Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News

Archives

January 2017
M T W T F S S
« Dec    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Calciopoli – Can it happen in the PL? – Part 2

By Walter Broeckx

I hope you have read part 1 and if not please do. You can find it here.

Now Moggi and his accomplices Pairetto and Bergamo had a lot of power over the referees. It is said that they could make or brake a ref. One example is Gianluca Paparesta. He was under a heavy attack by Moggi after he made a few mistakes against Juventus in a game in November 2004.  He then was heavily criticised by Moggi and some even say that he was locked in by Moggi at the time. The ref claimed he wasn’t locked up. But this could be that he said this to avoid being called an accomplice.   But what as noticeable was that after that he did do a few games involving Juve and Juventus never lost a game since that day.

Of course it could have been a coincidence. As we all know football is full of coincidences. But what is remarkable is that the judge gave him a 3 month ban. After that ban this ref stopped refereeing. He claimed that he was innocent.  As he was banned we can assume there was something wrong.

And to underline this I will show you a statistic we have used before on Untold. The win % of a ref with a certain team. So I now will show you the statistics of this ref before and after that game in November 2004.

Before 2004 Total Games Win Draw Lost
Paparesta 17 9 4 4
In % 53% 23,5% 23,5%
After 2004 6 5 1 0
In % 83% 17%

So it is clear to see that there is a really big difference between the two. After that lost game in 2004 Juventus never lost another game when Paparesta was around. And even more their win % shot up from already a high win % to an amazingly high win %.

I know that when I did the same for the PL refs I got criticised for doing it and told that it all meant nothing.  Of course it also could work the other way round. That when a ref first has a win % of dazzling heights and then suddenly the same team cannot win another game with that ref, this could point to the same effect. Because remember that Calciopoli was not just about sending the desired ref to games of Juventus but also sending the “bad ref” to games of their closest rivals!

And if we then look at how many times the PGMOL sends out Dean, the Arsenal bogy ref in the last seasons… we might just be looking at the hidden aspect of Calciopoli. The aspect of sending the “bad ref” to your opponents so they drop points.

So once again I ask you to give it some thought. Could there be something happening similar to that in Italy where they send the “bad refs” to their rivals in order to benefit themselves? Of course it could be coincidence?

To continue about the Italian part of Calciopoli I also want to mention that Moggi of Juventus also used in influence in the politics of the Italian Football Federation. You know putting the right person in the right job. All very handy of course. Always useful to have people who you can ask favours when needed.

Moggi also tried to influence players to use a certain agent. By using that agent their football career would flourish and their chances of making it in to the Italian national team would rise. And he also had friends in the real political world in Italy. The Minister of Internal Affairs and the Minister of Economy were close friends. Always very useful to have high placed friends.

Like when after the death of Pope John Paul II the Italian government wanted to stop the league and let the games be played on another day. The Minister gave Juventus permission to play at that moment against a weakened Fiorentina. This was in return for Moggi arranging “good refs” for the games of the local team of the Minister.

Moggi also tried to be good friends with high police officers. Giving them free tickets for games. Always handy you know.

But also Moggi made sure that he had important and influential journalists on his side. And the task of those journalists was to make sure that they would try to cover up as much as possibly can.

I have seen the remark asking me, “how does it come that the media don’t pick on our findings?” I have seen the remark a few times before to be honest. So if we look at how it went in Italy we see that the media or better said important members of the media gladly co-operated on covering things up.

I now will bring up another name. The name of Aldo Biscardi. He was the very popular presenter of the football show on the Italian TV company that had the broadcast rights. This Biscardi, in exchange for benefits granted to him, talked with Moggi about what they would show in the program and what they would not show.

I will now use transcripts to give an example of those things.

A bit of a messy conversation between Moggi and Aldo Biscardi. The talk includes the expensive watch that Moggi gave to  Biscardi.

• Biscardi: Hello?

• Moggi: I would like to speak with Biscardi

• Biscardi: That’s me.

• Moggi: I’m Luciano Moggi.

• Biscardi: Whoa Lucia ‘!

• Moggi: Yesterday I saw our friend from Trieste called … Fabio Baldas (former appointer of referees and commentator (pundit) for Il Processo the show from Biscardi). I gave him a good scolding, but it was not necessary. He is not guilty. (…) But if he does not come then I have no one else, why do we have to sell the championship?

• Biscardi: No, you sell nothing, maybe you have done that last year, you have 40 million Lire to give too me, you bet with me and you’ve lost …

• Moggi: Aldo, but I … that watch is already the insurance, what do you want me to tell you?

• Biscardi: And where is that?

• Moggi: And you know that if I tell you …

• Biscardi: And I do not know. You never sent me.

• Moggi: Man, get lost anyway, I have given you one, it cost 40 million!

So you see that Moggi gave a 40 million Lire watch to this match commentator.

A few lines from another conversation between the two, held in December 2004 after the broadcast. It’s about Aldo Grasso, a critical journalist who was a guest at Biscardi in the studio.

• …..

• Moggi: And what else, Aldo Grasso can go to hell.

• Biscardi: Indeed, what a jerk.

• Moggi: But could you please get him out of the show?

• Biscardi: I  will never invite him again, you can be sure about that!

So you see that Moggi instructs Biscardi to not invite critical persons again to his football show.

The next name is already mentioned in the phone calls. It is pundit Fabio Baldas. A former referee who turned in to a pundit in the show from Biscardi.

Moggi talking to football commentator Baldas

• Baldas: How are you? Good?

• Moggi: Good.

• Baldas: Listen Luciano, today we do not have much … there is only Rodomonti (that weekend referee at Cagliari-Milan) … is it okay if we make him look bad at the show? If you agree, of course …

• Moggi: Oh, of course.

• Baldas: What else? What else? There is of course also Siena- Fiorentina.

• Moggi: Was there a penalty then?

• Baldas: Hell there surely was  a penalty! … Rosetti whistled there. You know him well … but if we show him what we do then?

• Moggi: No, no, leave him alone … let’s leave that  match like that.

• Baldas: OK … If I need a favour you help me?

• Moggi: No problem.

• Baldas: Call you soon?

• Moggi: Yep, fast.

• Baldas: Good day.

Again the same two people (January 17, 2005).

• Baldas: Trezeguets goal was from an offside position.

• Moggi: The referee must remain absolutely clean!

• Baldas: Whatever you want … but well, I want to say, since we show it as it happened, the viewers will see it … it is 50 cm offside!

• Moggi: Then cut some of those 50 cm off, it should be 20!

So from these conversations it is clear that Moggi not only decided which ref would do which games with a little help from is accomplices but he also gave direct instructions and bribed the people who presented and acted as pundits in the football programs on TV. How convenient.

And then I come back to the football shows in England. And well from what I see I sometimes wonder: why don’t they show that incident? Or why do they focus on this offside goal but don’t mention the offside goal that was scored by the other team.

So from now on if someone asks: why doesn’t the media bring such things above water? You could remember the way the Italian cheaters acted. Not only using the persons in the Football Federation but also using the persons in the referee world who appoint refs but also using the media to decide what to show and what not to show.  And to pay them or bribe them as it then should be called. Moggi was in touch with the persons who decided what to show or what not to show. To decide on what to focus and on what not to focus.

Do you smell the gutter? I do.

 

Recent posts

The books…

The sites from the same team…

25 comments to Calciopoli – Can it happen in the PL? – Part 2

  • Adam

    A scary read Walter. Most people hope for and want honesty in all that they do in life. What you are suggesting is something that is rotten to its core. Before I started reading Untold (when ever that was, it feels like ages) I would fail to believe that this could be going on in any country. Now, I believe this is happening in some form here. Some form of institutional bias or worse corruption is taking place in English football. How to prove it is the hard part.

    Keep at it, at some point more people will jump on board and the ideology will grow.

  • Sav from Australia

    Masterful Walter! Untold has been shining a light on the corruption in English football virtually single handedly.

    It is so easy to see the way Sky shows EPL matches corresponding with the Italian corruption. So easy, but I do wonder whether any judge/politician/law enforcement/etc in England will take up the challenge. I doubt it, personally.

    But at least Untold will be there to expose the cheaters and the fools who believe their lies.

  • Rupert Cook

    It’s Italy, one of the most corrupt countries in Europe. Any country that votes for a crook like Berlusconi as president gets what it deserves. It’s more surprising in Italy when corruption isn’t involved. And of course another hotbed of hypocrisy, the Catholic Church has it’s leader there.

    Dodgy practices in England? Quite possibly, nothing would surprise me. After all football is a big money business and where mounds of money is crooks congregate.

  • Sav from Australia

    Rupert you silly man,

    Catholic church corrupt? What about the liberal Americans, aren’t they corrupt, forcing their views on everyone, through media far and wide?

    Silvio Berlusconi – sure he is alleged of doing corrupt things…did he invade Iraq alongside America and contribute to the rape of a country and the people within said country…Blair, Rupert, Blair…is not Italian.

    You start by saying Italy is corrupt. I say England is corrupt. India is corrupt. America, Australia, Fiji, everyone is corrupt. But you jump on Italy. Rascism, Rupert – its bad – ask the media, they’ll tell you.

    But you get paid to blog, so I suppose you’ll enjoy all this.

  • Shard

    I have said for years that the TV viewing experience is one of the reasons people are unwilling to consider corruption or manipulation in football. Sky often do not show replays of incidents benefiting certain teams. If they do show a replay, they show it from an angle where basically nothing is clear, and then they rely on the commentator to cover up whatever can be seen.

    Notice how commentators on Sky were so quick to defend Sidwell’s tackle as simply mistimed, ‘he didn’t launch himself in’ (when he clearly did) and that he was unlucky. And were equally quick to say that was a terrible tackle by Giroud in the end, when it was actually much less of a poor tackle than Sidwell’s. That’s just an example. They do it all the time. The camera lies, and when it can’t, the commentators do.

    And that’s leaving aside the programs like Motd which are so selective in their pick of highlights and then their ‘analysis’ that it’s unbelievable. If most football fans in England spend time watching their team, and rely on programs like Motd to see what other teams are up to, is it any wonder that they can’t quite fathom just how bad it is? They aren’t allowed to see the entire picture. Only a pre-decided narrative of what occurred/is occurring.

  • Rupert Cook

    @Sav, I don’t get paid to blog. It’s amusing how you say everywhere is corrupt and act all righteous and then assert that I get paid to blog despite you having no facts whatsoever to prove it.

    Exactly how did you arrive at your rather insane outburst by my comments? Did I mention anything about Blair? FYI I have no time for Blair or any politician.

    Italy is rife with corruption, there’s no racism involved in that statement. Berlusconi alleged, no mate proved, only being the corrupt man that he is he manage to pass a law which exempted him from prosecution. I’d also suggest you learn how to spell racism before you start firing off offensive accusations at people.

    There are levels of corruption in every country though I’d be bold enough to say that English institutions are not as striped with corruption as Italian ones.

    As for America what views are they forcing onto you? If you’re fool enough to accept what the US government says then more pity you. And if you’re defending the Catholic Church you really are a fool.

  • Rupert Cook

    @Shard, fascinating. Can’t really comment on Sky but MOTD were adamant that Sidwell deserved a red and much more reticent about Giroud’s red so maybe they’re not always so bad.

  • Pat

    Very, very interesting Walter.

    It would be very naive to say it couldn’t happen here.

  • Sav from Australia

    @Shard

    ” They aren’t allowed to see the entire picture. Only a pre-decided narrative of what occurred/is occurring.”

    I agree. The media works the same in football as everything else, there’s always a story they feed people. The funniest story this season is that Man Utd are the ‘best’ team in England.

  • Rupert Cook

    Well, seeing as Manu are over a dozen points clear of everyone else in the league they probably are the best team in England. If they aren’t then who is?

  • Patrick (Malta)

    Walter,

    I support Arsenal in England. I support Juve in Italy. Calciopoli was very intriguing for me, and you can imagine I followed it pretty well. Nothing you say is false. I will add and concede that Italy is one of the most corrupt countries in Europe. What I wish to gripe about is what you did NOT say.

    The practice with the referee selectors in those times was that comments and feedback from club directors was ENCOURAGED. The 30,000 tapped calls you mentioned include thousands of calls from other club directors. This was normal practice, right or wrong. Moggi calling the selectors was not the exception. He was simply one of the bandwagon.

    Together with Juve, other clubs were also punished. Milan, Fiorentina, Lazio…. but only Juve were relegated. Inter were not hit with any penalties. Here start the pointers. Inter had forgotten when they had last won the league. Milan and Juve had dominated for several years…even Roma had won a title.

    The company that carried out the tappings was Italy’s biggest telecom operator – TIM. The TIM director in charge of the tapping operations was also a director of Pirelli Italy. Pirelli were (and still are) Inter’s shirt sponsors. The same director is a well-known avid Inter fan. this is a fact and general knowledge.

    Recent findings have discovered that from the plethora of recordings of tapped phone calls submitted by TIM to the judges you mention were hundreds of calls made by the sadly departed Giacinto Facchetti, then a director of Inter, the same as Moggi was of Juve. The findings were investigated by a Napoli court that found Inter just as culpable as Juve, in that Facchetti also demanded certain referees officiate or not officiate Inter games. However, these findings could not be tried in court only due to prescription reasons!!!

    Juve were stripped of the 2004/5 title solely on the basis of…”since you were guilty in 2005/6, then you must have also been guilty in 2005″…!!! In fact the investigation only centred around 2005/6, and 2004/5 was in no way involved in any investigations.

    The penalties were handed down in record haste by the Italian federation before any thorough investigations were carried out and also before the 2006 Italy World Cup victory where 7 world Cup winners were Juve players!!! Weren’t Juve capable of winning on their own merit?

    The aftermath of the Calciopoli penalties was…. Juve relegated to Serie B and constrained to sell some of their top players that had just won two successive titles…including Ibrahimovic and Vieira to Inter! With Juve, Milan and Lazio out of the equation, Inter finally won the league after a frustrating absence of a couple of decades..and a bit.

    Food for thought?

  • Mogooner

    Anyone who watches live football would be thinking that the same issues are prevalent in English football. There are way too many inexplicable decisions made. If Rebekah Brooks and co had targeted football for phone hacking, there is no doubt in my mind that many sordid deals would have been uncovered

  • Gord

    Off topic – Referee Assignments (we get Dowd for ManU)

    Saturday 27 April

    Manchester City v West Ham United (12.45pm)
    Referee: H Webb Assistant: D Cann, S Massey 4th: C Foy

    Everton v Fulham
    Referee: J Moss Assistant: M McDonough, A Holmes 4th: M Jones

    Southampton v West Bromwich Albion
    Referee: R Madley Assistant: M Mullarkey, S Bennett 4th: P Dowd

    Stoke City v Norwich City
    Referee: A Taylor Assistant: S Burt, G Beswick 4th: M Halsey

    Wigan Athletic v Tottenham Hotspur
    Referee: M Atkinson Assistant: P Kirkup, C Breakspear 4th: N Swarbrick

    Newcastle United v Liverpool (5.30pm)
    Referee: A Marriner Assistant: S Child, S Long 4th: L Mason

    Sunday 28 April

    Reading v Queens Park Rangers (1.30pm)
    Referee: K Friend Assistant: A Halliday, L Betts 4th: L Probert

    Chelsea v Swansea City
    Referee: M Clattenburg Assistant: H Lennard, D England 4th: A Taylor

    Arsenal v Manchester United (4pm)
    Referee: P Dowd Assistant: A Garratt: S Ledger 4th: M Oliver

    Monday 29 April

    Aston Villa v Sunderland (8pm)
    Referee: M Dean Assistant: J Collin, J Brooks 4th: M Atkinson

  • WalterBroeckx

    Patrick,
    I know I’m not complete and I had to leave things out for the sake of keeping it readable and to come to my conclusion. I decided to focus on Juventus and I think when I come to the final article you will understand why.

    But I thank you for your comment that brings up points I had to leave out.

  • WalterBroeckx

    And like I said against another Juventus supporter after the first article: this is not about making Juventus look bad. But they are just the example I needed to make my final point. That will appear after the last article. 2 to go 😉

  • BuffonNumeroUno

    I know you said this wasn’t about Juventus, but this comes across as a strong attack, with questionable evidence. So what if Moggi speaks to a journalist and tells him to favour Juventus? Berlusconi controlled nearly the entire media when he was Prime Minister, and whenever Milan got a bad decision in their favour, the same media never covered it (and still don’t). It’s annoying if that happens, but it’s a million miles from match fixing.

    Your Paparesta stats mean nothing. CCTV evidence proved he wasn’t locked away, as well as witness statements. You have to take into account the fixtures he refereed, and their respective difficulty. After that game at Reggina Paparesta was slaughtered by the media for his errors. Do you not think that media pressure won’t have an affect?

    You go on about Moggi sending good refs and bad refs, but then provide no evidence that this is happening (the conversation with the journalist about covering up certain errors doesn’t count).

    As I said before, Bergamo and Pairetto were both too friendly with the clubs, and that included Juventus. But not solely Juventus, like this article and others have implied. As far as I’m aware there’s no concrete evidence any team was fixing matches, although there’s a call where Inter’s president calls the designator subtly asking him to put pressure on the referee for their next game. The designator obliged. Inter’s opponents in this game? Juventus. Paolo Bergamo, Moggi’s man on the inside, was nudging the referee to go against Juve, after a chat with Inter’s president.

    You guys on here were friendly towards me, so I’m being friendly back, but I don’t like the one-sided argument on display here, and I will continue to say that if I think that’s the case.

    This link has copies of a few articles containing some information on the “missing” evidence.

    http://forum.juventuz.org/archive/index.php/t-29877.html

  • Stuart

    Rupert,
    The answer to your question would be clear if it wasn’t for the constant barrage of referee decisions in favour of Man Utd. Unfortunately, we just don’t know who is the best.

  • Mick

    @Stuart
    Right on Stuart, 2 of the 3 Man U goals against Villa tonight involved offside’s not flagged by the linesman.

  • Mick

    Correction, apparently not just 2 but all 3 goals were dubious.

  • Gf60

    Having converted to the Euro in 2002, were the Italians still referring to “40 million lire” in 2004?

  • El Gringo

    Also, the BBC announced the win well before the match started. I’m kicking myself for not copying the match preview, and it seems to have been taken down from the BBC website. If I remember correctly, it said,

    “Manchester United will win the league with a victory over Aston Villa tonight”

    It might be ambiguous: is the ‘with’ instrumental (ie, a victory may be the instrument which wins them the league)–in which case the statement is prescient–or does it merely imply what might happen (ie, if a victory is granted, then they win the league)?

    At any rate, I read the statement, rolled my eyes, and was not in the least surprised to find that RVP scored an offside goal in the 2nd minute and a hat trick in the first half. Coincidence?

  • Rupert Cook

    @Stuart, just which team is the best? It certainly isn’t Arsenal.

    I’d say that Manu are the best, far more consistent than any other team and with a squad that on paper is probably not as strong as City. The fact that they have breezed through the league this year is more of an indictment on the rather poor quality of their rivals. Of course Arsenal did decide to help them by selling the best player in the league to them. One decision that I hope these “ambitious” types who run our club are never allowed to forget as long as they fiddle around with AFC.

  • Stuart

    Rupert,
    Yes they have more consistency results wise but how much of that was ref favours? We will never actually know. It’s not Arsenal but were not far off it.

  • Rupert Cook

    @Stuart, come on, I might agree with you if they’d won the league by four or five points but they stormed it. Most other major teams have been poor in comparison. Chelsea, City and Spuds are not consistent and we have been fairly ordinary until the last few months.

  • Stuart

    Rupert,
    Are you suggesting that Man Utd have been good this season? It looks like it.

    Referring to your comment about four or five points, that would need only two games out of 38 to have been influenced but let’s be more realistic here and say that 10 games were won that would otherwise have been drawn, just a quarter of their games (if you check Walters ref reviews, you will find it is more), that is an extra 20 point handed to them from just 10 games which puts us in the title race.

    Further to this, it’s not just the extra points Man Utd have gained, there is also the double whammy that another team also lost those points so the advantage is greater than irst envisaged.

    However on top of all this, you admit to not even watching the games so this is a pointless discussion to be honest.