The Run In.

[City64]

I agree with above but there is also nativity by some with how some big matches are influenced by officials , politics and the media . The day we go to Anfield there will be huge media attention not only through the ferver of Liverpool being top of the league but also politics surrounding that club from the Hillsborough disaster which will have huge focus on match day , this in itself may work against us but it may also work in our favour . Either way this game is going to be hyped to the fucking hilt by sky so expect controversy !

[bayblue]

You want proof that refs are corrupt? If we had proof, we'd have handed it over. And if you paid attention, you'd see that I said officials are INFLUENCED by the media and such like. It is a propaganda machine for the premier league brand boys. Stop being pedantic with your "let's bring these people to justice" bullshit... for our good. And stop being completely naive... for your own good.

My comment you responded to wasn't aimed at you but Goataldo who said in black and white that the referees are corrupt. That's the bullshit my friend.

[bayblue]

I don't think refs in England are 100% above being influenced by the media, managers, television stations etc. but I don't think we're specifically targeted like some people seem to believe. Not every decision has gone our way this season, but we've had some decisions go our way too, such as the offside in the Liverpool game which could have led to a goal, or Newcastle's disallowed goal. There are fans of EVERY team who believe their team is victimised and targeted by the FA, refs, media etc. A lot of fans of other clubs genuinely believe that City are favoured over other teams. Of course I don't agree with them, but they do think that. I personally believe we should be a few points ahead of where we are, and that's not because the referees or FA have held us back. The main reasons, in my opinion, are Pellegrini's naivety at the start of the season and his continued selection of Demichelis. There have been other individual performances of certain players in certain games which have been a factor, but we're not facing a tough run-in (having to go away to Liverpool and Everton and getting a good result) because of anyone else but ourselves.

I agree 100%.

All fans feel their team is hard done by; many other fans feel City get preferential treatment.

The more we psych ourselves up believing conspiracy theories the more we look like whingeing victims and the less we take responsibility for that which we can control.

[Original Dub]

My comment you responded to wasn't aimed at you but Goataldo who said in black and white that the referees are corrupt. That's the bullshit my friend.

So this is only in england then, is that right?

Had you been a fan of, let's say, the italian league a few years back, would you have been so sure then as well?

It's a nice thought that everything is well and right in the game of football, but unfortunately the ages tell us that wherever there is vast amounts of money and angles in which to influence, there is corruption in some form or another.

Thinking otherwise is the real bullshit my friend.

[bayblue]

So this is only in england then, is that right? Had you been a fan of, let's say, the italian league a few years back, would you have been so sure then as well? It's a nice thought that everything is well and right in the game of football, but unfortunately the ages tell us that wherever there is vast amounts of money and angles in which to influence, there is corruption in some form or another. Thinking otherwise is the real bullshit my friend.

I don't know what you are really saying.

I am only talking about the English PL, not Italy.

I don't think there are corrupt referees in the Premier League - do you?

[Original Dub]

I don't know what you are really saying.

I am only talking about the English PL, not Italy.

I don't think there are corrupt referees in the Premier League - do you?

I couldn't be sure.
No one can.

Although the fact that it happened in another top european league very recently, means that those who shoot others down for suggesting it are absolutely naive.

Are you naive?

[bayblue]

I couldn't be sure. No one can. Although the fact that it happened in another top european league very recently, means that those who shoot others down for suggesting it are absolutely naive. Are you naive?

Not shooting you down. Just asking your opinion.

I say I don't think the refs here are corrupt.

You say you're not sure.

You call me naive.

Not much progress then.

Surely you have a view as to whether they are corrupt or not?

[Original Dub]

Not shooting you down. Just asking your opinion.

I say I don't think the refs here are corrupt.

You say you're not sure.

You call me naive.

Not much progress then.

Surely you have a view as to whether they are corrupt or not?

I have given my view already. Then you started talking about having no proof. As though any crime that has not been proven does not exist.

If we're talking views, then forget proof for starters.

My view on the subject is very well known on here, but I'll run through it again for you...

I believe officials have been influenced by the media and in particular, the managers that use the media as a tool.

Imo there are many forms of corruption, right down to not doing what is right, or overlooking incidents, because it makes your job easier and perhaps safer.

There has been evidence of this in the two other top european leagues, on different levels. It had been going on for years before it was brought to light.

There have been glaring precedents in recent history, yet you feel they have nothing to do with this debate.

I think that's strange.

Mind you, I said pretty much all of this when I first joined in.

So maybe you're right, we've not moved on at all.

I think corruption in some form is quite likely. You think it's ridiculous.

The end.

[bayblue]

I have given my view already. Then you started talking about having no proof. As though any crime that has not been proven does not exist. If we're talking views, then forget proof for starters. My view on the subject is very well known on here, but I'll run through it again for you... I believe officials have been influenced by the media and in particular, the managers that use the media as a tool. Imo there are many forms of corruption, right down to not doing what is right, or overlooking incidents, because it makes your job easier and perhaps safer. There has been evidence of this in the two other top european leagues, on different levels. It had been going on for years before it was brought to light. There have been glaring precedents in recent history, yet you feel they have nothing to do with this debate. I think that's strange. Mind you, I said pretty much all of this when I first joined in. So maybe you're right, we've not moved on at all. I think corruption in some form is quite likely. You think it's ridiculous. The end.

So are Premier League refs corrupt?

[Original Dub]

So are Premier League refs corrupt?

Are they definitely not?

[bayblue]

Are they definitely not?

Doesn't hurt to have an opinion.

[Original Dub]

Doesn't hurt to have an opinion.

I believe there has been corruption in the premier league to some degree.

I think I already gave my opinion.

And you shot it down. So you know there definitely isn't?

Good man.

[bayblue]

I believe there has been corruption in the premier league to some degree. I think I already gave my opinion. And you shot it down. So you know there definitely isn't? Good man.

Apologies if you thought I shot it down but I didn't understand what your point was and it appeared to me you didn't want to give a straight answer.
Even now when I ask if you think if there is corruption you say there has been, i.e. you respond to a question about the present with an answer about the past.

[Original Dub]

Apologies if you thought I shot it down but I didn't understand what your point was and it appeared to me you didn't want to give a straight answer.
Even now when I ask if you think if there is corruption you say there has been, i.e. you respond to a question about the present with an answer about the past.

Just answer. Is there definitely not?

You're such a tease

[Original Dub]

By the way, apology accepted.

[patrickblue]

Bayblue, a few years back I would have agreed with you, but there have been two games that have changed my mind completely.
The first was us away to Chelsea in our league winning year. It was the first really tough fixture that season after we had started the season at a storming pace. Balo scored in the first few minutes, and then the ref made sure we got nothing else. Silva was denied a stonewall penalty, Chelsea were given a dubious one, and Clichy was sent off. I seriously believe that season was meant to be Bacon's glorious winning retirement season. I think we were never going to be allowed to win that match, as we would have been too far ahead for the powers that be. I'm sure they thought that away to such strong opponents, they :a)Might not have to intervene at all, or :b)Only minimal intervention that wouldn't be noticed would swing it. As it happened, we started the game on fire, and the intervention was very noticeable.
The other game was also at Stamford Bridge the following season when the filth won there, after Chelsea had two players sent off. Both games so bent as not to be credible.

[Im_Spartacus]

My comment you responded to wasn't aimed at you but Goataldo who said in black and white that the referees are corrupt. That's the bullshit my friend.

With all respect, corrupt can mean many different things and covers many shades of grey.

Graeme Poll has time and time again outlined the pressures of refereeing at old Trafford, in particular the implied and often real threat of a banishment from reffing united games if your performance was "controversial" - a phenomenon that he has also related to refereeing Liverpool in their glory days. This automatically precludes you from many big games, which prevents you moving your career on.

The reality is that its like training a dog with a water spray. If the dog misbehaves it soon learns that it gets wet, and doesn't like getting wet so stops doing the things that cause it to get wet. A referee soon learns that there are consequences, and that's not good for their career. As a result, the "corruption" is not overt, but occurs by the power of certain personalities to be able to cause those consequences for referees. Whether consciously or otherwise, the outcome is that some referees make seemingly incredulous decisions in Uniteds favour - many of which I could list.

I personally always thought the pressure came from ferguson, and from that perspective, I don't believe Rodgers has that sway. If some though believe it is the FA that direct the referees for their brand, It is entirely possible that they have quiet word in the ear of the pgmo head to place a sympathetic referee or exclude certain others in games for certain teams.

That's not a weird conspiracy, it is a simple fact that those who get to red the biggest games the most often are those who are seen as the best referees, but they are seen as the best refs because they are always on the fucking telly - it's a self perpetuating myth, and to get there you have to dish out some odd decisions on the way to help your career. Like someone else has said, Webb appears to have passed this now and at the top of his game with his reputation made, seemed to have become more even handed over the last couple of years

[Im_Spartacus]

Bayblue, a few years back I would have agreed with you, but there have been two games that have changed my mind completely.
The first was us away to Chelsea in our league winning year. It was the first really tough fixture that season after we had started the season at a storming pace. Balo scored in the first few minutes, and then the ref made sure we got nothing else. Silva was denied a stonewall penalty, Chelsea were given a dubious one, and Clichy was sent off. I seriously believe that season was meant to be Bacon's glorious winning retirement season. I think we were never going to be allowed to win that match, as we would have been too far ahead for the powers that be. I'm sure they thought that away to such strong opponents, they :a)Might not have to intervene at all, or :b)Only minimal intervention that wouldn't be noticed would swing it. As it happened, we started the game on fire, and the intervention was very noticeable.
The other game was also at Stamford Bridge the following season when the filth won there, after Chelsea had two players sent off. Both games so bent as not to be credible.

I predicted the debacle when the rags played Chelsea, the game they went 2.0 down being totally outplayed, only to end up with 9 men in a remarkable refereeing display. Guess what, Clattenburg was ending a 12 month banishment for his allowing of the 1-6, lo and behold some truly remarkable decisions went Uniteds way that day to bring united back from the dead, in a game they would never have won without serious interference from the referee.

The thing that's strange to me, is that people didn't latch onto the utter idiocy of the decisions that day and link it to Clattenburgs well known absence from united games. It's really not rocket science, to the extent that I predicted that the referee would be involved in major controversy that day....and so it came to pass.

If little ole me can predict shit like this, then there have to be a lot of people in the know looking the other way......including the sky editorial teams who set the agenda for the commentary, which should have destroyed Clattenburg that day for his performance, yet strangely didn't.

The potential for sky's role in all this to be mainpulated by the FA is considerable. The FA simply throw a clause in the contract that criticism of officials should be 'mild' so as not to destroy the reputation of a particular referee or bring the game into disrepute. Given how things have transpired over the years, and the proliferation of phrases like 'if there's contact, he has every right to go down", excuses are made for referees at every turn by commentators, without ever really hammering them when they have had a shocker.

If sky, as the principle broadcaster can't do this, then it's very unlikely that 99% of the 'men in the street' will join the dots in decision patterns, given that this generation is dumb as fuck generally and incapable of thinking for themselves, and takes what the media spoon feeds them as gospel.

It's almost the perfect crime of manipulating a market

[michaelcityfan]

Then perhaps we should campaign for a random selection from a panel of suitably qualified referrees Draw them out of a hat and that would answer all the conspiracy concerns. Personally if we score enough goals against Liverpool then it makes any referreeing unable to have influence. So I think we either set up like chelsea did against us or we go at them from the start like our first game with Newcastle at the beginning of the season.

[Hazy2]

I often think the Premier League is bent, Portsmouth, every fucker new that club was being arse shagged by"Fit and Proper persons"
Lets pray they get relegated and the Football League can sort that sack of shit out.

4th official never gets involved "B.S"
Suarez, is still a dirty cheating bastard, but he is Box office, I am sure refs have been told,
"He is one of a very few players who need special treatment, he is box office" His dives are now accepted as the refs are conditioned to suit the overseas viewers who don't have a problem with shirt pulling, diving and cheating fuck me every break has a betting company.

Clattenburg, Hey you cunt I remember you as a shithead in the lower divisions, Lalana who the fuck are you talking too., Brush that one under the carpet.

Arsenal V Wigan trust me. Uwe, is gonna be screaming after that Game No fucking way are Wigan Playing Hull or Sheff Utd.