WSL Chelsea (H) 08/10/23:

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Oh I agree with that, mostly. Mistakes happen, but I don't see how the ghost goal gets given by any ref unless something sinister is going on. Maybe there's a conspiracy nut deep down in me, but I felt he had been told to do something ridiculous and by then doing it, he showed he was willing to ref games however was needed.

No ref should progress after a mistake like that one.

Heaslip's performance struck the same chord with me. Told to be super strict on time wasting and dissent, so she does exactly what she was told. Yeah the match was fucked as a result, but she'll have earned top marks and her day in the sun will come.

I’m not sure giving a ghost goal is in the same ballpark as booking too many players for dissent.

It also seems an odd game to try and corrupt, wasn’t it Watford vs someone in the championship?

I gave up on the VAR thread as people just want to shout corruption every time something happens that they don’t agree with.

It sums up modern society in a way. Lots of people on here can’t or won’t take an opinion of a rival fan and tell them to fuck off. Echo chambers everywhere.

Same in most debates these days. Loads of whataboutery and not a lot of substance.

 

[mattcity5]

I’m not sure giving a ghost goal is in the same ballpark as booking too many players for dissent.

It also seems an odd game to try and corrupt, wasn’t it Watford vs someone in the championship?

I gave up on the VAR thread as people just want to shout corruption every time something happens that they don’t agree with.

It sums up modern society in a way. Lots of people on here can’t or won’t take an opinion of a rival fan and tell them to fuck off. Echo chambers everywhere.

Same in most debates these days. Loads of whataboutery and not a lot of substance.

Oh I stay out of that one generally too. I am generally reasonable (i think) and can often see two sides to each decision.

You can say "mistakes happen" though, but some can't be explained rationally. Watford v Reading, yes, so you can have half a point...

No point dragging this thread too far off track, but for anyone who hasn't seen it....

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Oh I stay out of that one generally too. I am generally reasonable (i think) and can often see two sides to each decision.

You can say "mistakes happen" though, but some can't be explained rationally. Watford v Reading, yes, so you can have half a point...

No point dragging this thread too far off track, but for anyone who hasn't seen it....

These decisions are why VAR came in. It’s a shocker.

However, you can’t prove it is corruption. That’s just a feeling you have.

If you took Attwell to court to prove he was corrupt, showing that video and the Fernandes offside goal wouldn’t prove anything.

 

[mattcity5]

These decisions are why VAR came in. It’s a shocker.

However, you can’t prove it is corruption. That’s just a feeling you have.

If you took Attwell to court to prove he was corrupt, showing that video and the Fernandes offside goal wouldn’t prove anything.

Oh absolutely, there's no way of prooving anything unless they've helpfully documented payments, contacts etc. And even then, there would have to be a will to investigate and there just isn't in this country. If we were Italy, I'm sure things would be more likely to get investigated.

But that decision didn't even need VAR. The lineman told him to give it, so he just did. When did he think the ball went in?

Might not be corruption, just a naive kid for a ref (he was 25 then), but I still question how he got up the ranks so fast.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Oh absolutely, there's no way of prooving anything unless they've helpfully documented payments, contacts etc. And even then, there would have to be a will to investigate and there just isn't in this country. If we were Italy, I'm sure things would be more likely to get investigated.

But that decision didn't even need VAR. The lineman told him to give it, so he just did. When did he think the ball went in?

Might not be corruption, just a naive kid for a ref (he was 25 then), but I still question how he got up the ranks so fast.

I don’t know is the honest answer. Wrong people get promoted all the time though in all walks of life.

 

[Paladin]

She'll get there, I'm sure there's a will for it to happen from above. She'll ref some men's games and the top brass will all be patting themselves on the backs about how inclusive and forward-thinking they are.

It reminds me of some dodgy street gang, where a possible new member has to prove themselves by nicking a car or stabbing a rival, or something like that. You pass the test, you get helped up. It happened to Attwell after the ghost goal and it'll happen now to her.

The ghost goal was a genuine error, not some sort of initiation right, or a betting scam, or three result of a payoff.

Show me the person who hasn't ever made a mistake at work. Players, managers, referees all make them. You don't lose your job for making a single mistake. You lose it when mistake become common.

 

[Paladin]

Not many have made mistakes like that one at a decent level and continued upwards.

Attwell redeemed himself in subsequent performances. That mistake put the brakes on his career, but he has since proved that he's one of the best referees in the country.

Was the ghost goal any worse than issuing three yellow cards to the same player in a game? Personally, I would say the three yellow cards is a worse decision because it highlights a deficiency in record keeping during a game. The ghost goal could be attributed to obstructed vision, or poor optics or something. The three yellow cards occurred at the most prestigious game in world football though, by arguably the world's best referee at the time.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Has there ever been a referee that hasn’t made a mistiake?

There are mistakes, AHT, and then there are glaring errors, cock ups in the VAR shed, refs who have clearly cheated one side,and I've seen refs cheat both sides!. I don't rail at refs who make a genuine and honest mistake who do not have the 'veracity' of VAR to call on. In my days of traversing the corpy playing fields of Manchester as the whistling wanker I might have given the odd throw-in the wrong way, but that lass on Sunday was way beyond 'making a mistake'. She was clearly going to imprint her 113 minutes of infamy on the result, the players and the following morning's headlines, all of which was to the chagrin of almost everybody except Emma Hayes, who, it seems, thought she demonstrated the art of strong, and firm arbitration that was kept well in the background!

Am I a cynical old bugger? Guilty, m'lud!

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Attwell redeemed himself in subsequent performances. That mistake put the brakes on his career, but he has since proved that he's one of the best referees in the country.

Was the ghost goal any worse than issuing three yellow cards to the same player in a game? Personally, I would say the three yellow cards is a worse decision because it highlights a deficiency in record keeping during a game. The ghost goal could be attributed to obstructed vision, or poor optics or something. The three yellow cards occurred at the most prestigious game in world football though, by arguably the world's best referee at the time.

Assuming your comment was genuine and not a piss take, I'm going to immediately take issue with your " one of the best referees in the country " statement, as I believe him to be exactly the opposite, bordering on corrupt with the decisions made on a number of occasions during his truly shite career.

For me, Attwell is PiGMOL's go to ref for corrupt and biased decisions on a major scale.

 

[Paladin]

Assuming your comment was genuine and not a piss take, I'm going to immediately take issue with your " one of the best referees in the country " statement, as I believe him to be exactly the opposite, bordering on corrupt with the decisions made on a number of occasions during his truly shite career.

For me, Attwell is PiGMOL's go to ref for corrupt and biased decisions on a major scale.

He's one of the best referees in the country because he is in an elite list of PL referees. This means the ones below him are worse than him, so pity the Championship and all the lower levels.

I personally don't think he is a good PL referee. I think he is weak, and is very easily swayed in his decision making. I think he knows his masters. He knows who not to upset in order to keep his career on track.

I don't think he is corrupt, but I do think he is one of the referees that have succumbed to an institutional bias towards/against certain teams.