Referees/Officials

  • Thread starter Thread starter blueinsa
  • Start date Start date
Neville Kneville said:
The final score would not necessarily be the important part, if a ref were being paid off (which I doubt was the case, he just favoured Barca & Bayern because he is a shithouse who bends over for the 'elite').
Click to expand...
I actually think that the ref might have been subconsciously in favor of Barca. I also think that it's idiotic for a ref with his prior history of fucking up calls against City should have been referring such an important match.

So... in the end... meh.

BIg fuckup to let this particular ref be in charge of our match against Barca.

Predictably he made several dubious calls.

Unfortunately his bad calls went against City.

And yet we won by a two goal margin.
==========

So now, even though we've won big aginst Barca, the ref is a clear cheat, UEFA is corrupt, and we can't trust any UEFA ref going forard.

Totally avoidable if UEFA management were competant enough to select a different ref - either with no history with Barca/City or with a completely spotless record against these teams.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It isn't and, most importantly, our club owners know for certain that it isn't so accept it & get over it.

Refs are bent, managers are bent and players are bent. We've had our share of them at City as well.
Click to expand...
Might as well chuck it in then and I can't believe you willingly hand over your cash, if you know its all bent.
 
Terra Passenger said:
Yup. He had a clear view of all those decisions and intentionally made biased calls. No chance in hell that he made several mistakes with a poor view. Or that he didn't want to award early yellows and let a clear early yellow go for that reason. After all, no ref has ever, ever, made multiple mistakes in a match - so mistaken calls are clearly out.

Moreover, as a cheater, he was totally inept - could have awarded a penalty for Messi going down in our box - what a terrible call for a cheating ref.

And he could easily have sent Sterling off for several subsequent fouls - holy cow, what an inept cheater!

Yup - it's clear that UEFA has conspired against us and that the ref was totally biased - really lucky that the ref was inept and allowed us to win.

The evidence in favor of the ref being a cheat is overwhelming - bizarre that anyone might conclude otherwise.
Click to expand...

This is my favourite part of your one man crusade to defend the worst referee ive ever had the misfortune of attending 2 games he's been 'in charge' of.

I genuinely cant think of any fouls Sterling committed in the whole game even after his booking for having the audacity to be kicked
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
Might as well chuck it in then and I can't believe you willingly hand over your cash, if you know its all bent.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why I do either but it's probably because sometimes, like Tuesday night, like the 6-1 of the 5-1 at Norwich in 2012 (when Foy had every intention of doing us over if he could) the shit just doesn't work.
 
gazinho said:
This is my favourite part of your one man crusade to defend the worst referee ive ever had the misfortune of attending 2 games he's been 'in charge' of.

I genuinely cant think of any fouls Sterling committed in the whole game even after his booking for having the audacity to be kicked
Click to expand...
:-)

I do seem to be on an island. But I also think that the majority of City fans simply think that the ref had a very bad game but wasn't a cheat.

In the second half, Sterling did commit at least one (and I think actually two or maybe more) clear fouls.

A completely bent ref would have absolutely sent Sterling off after either of these fouls.
 
Terra Passenger said:
But not sending Sterling off and not awarding a penalty when Messi went down?
Click to expand...

Terra Passenger said:
In the second half, Sterling did commit at least one (and I think actually two) fouls.

A completely bent ref would have absolutely sent Sterling off after either of these fouls.
Click to expand...

There was no foul on Messi and there was no bookable offence by Sterling. Not even borderline.

Do you agree that - hypothetically speaking - if the referee was on the take, the best way to go about securing a result wouldn't be to disallow the other team's goals and to send off their players for no reason?

If someone, somewhere wanted to influence the game, it would throw the entire game into disrepute by being so obviously one sided. It would be far more beneficial to play the long game and not be so explicit so as to keep the wheels turning without drawing so much attention.

giphy.gif


Like I stated much earlier in the thread, I'm no conspiracy theorist but all sides must be considered in order to draw any reasonable opinion rather than flat out accusations or flat out denials.
 
Tugay One Cup said:
There was no foul on Messi and there was no bookable offence by Sterling. Not even borderline.

Do you agree that - hypothetically speaking - if the referee was on the take, the best way to go about securing a result wouldn't be to disallow the other team's goals and to send off their players for no reason?

If someone, somewhere wanted to influence the game, it would throw the entire game into disrepute by being so obviously one sided. It would be far more beneficial to play the long game and not be so explicit so as to keep the wheels turning without drawing so much attention.

giphy.gif


Like I stated much earlier in the thread, I'm no conspiracy theorist but all sides must be considered in order to draw any reasonable opinion rather than flat out accusations or flat out denials.
Click to expand...
But there was an opportunity to make a questionable call for a foul against Messi in our box. And Sterling clearly fouled and was called for such.

In both cases, the ref had ample opportunity to make borderline/questionable calls against City - and yet failed to do so.

Let's say I was paying the ref to cheat. Given the non-calls for Messi going down in our box and multiple post-yellow card fouls by Sterling with no sending off - would I be happy with the ref's performance? No way in hell.

If the ref was a cheat - he was a totally incompetent cheat.
 
Terra Passenger said:
:-)

I do seem to be on an island. But I also think that the majority of City fans simply think that the ref had a very bad game but wasn't a cheat.

In the second half, Sterling did commit at least one (and I think actually two or maybe more) clear fouls.

A completely bent ref would have absolutely sent Sterling off after either of these fouls.
Click to expand...

I actually dont think he was a cheat, I just think that certain (mainly historically the more successful) teams in the upper echelons of European football get more protection and favourable calls from referee's, just as united seemed to do in the league for many a year.

What I must disagree with though is Sterling didnt commit 1 foul in the second half never mind any he 'could' have been booked for!
 
Terra Passenger said:
But there was an opportunity to make a questionable call for a foul against Messi in our box. And Sterling clearly fouled and was called for such.

In either case, the ref had ample opportunity to make borderline/questionable calls against City - and yet failed to do so.

Let's say I was paying the ref to cheat. Given the non-calls for Messi going down in our box and multiple post-yellow card fouls by Sterling with no sending off - would I be happy with the ref's performance? No way in hell.

If the ref was a cheat - he was a totally incompetent cheat.
Click to expand...

Why would you be paying a single referee to throw just the fourth game of a group that Barca are already topping when that willingness to take bribes could be extended to favour them over the course of the entire competition?

The former would be too risky for little short term gain whereas the latter would give room for subtlety and potentially provide much bigger rewards.

Hypothetically, that is.
 
gazinho said:
I actually dont think he was a cheat, I just think that certain (mainly historically the more successful) teams in the upper echelons of European football get more protection and favourable calls from referee's, just as united seemed to do in the league for many a year.

What I must disagree with though is Sterling didnt commit 1 foul in the second half never mind any he 'could' have been booked for!
Click to expand...
Agree with regard to potential unconscious favoritism for continental sides - after all, most refs are not from the PL.

With regard to Sterling in the 2nd half - he absolutely fouled at least twice - maybe more times (I"d have to review the game) - and given that he was already on a yellow, a supposedly corrupt ref had (at least) two opportunities to send him off but somehow failed to do so.
 
Terra Passenger said:
Agree with regard to potential unconscious favoritism for continental sides - after all, most refs are not from the PL.

With regard to Sterling in the 2nd half - he absolutely fouled at least twice - maybe more times (I"d have to review the game) - and given that he was already on a yellow, a corrupt ref had (at least) two opportunities to send him off but somehow failed to do so.
Click to expand...

The ball hit his hand once from about a yard but even this clown couldnt book him for that, like I say I dont think he was a cheat just gave Barca every 50/50 (and 60/40 in our favour) Sterling was also offside once but they were the only 2 indiscretions he managedd after half time
 
gazinho said:
The ball hit his hand once from about a yard but even this clown couldnt book him for that, like I say I dont think he was a cheat just gave Barca every 50/50 (and 60/40 in our favour) Sterling was also offside once but they were the only 2 indiscretions he managedd after half time
Click to expand...
OK - let's say you're right, and the ref was a total cheat.

Do you think he did a good job as a cheat?

Do you think that UEFA management failed to recognize him as a cheat?

Do you think that UEFA management knew he was a cheat and let him referee our game?

Do you think that the ref, who was a cheat after all, made a good decision not to award a penalty for Messi going down in our box?

If you knew that the ref was a cheat and betted against City in the match, would you be happy with the outcome?

Typically match fixing is done by organized crime - fuck it up and you will die - literally - given the ref's performance, would you expect him to live beyond this year?
==========
Or maybe all of this conspiracy/match fixing speculation is way, way off.
 
Last edited:
Terra Passenger said:
Or maybe all of this conspiracy/match fixing speculation is way, way off.
Click to expand...

But this whole time you've been ascribing your own very specific idea of what constitutes corruption and match fixing whilst putting words in people's mouths.

I guess we'll never agree but the one thing I've learnt from this thread is that if I ever need a sporting event throwing, you'd be the last person I'd call :)
 
Tugay One Cup said:
But this whole time you've been ascribing your own very specific idea of what constitutes corruption and match fixing whilst putting words in people's mouths.

I guess we'll never agree but the one thing I've learnt from this thread is that if I ever need a sporting event throwing, you'd be the last person I'd call :)
Click to expand...
Uh, OK, I guess?

What do you think constitutes corruption on behalf of the ref in the City v. Barca match? And do you think that the ref was corrupt? And if he was corrupt, why so? And did UEFA management have anything to do with it?

From your post, you seem to think that the ref was corrupt. I'd love to read your logical narritive about why this is so and why that's more logical than the assumption that the ref simply had a bad game.

For the record - I'm pressing hard against the corruption advocates because there's simply not enough evidence to conclude that this was so - moreover, if corruption occurred, we might as well stop watching the UCL - if it's totally corrupt - how will we ever win?
 
Terra Passenger said:
OK - let's say you're right, and the ref was a total cheat.

Do you think he did a good job as a cheat?

Do you think that UEFA management failed to recognize him as a cheat?

Do you think that UEFA management knew he was a cheat and let him referee our game?

Do you think that the ref, who was a cheat after all, made a good decision not to award a penalty for Messi going down in our box?

If you knew that the ref was a cheat and betted against City in the match, would you be happy with the outcome?

Typically match fixing is done by organized crime - fuck it up and you will die - literally - given the ref's performance, would you expect him to live beyond this year?
==========
Or maybe all of this conspiracy/match fixing speculation is way, way off.
Click to expand...

'like I say I dont think he was a cheat'

Which part of that are you struggling with??? I've said pretty much that exact phrase in my last 2 posts.

All I took umbrage to was your continued use of the fact he could have sent Sterling off in the second half, all ive done is prove to you and everyone else thathe didnt have any opportunity to send Sterling off.

Anyway ive made my point you carry on with your crusade! Good luck.
 
gazinho said:
'like I say I dont think he was a cheat'

Which part of that are you struggling with??? I've said pretty much that exact phrase in my last 2 posts.

All I took umbrage to was your continued use of the fact he could have sent Sterling off in the second half, all ive done is prove to you and everyone else thathe didnt have any opportunity to send Sterling off.

Anyway ive made my point you carry on with your crusade! Good luck.
Click to expand...
Then I guess we've (at least I have) misinterpreted each other.

If you think that the ref wasn't a cheat... then we're in total agreement.

Pretty much "the ref was a cheat" sentiment, is the only reason I continue to post in this thread. Not nearly enough evidence to reach this conclusion, and, several damning facts to conclude that the ref was a cheat is totally wrong.
 
Last edited:
Terra Passenger said:
:-)

I do seem to be on an island. But I also think that the majority of City fans simply think that the ref had a very bad game but wasn't a cheat.

In the second half, Sterling did commit at least one (and I think actually two or maybe more) clear fouls.

A completely bent ref would have absolutely sent Sterling off after either of these fouls.
Click to expand...
Look at is this way. If I warned you for trolling or abuse you might not be happy, particularly if I'd let another user get away with something similar. Other users might say you deserved it or I might have been having a bad day and you were the one who was grinding my gears.

But if I issued a warning every time you posted, you'd suspect there was a motive of some sort. If a series of mods issued you with a warning for trolling every post you'd made, then you'd definitely suspect that something was up. It would be very likely that, behind the scenes, we'd made a collective decision as a team that you were a deliberate troll and that we were going to clamp down on you at every opportunity.

The point being, when does a single bad decision (or series of them) become a definite, predetermined pattern?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
Look at is this way. If I warned you for trolling or abuse you might not be happy, particularly if I'd let another user get away with something similar. Other users might say you deserved it or I might have been having a bad day and you were the one who was grinding my gears.

But if I issued a warning every time you posted, you'd suspect there was a motive of some sort. If a series of mods issued you with a warning for trolling every post you'd made, then you'd definitely suspect that something was up. It would be very likely that, behind the scenes, we'd made a collective decision as a team that you were a deliberate troll and that we were going to clamp down on you at every opportunity.

The point being, when does a single bad decision (or series of them) become a definite pattern?
Click to expand...
+1

But when does this pattern become outright cheating? And then what is the motive? And why on earth would UEFA allow such an obviously biased ref to be in charge of such an important game?

Occam's razor - is it more likely that the ref has had two bad games - or that he's totally corrupt and yet failed to award Barca the match when given ample opportunity to do so?

And if he's totally corrupt - what are the implications?

You decide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top