Those who think there's no agenda need to read this...

[redmizzle]

 

[Pigeonho]

Thing is, it was proven by the television that the ref didnt see the incident he was blocked off by at least two players, therefore under this ridiculous law,as the ref didnt see it, he could have been retrospectively punished......but he wasn't

The mere fact that everyone agrees it was an atrocious tackle and yet the fa deem it not worthy of punishment yet a sending off that everyone universally agrees was wrong and its not rescinded doesnt even strike you as strange? The thing is they can even break their own rules as they did in the ben thatcher case and yet STILL they dont deem it worthy of retrospective punishment.

Bear in mind many of us blues have been going on about this inbuilt bias long before the ridiculous decisions at fulham and subsequently QPR.

How many more crazy decisions in favour of the rags will it take for you to believe that everything is not as you hope?

What it will take, is a document which a retired ref produces which is dated 1st of August of any year post 1992. If that document says 'protect our cash cow at all costs', then I will gladly bow down to those who believe this to be the case. Now for United to be protected it would take communication from the powers that be to those who officiate the games, yes? Where is it then? Why hasn't a ref who wasn't paid as much in the early years of the prem not come forward with such a document and made himself a millionaire? I am going to go all crazy and hazard a guess that it's because such a document doesn't exist. That maybe me being too practical and all, but practical is what I am. No evidence = no agenda.

The evidence is presented to you week in week out, stat after stat, new regulation after new regulation.

It doesnt need to be written down, actions speak louder than words, sorry to debase the conversation but just to make my point, do you think the nazi's ever wrote down what should happen to jews? It just happened, people understood what needed to take place, they took verbal orders, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence ther e are still holocaust denyers. Do we really need something written down to prove it, course not

Not sure what you do for a living but where i work there are things i need to do, like send e-mails at 11.00pm at night to make it look like im working all the hours, thats not written down i just see other people do, amongst other things, and seen how those people tend to get promoted and started to understand the things that will help me get on, and the culture takes hold, virtually everyone does it and those that dont, dont get on. There is no better example than the referee getting a month long ban for the wrong decision for newcastle against the rags. That could send no stronger message to the rest of the referees. Does it happen in similar circumstances like the sunderland offside? Does it hell.

Anyone who cant see the bias taking place just doesnt want to believe that the beautiful game they love isnt quite what it seems. I dont want to believe it, but everything i see week in week out tells me its taking place.

Except we're not talking about emails at work at 11pm, we're talking about ensuring one club remains on top of the other clubs it's competing with, in a multi-billion £ industry. We're talking about ensuring that happens and it' supposed to happen without any kind of communication whatsoever? This new kid, Michael Oliver, if the 'ensure United stay top' agenda was real, would he not have had some form of communication which tells him to make sure he is on-board with that? If it was as real as some suggest, he would have to have. If Mr Oliver is paid £50k a year to do just that, would it not be more financially suited for him to blow the story wide open and make himself an instant millionaire?
For something this big to happen, people would have to be 'in on it'. For people to be in on something they would require an instruction. Sorry if this sounds all taking the piss, i'm not, i'm simply saying that if this was the way it is season in, season out, there would have to be some form of paper trail so that people knew what was expected of them.

The one theory I would only begin to contemplate is the refs want to manage Man United games to up their profile theory. I don't believe in refs fearing tongue-lashings off Fergie, I don't believe they have been bought and i don't believe in any agenda to cripple us and keep united on top. Like I say though if someone shows me a piece of paper, an email or voicemail from the powers that be which instructs people to keep united top and to knock others down, i'll gladly conform to the masses.

 

[Bill]

time for some spring cleaning me thinks.

Briliant.

So yet again the inevitable 'rag' insults appear.

I've been on this forum a good while now and yet because I strongly disagree with a topic on corruption which, on this occasion, means the flipside can come across as me 'defending' United I am labelled one of them.

It's a fucking joke. Time and time again I see people on here who've made 2 or 3 posts coming out of the woodwork when they win and masquerade as City fans yet I've been on here for ages, made 800+ posts, contributed to hell of a lot of other discussions besides this and now the mod squad decide to go all gung-ho and threaten to get rid because they like to think I'm a fucking United fan.

I'd rather you PM'd me to discuss this as I do think that's a fair way of approaching it and it pisses me off to no end that you're trying to get everyone else thinking I'm one of them.

Me thinks he protesth too much...

me thinks he's too precious by half. if i thought he was a rag he'd be long gone.

 

[Nascent Blues]

What it will take, is a document which a retired ref produces which is dated 1st of August of any year post 1992. If that document says 'protect our cash cow at all costs', then I will gladly bow down to those who believe this to be the case. Now for United to be protected it would take communication from the powers that be to those who officiate the games, yes? Where is it then? Why hasn't a ref who wasn't paid as much in the early years of the prem not come forward with such a document and made himself a millionaire? I am going to go all crazy and hazard a guess that it's because such a document doesn't exist. That maybe me being too practical and all, but practical is what I am. No evidence = no agenda.

The evidence is presented to you week in week out, stat after stat, new regulation after new regulation.

It doesnt need to be written down, actions speak louder than words, sorry to debase the conversation but just to make my point, do you think the nazi's ever wrote down what should happen to jews? It just happened, people understood what needed to take place, they took verbal orders, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence ther e are still holocaust denyers. Do we really need something written down to prove it, course not

Not sure what you do for a living but where i work there are things i need to do, like send e-mails at 11.00pm at night to make it look like im working all the hours, thats not written down i just see other people do, amongst other things, and seen how those people tend to get promoted and started to understand the things that will help me get on, and the culture takes hold, virtually everyone does it and those that dont, dont get on. There is no better example than the referee getting a month long ban for the wrong decision for newcastle against the rags. That could send no stronger message to the rest of the referees. Does it happen in similar circumstances like the sunderland offside? Does it hell.

Anyone who cant see the bias taking place just doesnt want to believe that the beautiful game they love isnt quite what it seems. I dont want to believe it, but everything i see week in week out tells me its taking place.

Except we're not talking about emails at work at 11pm, we're talking about ensuring one club remains on top of the other clubs it's competing with, in a multi-billion £ industry. We're talking about ensuring that happens and it' supposed to happen without any kind of communication whatsoever? This new kid, Michael Oliver, if the 'ensure United stay top' agenda was real, would he not have had some form of communication which tells him to make sure he is on-board with that? If it was as real as some suggest, he would have to have. If Mr Oliver is paid £50k a year to do just that, would it not be more financially suited for him to blow the story wide open and make himself an instant millionaire?
For something this big to happen, people would have to be 'in on it'. For people to be in on something they would require an instruction. Sorry if this sounds all taking the piss, i'm not, i'm simply saying that if this was the way it is season in, season out, there would have to be some form of paper trail so that people knew what was expected of them.

The one theory I would only begin to contemplate is the refs want to manage Man United games to up their profile theory. I don't believe in refs fearing tongue-lashings off Fergie, I don't believe they have been bought and i don't believe in any agenda to cripple us and keep united on top. Like I say though if someone shows me a piece of paper, an email or voicemail from the powers that be which instructs people to keep united top and to knock others down, i'll gladly conform to the masses.

Do you believe that some referees are conciously/subconsciously biased and lack, in varying degrees, the prerequisite that is surely the cornerstone of honest and therefore competent refereeing: the prerequisite being impartiality?

 

[fatbloke]

What it will take, is a document which a retired ref produces which is dated 1st of August of any year post 1992. If that document says 'protect our cash cow at all costs', then I will gladly bow down to those who believe this to be the case. Now for United to be protected it would take communication from the powers that be to those who officiate the games, yes? Where is it then? Why hasn't a ref who wasn't paid as much in the early years of the prem not come forward with such a document and made himself a millionaire? I am going to go all crazy and hazard a guess that it's because such a document doesn't exist. That maybe me being too practical and all, but practical is what I am. No evidence = no agenda.

That whole statement smacks of naivety, you simply cannot 100% deny something ever happen based on no factual evidence. You're contradicting yourself. New evidence comes to light all the time in criminal cases, sometimes 20/50/100 years after the event, just because it hasn't been discovered or exposed yet doesn't mean it isn't happening. What is in front of your eyes and every football fans eyes is a lot of suspicious/mysterious decisions and a lack of any communication from the powers that be which in any other industry would prompt at the very least an investigation. To outright deny any agenda is naive when there is a distinct possibility.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Briliant.

So yet again the inevitable 'rag' insults appear.

I've been on this forum a good while now and yet because I strongly disagree with a topic on corruption which, on this occasion, means the flipside can come across as me 'defending' United I am labelled one of them.

It's a fucking joke. Time and time again I see people on here who've made 2 or 3 posts coming out of the woodwork when they win and masquerade as City fans yet I've been on here for ages, made 800+ posts, contributed to hell of a lot of other discussions besides this and now the mod squad decide to go all gung-ho and threaten to get rid because they like to think I'm a fucking United fan.

I'd rather you PM'd me to discuss this as I do think that's a fair way of approaching it and it pisses me off to no end that you're trying to get everyone else thinking I'm one of them.

Me thinks he protesth too much...

me thinks he's too precious by half. if i thought he was a rag he'd be long gone.

So what did you mean by 'Smell something' and 'Spring cleaning' then?

It wasn't a fucking turd under your carpet was it?

 

[Pigeonho]

The evidence is presented to you week in week out, stat after stat, new regulation after new regulation.

It doesnt need to be written down, actions speak louder than words, sorry to debase the conversation but just to make my point, do you think the nazi's ever wrote down what should happen to jews? It just happened, people understood what needed to take place, they took verbal orders, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence ther e are still holocaust denyers. Do we really need something written down to prove it, course not

Not sure what you do for a living but where i work there are things i need to do, like send e-mails at 11.00pm at night to make it look like im working all the hours, thats not written down i just see other people do, amongst other things, and seen how those people tend to get promoted and started to understand the things that will help me get on, and the culture takes hold, virtually everyone does it and those that dont, dont get on. There is no better example than the referee getting a month long ban for the wrong decision for newcastle against the rags. That could send no stronger message to the rest of the referees. Does it happen in similar circumstances like the sunderland offside? Does it hell.

Anyone who cant see the bias taking place just doesnt want to believe that the beautiful game they love isnt quite what it seems. I dont want to believe it, but everything i see week in week out tells me its taking place.

Except we're not talking about emails at work at 11pm, we're talking about ensuring one club remains on top of the other clubs it's competing with, in a multi-billion £ industry. We're talking about ensuring that happens and it' supposed to happen without any kind of communication whatsoever? This new kid, Michael Oliver, if the 'ensure United stay top' agenda was real, would he not have had some form of communication which tells him to make sure he is on-board with that? If it was as real as some suggest, he would have to have. If Mr Oliver is paid £50k a year to do just that, would it not be more financially suited for him to blow the story wide open and make himself an instant millionaire?
For something this big to happen, people would have to be 'in on it'. For people to be in on something they would require an instruction. Sorry if this sounds all taking the piss, i'm not, i'm simply saying that if this was the way it is season in, season out, there would have to be some form of paper trail so that people knew what was expected of them.

The one theory I would only begin to contemplate is the refs want to manage Man United games to up their profile theory. I don't believe in refs fearing tongue-lashings off Fergie, I don't believe they have been bought and i don't believe in any agenda to cripple us and keep united on top. Like I say though if someone shows me a piece of paper, an email or voicemail from the powers that be which instructs people to keep united top and to knock others down, i'll gladly conform to the masses.

Do you believe that some referees are conciously/subconsciously biased and lack, in varying degrees, the prerequisite that is surely the cornerstone of honest and therefore competent refereeing: the prerequisite being impartiality?

I think referees are professional as they can be and give decision as they see them in real time, from pitch level. I believe there are some decisions which will go for United and which will inevitably piss people off, and I think there are decisions which will go against United. I think that last night it is very likely that Fleetwood may have got a decision from the ref from their game with Wrexham which their fans could look into as the ref fucking up their promotion party. Not one person on here ould give a toss about that as Fleetwood Town means nothing. If United got a decision which 'assists' them, (or in my eyes as that particular ref saw it at that time), people on here and many other board nationwide think it's because a ref is scared or that a ref has some pro-United agenda. People believe that because they are adamant that the biggest club in the country are assisted by referees in each and every game. Point being ALL clubs get decisions in each game that go both for and against them. Balotelli, in the example in pages before this one, was lucky to not only stay on the field on Sunday but he was also lucky the ref said he saw the incident and therefore is only banned for 3 matches and not the potential 9 he was looking at. If such an agenda was rife then Balotelli would have had the book thrown at him the the pony that is the FA. Because he hasn't though some on here say it is only because the FA don't want to be looked at as having an agenda against us, therefore because it's looking we are out of the title race the decision was made to not punish Balotelli! People are THAT paranoid that they are now saying the FA are going for us so's the anti City/pro United agenda doesn't become too obvious. It' laughable.

 

[Nascent Blues]

Except we're not talking about emails at work at 11pm, we're talking about ensuring one club remains on top of the other clubs it's competing with, in a multi-billion £ industry. We're talking about ensuring that happens and it' supposed to happen without any kind of communication whatsoever? This new kid, Michael Oliver, if the 'ensure United stay top' agenda was real, would he not have had some form of communication which tells him to make sure he is on-board with that? If it was as real as some suggest, he would have to have. If Mr Oliver is paid £50k a year to do just that, would it not be more financially suited for him to blow the story wide open and make himself an instant millionaire?
For something this big to happen, people would have to be 'in on it'. For people to be in on something they would require an instruction. Sorry if this sounds all taking the piss, i'm not, i'm simply saying that if this was the way it is season in, season out, there would have to be some form of paper trail so that people knew what was expected of them.

The one theory I would only begin to contemplate is the refs want to manage Man United games to up their profile theory. I don't believe in refs fearing tongue-lashings off Fergie, I don't believe they have been bought and i don't believe in any agenda to cripple us and keep united on top. Like I say though if someone shows me a piece of paper, an email or voicemail from the powers that be which instructs people to keep united top and to knock others down, i'll gladly conform to the masses.

Do you believe that some referees are conciously/subconsciously biased and lack, in varying degrees, the prerequisite that is surely the cornerstone of honest and therefore competent refereeing: the prerequisite being impartiality?

I think referees are professional as they can be and give decision as they see them in real time, from pitch level. I believe there are some decisions which will go for United and which will inevitably piss people off, and I think there are decisions which will go against United. I think that last night it is very likely that Fleetwood may have got a decision from the ref from their game with Wrexham which their fans could look into as the ref fucking up their promotion party. Not one person on here ould give a toss about that as Fleetwood Town means nothing. If United got a decision which 'assists' them, (or in my eyes as that particular ref saw it at that time), people on here and many other board nationwide think it's because a ref is scared or that a ref has some pro-United agenda. People believe that because they are adamant that the biggest club in the country are assisted by referees in each and every game. Point being ALL clubs get decisions in each game that go both for and against them. Balotelli, in the example in pages before this one, was lucky to not only stay on the field on Sunday but he was also lucky the ref said he saw the incident and therefore is only banned for 3 matches and not the potential 9 he was looking at. If such an agenda was rife then Balotelli would have had the book thrown at him the the pony that is the FA. Because he hasn't though some on here say it is only because the FA don't want to be looked at as having an agenda against us, therefore because it's looking we are out of the title race the decision was made to not punish Balotelli! People are THAT paranoid that they are now saying the FA are going for us so's the anti City/pro United agenda doesn't become too obvious. It' laughable.

Ahem...is there any chance you could answer my question though with regards to the 'impartiality' of 'some referees'? Or are you saying that all referees always give an honest and fair-minded appraisal of all incidents in all circumstances? Do you think this is the case?

 

[friend]

I think I agree with all that.

Some you get, some you don't. We have been fortunate to get the decisions in our favour vs Fulham and QPR. And yes, Rooney should have been booked. At this stage of the season, mistakes seem to be noticed more. You have also been on the receiving end of favourable decisions. Off the top of my head, the Dzeko penalty claim vs Sunderland was debatable.

 

[Latics Fan SJK]

Except we're not talking about emails at work at 11pm, we're talking about ensuring one club remains on top of the other clubs it's competing with, in a multi-billion £ industry. We're talking about ensuring that happens and it' supposed to happen without any kind of communication whatsoever? This new kid, Michael Oliver, if the 'ensure United stay top' agenda was real, would he not have had some form of communication which tells him to make sure he is on-board with that? If it was as real as some suggest, he would have to have. If Mr Oliver is paid £50k a year to do just that, would it not be more financially suited for him to blow the story wide open and make himself an instant millionaire?
For something this big to happen, people would have to be 'in on it'. For people to be in on something they would require an instruction. Sorry if this sounds all taking the piss, i'm not, i'm simply saying that if this was the way it is season in, season out, there would have to be some form of paper trail so that people knew what was expected of them.

The one theory I would only begin to contemplate is the refs want to manage Man United games to up their profile theory. I don't believe in refs fearing tongue-lashings off Fergie, I don't believe they have been bought and i don't believe in any agenda to cripple us and keep united on top. Like I say though if someone shows me a piece of paper, an email or voicemail from the powers that be which instructs people to keep united top and to knock others down, i'll gladly conform to the masses.

Do you believe that some referees are conciously/subconsciously biased and lack, in varying degrees, the prerequisite that is surely the cornerstone of honest and therefore competent refereeing: the prerequisite being impartiality?

I think referees are professional as they can be and give decision as they see them in real time, from pitch level. I believe there are some decisions which will go for United and which will inevitably piss people off, and I think there are decisions which will go against United. I think that last night it is very likely that Fleetwood may have got a decision from the ref from their game with Wrexham which their fans could look into as the ref fucking up their promotion party. Not one person on here ould give a toss about that as Fleetwood Town means nothing. If United got a decision which 'assists' them, (or in my eyes as that particular ref saw it at that time), people on here and many other board nationwide think it's because a ref is scared or that a ref has some pro-United agenda. People believe that because they are adamant that the biggest club in the country are assisted by referees in each and every game. Point being ALL clubs get decisions in each game that go both for and against them. Balotelli, in the example in pages before this one, was lucky to not only stay on the field on Sunday but he was also lucky the ref said he saw the incident and therefore is only banned for 3 matches and not the potential 9 he was looking at. If such an agenda was rife then Balotelli would have had the book thrown at him the the pony that is the FA. Because he hasn't though some on here say it is only because the FA don't want to be looked at as having an agenda against us, therefore because it's looking we are out of the title race the decision was made to not punish Balotelli! People are THAT paranoid that they are now saying the FA are going for us so's the anti City/pro United agenda doesn't become too obvious. It' laughable.[/quote]

That's the key for me. I mean, according to many on here, this United bias and corruption bollocks has been going on since about '94 (as that is when they began to win things isn't it)?

This whole thing has gone largely unnoticed and rarely mentioned throughout the years until, coincidentally, City begin to challenge for the biggest prize in English football and all of a sudden Bluemoon has put all the 'evidence' together and uncovered a conspiracy. Noone on here really gave a fuck 10 years ago because you were on different levels. Now you've been elevated to the highest level in such a short time it's like your heads have gone dizzy and the excuses have to come rolling out.

What do you think the FA were discussing in the pre-season conferences a few months after Arsenal & Chelsea were dominating?

"Right gentlemen, the cartel has been upset and looks to be showing no signs of change. How can we get Manchester United back to the top of the league without making it too obvious"?

Quit with the excuses, deal with the fact that they've had some luck this season and go and do what Mourinho & Wenger have done a number of times and win the fucking league. As I keep saying, your squad is capable.

The interview with Micah shows he knows the real reason why United are where they are despite being 2nd best for a large part of the season. Ferguson. That's it.

*awaits comments such as "Well, Micah isn't going to come out and say the FA are corrupt twatzoids are they"?