what he did, so there MUST have been a thought process, so therefore he MUST be able to explain exactly why he chose to make those conscious decisions. But neither he nor PGMOL will explain (which within itself is a conscious decision), therefore many city fans will always suspect wrongdoing.

 

[cheekybids]

Webb has given a response that we all think isn’t true. That doesn’t definitively mean it was corruption.

He didn’t offer a reason why he didn’t wait that second longer, just that Hooper now wishes he has.

The rest is speculation, unless Hooper answers questions about it.

My opinion & I’ve given it many times is that Webb makes referees nervous about making bad decisions which affect certain clubs due to the bad publicity. Make a bad decision against Rags & Dippers & you are dropped but a bad decision against City you are forgiven.

I argue that’s corruption.

Atwell made one of the worst seen last year at OT & his career went from strength to strength.

• Bribery.
• Trading in influence.
• Patronage.
• Nepotism and cronyism.
• Gombeenism and parochialism.
• Electoral fraud.
• Embezzlement.
• Kickbacks.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

Webb has given a response that we all think isn’t true. That doesn’t definitively mean it was corruption.

He didn’t offer a reason why he didn’t wait that second longer, just that Hooper now wishes he has.

The rest is speculation, unless Hooper answers questions about it.

So if I went out and robbed a bank with a gun, then I couldn't explain why I did it but said I wished I hadn't. Would it be just speculation as to whether I'd done it on purpose?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

My opinion & I’ve given it many times is that Webb makes referees nervous about making bad decisions which affect certain clubs due to the bad publicity. Make a bad decision against Rags & Dippers & you are dropped but a bad decision against City you are forgiven.

I argue that’s corruption.

Atwell made one of the worst seen last year at OT & his career went from strength to strength.

It isn’t corruption though.

corruption is defined as: dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.

We’re not far apart on your first paragraph.

Playing advantage is at the discretion of the referee. He’s not made an unlawful decision in footballing terms, he’s made a shit one.

Getting an offside call badly wrong is a fundamental error in footballing law. Hence that one got an apology.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

So if I went out and robbed a bank with a gun, then I couldn't explain why I did it but said I wished I hadn't. Would it be just speculation as to whether I'd done it on purpose?

I’m not sure that analogy works. Whether you have meant to rob a bank or sleepwalked there, you’d still get a hefty stretch as it’s against the law.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

I’m not sure that analogy works. Whether you have meant to rob a bank or sleepwalked there, you’d still get a hefty stretch as it’s against the law.

Whether it's legal/illegal or inside/outside the laws of the game wasn't the point I was trying to analogise. What I was trying say was, you can't judge intent based on an accompanying explanation, or lack thereof. Actions speak louder than words, and his actions and the lack of explanatory actions after it, looks really dodgy

 

[Paladin]

He blew before he knew Grealish was through on goal. It was a shite decision, but one he made. He doesn’t have the view the camera does.

He waved play on as he saw Haaland get up and play the ball. He must have thought Haaland had shanked it and he blew for the foul. Well, either that, or he was plugged into the matrix and became Agent Smith.

The audio doesn't support the latter. He just fucked up.

I don't understand why you are being so closed minded about this. If Hooper had thought Haaland had shanked his pass, he would have said this to Webb, and Webb would have given this as the explanation. This was not his reason for calling back the advantage.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Whether it's legal/illegal or inside/outside the laws of the game wasn't the point I was trying to analogise. What I was trying say was, you can't judge intent based on an accompanying explanation, or lack thereof

Which is fine. He made a decision to stop play before he should have. Why, we will never know.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

Which is fine. He made a decision to stop play before he should have. Why, we will never know.

The point at which he made that decision though was HIGHLY questionable, that is why the club and fans deserve a true explanation and not the tripe Webb served up to satisfy his media obligations. If this is let go, where is the line drawn on referee's power to stop advantages being played? How about waiting until the ball leaves the strikers boot and is heading for the top corner only for play to be pulled back? It gives too much opportunity for referee's conscious or unconscious biases to come into the mix. I'm not saying we shouldn't trust referee's with making these decisions, I am just saying, when such monumental unprecedented errors occur there has to be transparency, and there just hasn't been that here.

 

[Paladin]

I’d bin Webb tomorrow. He’s a terrible orator and has made VAR worse.

Hooray. Something we can agree upon.