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

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News


October 2016
« Sep    

Tottenham v Arsenal 5 Mar 2016 – The Match Officials. Oliver does know what he’s doing, and it isn’t right.

by Andrew Crawshaw

No referee reviews so an unchanged Table of Shame

Wrong Important Decisions Favouring Arsenal Favouring Opponents
2nd Yellow Cards 1 33
Red Cards 1 11
Penalties 3 26
Goals 0 9
Total 5 79
Possible Cost in Points 0 17

Wall of Shame (also unchanged)

Ref Game Weighted Score Bias against (h/a) Link to Ref Review
Craig Pawson Stoke v Arsenal 34 5/95 Review Stoke v Arsenal
Lee Mason Arsenal v Southampton 34 80/20 Review Arsenal v Southampton
Mike Dean Chelsea v Arsenal 41 5/95 Review Chelsea v Arsenal
Martin Atkinson Arsenal v Spurs 41 82/18 Review Arsenal v Spurs
Mark Clattenburg West Brom v Arsenal 42 9/91 Review WBA Vv Arsenal
Anthony Taylor Arsenal v Newcastle 48 9/91 Review Newcastle v Arsenal
Jonathan Moss Southampton v Arsenal 49 22/78 Review Southampton v Arsenal

On to Saturday kick-off 12:45 London Time

  • Referee – Michael Oliver
  • Assistants – M Mullarkey and S Child
  • Fourth Official – R East

This will be Mr Oliver’s 18th game this season, his second for Arsenal but fourth for Tottenham (home v Chelsea 0 – 0 and Palace 1 – 0 and away at Everton 1 – 1).

His previous Arsenal game this year was our 0 – 0 draw with Liverpool

Ref Review: Arsenal – Liverpool

67% weighted score, bias against both teams 90/10 and three wrong Important Decisions which certainly cost us two points.  In Min 8 Aaron Ramsey scored a goal which was wrongly ruled out for offside, Min 72 Lucas fouled Giroud in the penalty area – nothing given and Min 86 Mignolet was correctly given a yellow card for timewasting, he should have had a first yellow in minute 58 for deliberately kicking the ball away so this should have been a second yellow card.

Looking back to 2014-15 when Mr Oliver refereed two Arsenal matches

REFEREE REVIEW: Arsenal – Tottenham

66% weighted score, bias against both teams 85/15 and two wrong Important Decisions almost certainly costing Arsenal 2 points.

Min 30 Rose fouled Wilshere in the penalty area nothing given and in Min 72 Mason should have had a straight red card for a foul on Özil.  There were also 4 not given yellow cards to Tottenham players, Lamela in Min 7, Mason in Min15, Rose in Min 20 and Chadli in Min 68.  Adabayor was wrongly booked in Min 68 and Chambers was wrongly booked in Min 86.

There was another penalty incident in Min 18 when Kaboul seemed to jump into the back of Welbeck.  No proper replays were available to Walter when he did his review and he had to give the referee marks for not giving the penalty when we were all certain that a penalty should have been given but that is the rule in the referee review, we will only say a decision is wrong when there is definitive proof.

Ref Review Liverpool – Arsenal. Someone put something in the ref’s tea at half time

67% weighted score, bias against the two teams 0/100 with his customary 2 wrong Important Decisions costing Arsenal two points.  In Min 46 Sterling should have had a yellow card for a dive, Debuchy was wrongly given the card for being the nearest Arsenal player.

This became important as in Min 61 Sterling should have had a second yellow card for deliberate handball in our penalty area and should have been dismissed.

In Min 90+1 Borini was wrongly given a yellow card for a dreadful challenge on Cazorla which should have been a straight red.  As it was a second yellow card it made no difference to the outcome of the game but a one match ban didn’t fit his crime.  Mr Oliver had a great first half (albeit one where he didn’t have to do much) 16 decisions made, 14 correct for a 90% weighted score.  Unfortunately it all went wrong in the second half.

Going back one more year to 2013-14 we had Mr Oliver in three games.  There were no referee reviews for that season so I have linked Walter’s post game pieces to get some context.

Our 1 – 0 win at home to Spurs

Our 1 – 0 loss away at United

Our 5 – 1 away loss at Liverpool

No particular comments referring to Mr Oliver, so I guess he was adequate in these games, he certainly wasn’t responsible for the Liverpool result, we managed that one entirely by ourselves!

In 2013-13 there were Referee Reviews and there was one Arsenal game

Match Review: Michael Oliver – Everton Vs Arsenal (1 – 1) [28/11/2012]

70% weighted score, bias against the two teams of 21/79 and no wrong Important Decisions.

Regarding the Assistant Referees, I have a flag against Mr Mullarkey for failure to flag Classie offside in the buildup to Southampton’s first goal in their 4 – 0 victory on Boxing Day, I have nothing against Mr Child.


  1. In the four games refereed by Mr Mason this year featuring Spurs and Arsenal, no team has scored more than a single goal and three have been draws.
  2. Mr Mason has failed to reach the minimum 70% score in his last three Arsenal games.  He is not good enough to be a referee at this level and I see little chance of him being any better on Saturday.
  3. His bias against Arsenal in the last three games has been 85, 90 and 100% so unlike the common chant of “you don’t know what you’re doing” he clearly does, he just choses to do it in a way to harm Arsenal like a good PGMO Employee.
  4. By refusing to issue a straight red card for a chest high challenge by Borini on Cazorla (which was sufficient to rip Caz’s shirt and cut his chest) or a penalty for a clear kick on Wilshere’s shin in the penalty area Mr Mason shows that he is a coward and unwilling or unable to stand up for player safety on the pitch.
  5. Expect Spurs to pull, push, hold shirts and generally try and disrupt Arsenal from playing with no fear of reprisal from the referee.
  6. Chance of an Arsenal penalty – minute.
  7. Chance of a dive from a Spurs player resulting in a booking, penalty or free kick in a dangerous position – odds on.
  8. Probable outcome – draw (but with wrong decisions effectively having cost Arsenal the win).


The insult of the day (for Professional Game Match Fixers)

You common cry of curs! whose breath I hate as reek o’ the rotten fens, whose loves I prize as the dead carcasses of unburied men that do corrupt my air, I banish you.   (Coriolanus)

From the anniversary files (the index to over 4500 anniversaries is at Arsenal on this day)

  • 4 March 1987: Tottenham 1 Arsenal 2.  League Cup semi-replay.  Clive Allen put Tottenham ahead in all three of the “one nil down, two one up” semi-final games. Ian Allinson scored the first for Arsenal and Rocastle scored in injury time.  
  • 4 March 2008: Arsenal became the first English team to beat Milan in the San Siro thanks to a Fabregas free kick.

And elsewhere

  • 4 March 1933: Franklin D Roosevelt is inaugurated as US president and say “Let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”

Recent Posts

The Untold Books

The latest Untold book is Arsenal: The Long Sleep 1953-1970 with a Foreword by Bob Wilson, available both as a paperback and as a Kindle book from Amazon.   Details of this and our previous and forthcoming titles can be found at Arsenal Books on this site.

73 comments to Tottenham v Arsenal 5 Mar 2016 – The Match Officials. Oliver does know what he’s doing, and it isn’t right.

  • KR

    Sad site so obsessed with refs. When we had a great team we won titles and refs still made many mistakes. This is a sad smokescreen that harms and and embrasses our football club. The refs may not be great but their honest if you don’t agree with that you might as well stop watching football. By the way offside is usually decided by the assistants.

  • nicky

    At the risk of upsetting a host of fans of Andrew, Walter & Co, I think you have a point.
    No matter what chicanery by match officials is discovered, nothing changes.
    Any success is achieved in spite of referees.
    So far Untold is a voice crying in the wilderness.
    The only hope on the far horizon is the steady advance of technology. Which will assist the good and curb the wrongdoer at long last.

  • thierryhenry22

    ‘The refs may not be great but their honest’. 1. It’s ‘they’re. 2. That whole comment was humorous, thanks.

  • Usama Zaka


    Are you saying that Untold Arsenal is throwing a smoke-screen and embarrassing Arsenal FC by being the only site/blog/whatever to highlight the deliberate bias and game changing influencing done by referees ?

    Are you also implying that all of us fans should just accept and get on away with the corruption and high level of incompetence in refereeing ?

    If that’s the case, then I am afraid its a sad sight to see.

  • Mandy Dodd

    why would anyone assume our refs are honest, when all the evidence points to the fact they are not.
    The only doubt is whether they are incompetent, weak, biased or criminal…..I suspect we have examples on the spectrum of all of those.

  • WalterBroeckx

    That has been a while. Someone dismissing 4-5 years of study in one sentence.
    One of the ‘it evens out’ believers… 🙂 LOL

  • Marcus71

    This website and articles like this bring shame on Arsenal. There are poor decisions in a lot of games every week – quite a few having affecting the outcome – you just have to live with it. Where might our season be now if Flamini had been sent off at Bournemouth like he should have been, for example? Issues with refs are the least of the problems that Arsenal have, especially since the turn of the year (see the Opta points per game for 2016 for proof).

    Other sports are the same – there are terrible decisions in the NFL which are conveniently exempt from the video review they have as they are totally subjective.

    If people on this site are so sure of themselves maybe they should take the refs to court. Show the evidence and see what happens instead of just whinging in the background.

  • Mandy Dodd

    guess it all depends on perspective. Claudio Ranieri or Fergie…or Mourinho until recently would be justified in viewing them as very honest. I am told such teams even sometimes get things referred to as …penalties…., not sure, but I believe they are things given in abundance to teams like Liverpool to help them win the title
    I suspect we are going to get a very hard time from the ref tomorrow should we prove in any way competitive, in the hope of weakening a title challenge, and when/if the powers that be conclude we are out of the title race, the refs will leave us alone…attempts at taking us out of the top 4 may be a step too far even for them at this stage.
    That is perhaps the one benefit to Wenger out, I am sure his presence is part of the reason the team get this treatment….he has upset the English footballing establishment in the past, and the way he is treated, suggest that some believe he is still a threat, in contrast to the media/WOB.

  • Marcus 71, I have published your comment, but really you should have read back through our evidence and reports. If you disagree, perhaps you would like to write up your own statistical analysis of a game. There are hundreds on this site for you to model your approach on, or your could set up your own format.

    Sadly we have no evidence that the refs have committed any crime that the courts would be interested in. What we always say is that either they are incompetent or there is match fixing – we can’t tell which. But the problem could so easily be overcome if only PGMF would appoint more refs so we only got the same ref for two games a season.

    Anyway I await your analysis of a game so we can publish that and examine it. Or a supply of the Opta data that you think is relevant here.

  • Marcus71

    Tony – thank you for your reply. I think everyone will agree that refereeing could be improved and there are a lot of poor decisions – that is not the point. You say there is no evidence of criminality, though, but there are allegations of corruption on this very page which if true would be a serious crime – do you agree with this?

    I am an ST holder and have been going to 20+ games per season since the late 80s so in that time you see pretty much every level of refereeing. Nothing much has changed, to be honest. I like to be fairly pragmatic view and take into account that the relentless speed and flow of football make it a tough sport to officiate.

  • Gouresh

    along with the focus on the bad referring, why don’t we also focus of the way our players play rather than just dismissing it as bad form?

  • With regards to referees I’m afraid Jr. Does have a point Walter you point to 4-5 years of study presumably you are referring to untold ref reviews ? I have said before and will say again if untold Arsenal has clear evidence of biase against Arsenal by 99% of referees as your review before every match says why have you not summited this evidence to Arsenal football club the police or the FA ? Also if a guy sitting in India or USA watching our games can see quite clearly that every ref we get including European apparently are corrupt and biase then I would have to ask why cant AFC and Arsene wenger also see it ? There are only 2 answers to this either they don’t see it because it does not exist or they are fully aware of it and are complicate with it which would mean that AFC are as corrupt as the referees who are vilified on a regular basis by a section of your posters as mentioned earlier kr raises a point some of these posters are embarrassing and tend to negate some of the more sensible issues you raise concerning referees and there governing body on untold Arsenal anyway any sensible answer to my points raised welcome

  • rich


    Where would we be if Flamini was sent off? About 5-10 points better off,maybe…if alongside that we’d have had about half the terrible match-turning decisions go the way they should have.

    If you didn’t notice the regularity with which Ferguson teams ,for instance, got big decisions at helpful times, particularly to dig themselves out of holes ( the Rashford handball being a good one- blink of an eye a bad position would have been a brilliant one- 2-2 most likely, against ten men) I wouldn’t say that’s necessarily shameful but it’s not smart, to the benefit of the club, or noble.

    We can’t know what effect it would have on the relative fortunes of either club if we had received Man Utd type decisions over the last decade, or they had been treated like us. All we can say if we have brains and eyes to see is that we were treated very differently, and it helped them enormously and hurt us immensely.

    As an interesting exercise, can you clarify whether you believe IN THEORY it is possible for refereeing performances to be so bad, over a long period, as to be worse than suspicious, and as to hurt a team badly or help a team tremendously.

    If your answer is ‘No. NEVER!’ (not football, not English football!), then…you haven’t being watching human history closely, as bad behaviour is everywhere and there is no reason whatsoever to rule football is exempt from it.

    If you say ‘yes, in theory it’s a possibility’, then you just need to try look at how many bad decisions have gone against us and try work out if it is enough to be able to say something is very wrong with how we are refereed.

    That’s how it has gone with many of us. We didn’t go ‘you know what, the ref had an awful game there, which means I now believe they are against us’; instead we noticed over a period of time that it was happening a lot, a very suspicious amount; from there we started watching even more closely, and, over time, it became increasingly obvious that something is very wrong with how we are treated and with pgmol itself.

    One example which, arguably, went our way, disproves or invalidates countless examples of the opposite how,exactly? With what sort of reason or logic? None.

  • MoW

    tin foil hats everyone!!

  • Porter

    By the sites very nature the concentration is on Arsenal. Also because football is tribal fans of other teams easily dismiss the findings. However it is clear that there is a clique of teams that appear to get favoured and benefit from refereeing decisions. And there are others not only Arsenal that do not.

  • norman14

    I sense the smell of aaa on this thread.

    There are a lot of comments that are a) unfounded, b) derogatory and c) untrue.

    If people don’t like the research articles on referees, why bother reading them? Even more, why read them then make stupid comments?

    The majority of subscribers on UA look forward to the referee analysis, both pre and post match.

    As it stands, the referee analysis is covering decisions made on BOTH teams, so to say it is biased towards Arsenal is just daft.

    Having said that, this is a site for Arsenal supporters!

  • Tom

    Bringing attention to substandard refereeing in the PL isn’t the problem at Untold, it’s the total lack of football perspective associated with describing some of those bad/biased decisions that’s hurting this site more than anything else.

    When in his match report Walter points to a clear foul on Ozil in the build up to Swansea goal, it’s everything else he fails to notice or comment on that is the problem in my opinion.

    E.g. Why is Bellerin further up field than Rutledge when Arsenal don’t have possession and Ozil is competing for a 50/50 ball at a center circle?
    Why Arsenal players seem to stop playing even though there is no whistle, I mean , playing to whistle is something every twelve year old knows to be a cardinal rule.
    Why no Arsenal player has any wits about him to stop Swansea Attack with a strategic foul and take a yellow for the team, and then give the referee the business for not calling the foul on Ozil.

    Any of these could’ve been mentioned and more in a match report, in conjunction with pointing out bad calls we seem to get more often than others. None of it is terribly insightful. Not any more insightful than spotting the half Nelson on Ozil not given by the ref.

  • Andrew Crawshaw

    On the train home after the Swansea game I sat next to two ladies who told me confidently that the first Swansea goal shouldn’t have counted because of a foul on Özil, they also said that they thought that the free kick that led to their second goal shouldn’t have been awarded and that we should have had two penalties. They also said that Giroud was being fouled all game. If they were right that would explain how we lost another game. I will await the referee review with interest.

    From my seat I said that I agreed on the first goal, was unsighted for the second and thought that at least one penalty should have been given.

    Both ladies were quite rational and clearly knew what they had seen.

  • MoW

    a few comments on your refereeing conspiracy theory:

    1) you claim to have irrefutable evidence of a conspiracy against Arsenal that has been going on for several years and yet, despite this, the story has never broke or gone mainstream. how can this be?
    2) we live in a globalised age of information and mass media. Premier League football is one of the biggest shows on earth, and there are literally thousands of news and media outlets that make money off big news, and few things are bigger than scandal and corruption in sport. yet despite this, despite that your evidence is supposedly cut and dry and laid out for inspection, and despite the huge incentives for at least one outlet to champion your cause, no-one is interested. how can this be?
    3) you might worryingly claim that the media is in on the act, and that the conspiracy against Arsenal runs deeper than just the referees, but given the scale and diversity of digital news media, and the existence of thousands of genuine Arsenal fans across the globe who can’t possibly be in on the act, your claims stretch credulity to breaking point.
    4) if there is a conspiracy, then who is behind it and why? for something this big to exist and remain covered up for so long would take a breathtaking amount of organisation, deception and risk taking. few people could mastermind such a thing. it really does beg the question of why so many people could be incentivised to take such risks, not least of all the match day officials themselves. and what’s the point of it? who has such a beef with Arsenal and why? is it the Russians? Sheiks? if so, why Arsenal instead of other big clubs, or each other? without plausible explanations for any of this, the whole theory is left desperately wanting.
    5) all this and yet the site retains an unshakable, and on face value, cult like devotion to Wenger and his methods, despite his failure to recapture past glories. the site is highly leveraged in the position that Wenger is a genius and untouchable. which leads to the obvious conclusion that the site is highly invested in “proving” that there’s a grand plot foiling his plans. but this can simply be explained by the powerful and well understood phenomena of cognitive dissonance, and your referring analysis is a result of its bedfellow, confirmation bias.
    6) you might try and sidestep these points and claim that there isn’t a malicious, organised conspiracy, but rather a subconscious bias against Arsenal, but this runs into even deeper problems because you still need to account for why such a systematic and clear cut bias can exist for such a long period of time.

    the reality is that you’re not the only ones who watch football, and watch all of arsenal’s games. lot’s of people do. it’s not an exaggeration to say that elite football is one of the most passionately followed and scrutinized endeavours that exist on our planet. all fans will moan about refs, and absolutely Arsenal get bad decisions go against them. but no-one else can see it. only you guys. the guys who think Wenger is god.

  • proudkev

    Whatever your view, you cannot deny that we was unlucky with the officials decisions on Wednesday.

    Neither goal should have stood.

    It seems to me that we cannot blame losing on poor referee decisons, yet Wenger can be blamed for everything from injuries to a players loss of form. You can bet your last penny that if Arsenal won a game thanks to a bad referees decison, Wenger would be called lucky and the result would be discredited. While I accept some fans can be too quick to blame referees equally some are too quick to blame Wenger. It cuts both ways.

    Anyway, here is a balanced view on the issue.

    Swansea City:

    1. Williams winner was offside. I agree these things are difficult to see because of the speed of the game and of course they tend to occur when your luck is already out. I dont blame the officials, an honest mistake. However, it was offside and therefore following the rules of the game should not have been allowed.

    2. Amats foul on Ozil for the first Swansea goal was a clear foul. Probably as clear a foul as you are likely to see. Unlike the Williams decison, there were no bodies in the way and the referee had a clear view.

    Ozil was trying to bring the ball down but Amat had him in a headlock with his right arm, the inside of his elbow against Ozils throat and his arm in a v shape. A definite headlock. By holding Ozil around the neck and pulling him down, Ozil was prevented from being able to bring the ball under control. It is as clear a foul as you will ever see. There is no doubt, it’s obvious. When you look at the stills you see it would have been a high tackle in rugby!

    If you can explain why Madley thought that was a fair challenge, please do so. If you can’t explain that decision you should be as bemused as the rest of us. If he did not know that was a foul, then he simply is not up to the job and should not be refereeing the game. (It reminds me very much of the Costa hand in face of Koscielny when he then turned and barged Kos to the floor, right in front of Mike Dean. The retrospective sending off issued didn’t help us though). How do they miss these things that happen right in front of them?

    * * * * *

    Now I dont buy into the conspiracy theory about match fixing, it’s something I don’t want to believe. I know Former referee Halsey admitted to taking a holiday with his wife to Portugal paid for by Mourinho. This falls into the category, without question, of ‘INDUCEMENT. Totally unacceptable.

    I know Halsey was on friendly ‘text’ terms with Ferguson. Again, surely every football fan thinks referees and managers should not be texting each other?

    Match fixing? For me it just proves PGMO and the FA are incompetent, the same with Home Town appointments and PGMOs differing views to the FA. Again all make me uncomfortable. A complete lack of risk assessment and common sense.

    In the 50th game I think Riley was petrified at Old Trafford; that was why he ignored the rules of the game and why the highlights on youtube suggest he was bent. He was biased and he did ignore the rules but that was through intimidation not a pre-match arrangement, something Poll said was a serious problem at Old Trafford with Fergies staff.

    What I do beleive, and I have written about WITH EVIDENCE, is that our players get less protection from fouls. I think this is more to do with the British interpretation of the game, an acceptance that it is a legitimate tactic to foul more skilfull opponents/teams. On the Continent these are fouls all day long.

    It’s fine to blame players and the manager when they make mistakes, but equally it should be fine to blame match officials too. The problem is we have a lot of fans who only want to blame the manager. Losing to two bad decisions will only ever be blamed on wenger. Like injuries. Like players missing sitters. Like hitting the woodwork three times. Such a shame they only visit this blog when they want to gloat about a defeat, otherwise they might actually learn something.

  • Marcus I only speak for myself and I have to say I have no evidence of criminality that would stand up in court.

    For myself I believe I have seen a change from refereeing in which there were numerous mistakes, but a greater chance that it did, more or less, even out in the end, to refereeing that has declined in quality overall, and in which it does seem to me that it most certainly does not even out in the end.

    I’ve written a number of articles on this site, exploring the refereeing situation in Italy which did lead to action and have (along with others) suggested simple measures that the referees organisation (properly called PGMO but which I’m now calling PGMF out of frustration) could take to set aside any worries that anyone might have. Measures such as video refs (trialled in other countries but not here), many more refs (so we don’t get the same ref more than twice in a season), publication of the referees’ rankings and percentages so that we can compare their figures with ours, a much greater geographic balance for referees, an absolute ban on referees covering games from their home region, and above all a much greater openness.

    PGMF fail to answer our questions, have removed their own public web site, and will not engage in an sensible discussion. Instead they publish figures that say that 98% of referee decisions are accurate.

    So I do have very serious concerns on two fronts. One, the quality of referees, and two whether anything underhand is going on. The failure of PGMF to engage in a debate (and I don’t mean they should take any notice of me, I’m just a season ticket holder like you, but I mean engage properly with supporters in explaining the approach which I and others question) is indicative that there could well be something wrong.

  • Norman 14
    Which comments do you find unfounded,derogatory,untrue ? Also I was under the impression that the ref reviews were there for all to read how would you know if you agree with it or not if you didn’t read it ? And lastly what stupid comments are you referring to ?

  • MOW

    I’m not going to answer all that you have written as I don’t have time at the moment, but just to take the opening

    1) you claim to have irrefutable evidence of a conspiracy against Arsenal that has been going on for several years and yet, despite this, the story has never broke or gone mainstream. how can this be?

    No we don’t claim that. We claim that referee accuracy levels appear to us to be in decline and unbalanced, and it is most curious that the PGMF act as they do, as I have explained many times before.

    If you looked back through numerous articles you would see that I have set out the view that really is quite common among those who study the media from a sociological point of view, that whereas newspapers used to be critical of the way TV portrays football, pointing out the bias and inaccuracy of their reporting, now they don’t, for the simple reason that all the media has to pay the Premier League for the right to do what they do. Thus independent reporting has gone – but I thought the evidence of the complaints from the newspapers against TV coverage of football in the 1970s was rather telling.

    2) we live in a globalised age of information and mass media. Premier League football is one of the biggest shows on earth, and there are literally thousands of news and media outlets that make money off big news, and few things are bigger than scandal and corruption in sport. yet despite this, despite that your evidence is supposedly cut and dry and laid out for inspection, and despite the huge incentives for at least one outlet to champion your cause, no-one is interested. how can this be?

    I guess the same question could be asked about Fifa, and the problem is for the media that they have so much invested in football, that if there were ever a scandal of the type we suggest there might be lurking under the surface they would all lose an awful lot.

    Also I have written several times about the way that newspapers watch each other to ensure that they don’t step out of line.

    Thus when I first ran the story about the change in Swiss law that ultimately allowed the US to work with Switzerland and arrest Fifa officials in Switzerland, I made the point (and I am sorry to regular readers to say the same old thing yet again) that Fifa might follow the Olympic committee and move their next big meeting to a country that did not have an extradition treaty like Venezuela.

    That was long before the arrests happened, and although Reuters ran the story about the law change, no one else was running the piece that Fifa execs might suffer.

    The fact is the media is engaged with the status quo. There is no conspiracy theory, there is no conspiracy, just some people acting in a way that looks mighty suspicious.

  • MoW

    tony, are you claiming there’s a systematic bias against Arsenal or not? and if there is, what explains it, if it’s not a conspiracy?

  • MoW,no I am not claiming there is a systematic bias against Arsenal.

  • Tom

    It is the second time I have seen you do this.
    Are you referring to myself specifically, or are you just using “Tom/John/Mow “in a generic sort of way to make some point?

  • May I suggest that some of the posters who continue to use the words corrupt,cheats,biase,when referring to referees and then trying to use untold Arsenal as evidence of this wholesale vilification of refs just read Tony’s post he explains untold position perfectly and makes no such allegation or any evidence of it

  • Gooneress No1

    Tom Quinn – I for one will continue to use words such as corrupt, cheats, bias (without the ‘e’) when referring to refs. Why? Because that’s what I see.

  • Zedsaunt

    ‘Fergie Time’ existed before this site. With ‘Fergie Time’ it meant you could go around the UK and watch ManU home games in pubs and with the game running into ninety minutes, and the scores equal, or ManU behind, you could hear jokes cracked, or crack them yourself, about ‘Fergie Time’ coming up lads. On occasions, when ManU failed to score in added on ”Fergie Time” people would crack jokes about the game being played until Christmas, or the result, whatever came first.

    How did that happen? How did ‘Fergie Time’ as a real, concrete event, its meaning known to people around the country watching football, come into existence when the game is supposed to be fairly refereed? How did ‘Fergie Time’ become known to football fans around the UK? How did the meaning of ”Fergie Time’ become so explicit no-one had to explain what it meant?

    Every football fan has to expect poor decisions from referees. After decades watching football in different countries around Europe, I would argue that the first requirement of being a football fan is the acceptance of decisions against you.

    My unease regarding the PGMO as being a fit and proper body to officiate football came first when I stumbled across the make up of the PGMO. No referees from London, Essex, swathes of East Anglia?. People do not play football in London or Essex? Referees are not required in London or Essex? No tradition of football in London?

    30% of referees coming from Manchester/Greater Manchester. Two teams in the EPL having a one in three chance they will get a hometown boy as referee?

    How did that happen? That didn’t add up.

    Next – no transparency. No accounts for the PGMO. No published criteria for the matchday allocation of referees. No published minutes of decisions taken. A completely invisible organisation officiating football matches that is not beholden to anyone. The PGMO are not accountable to anyone.

    How does that happen?

    As long as I have watched football, over sixty years, I have watched tennis. Tennis was bedevilled for decades by poor quality officiating. It introduced technology for immediate ratification of line calls. In that instant the game was transformed. It could immediately be seen that the human being officiating will get it wrong, did get it wrong, that titles were won or lost on the basis of poor decision making by human officials.

    Professional Rugby League – I have been to games around the North of England – use technology to ratify decisions. Rugby Union uses technology. Cricket uses technology. Football has declared, certainly since the mid-90s, that technology is not required. The referee can be trusted.

    What pisses me off most about the attitude of FIFA, the FA, The Football League, in their reluctance to introduce technology, is their utter contempt for fans. They do not see the need to facilitate fairness. The fan is not supposed to get the best game going for what they pay to see.

    The football fan is not promised by the football authorities – we will do our utmost to ensure you witness a fair competition between highly skilled teams.

    I then started to ask the question – who is the most important person on the pitch in this game I am watching?

    Who is the person who does not have to explain to anyone how they were selected for the game? Who is not challenged by the instant replay in the crucial decisions they take? Who makes decisions which influence the game and those decisions stand without challenge? Who is allowed to make decisions which result in the game being decided and the decision made cannot be reversed?

    I considered the word ”paramount.” Who is ”paramount” on the football pitch? Who makes this person ”paramount?”

    ”Fergie Time” could not exist without the ”paramount” person on the pitch making it available.

  • Gonneress1
    you can say what you want but don’t use untold as your evidence to accuse refs it’s just your opinion or didn’t you read Tony’s post ?

  • Tom

    It makes perfect sense that it should be you responding to Proudkev’s post the way you did.

    The two of you think( by own admission) that Arsene Wenger is the greatest manager in the game, yet both regularly visit the comment section of the one site that denigrates him as a manager and a human being more than any other.

    I wonder what the resident psychiatrist, Dr Billy “the dog” McGraw would call such behavior. I’m sure there’s a clinical term for it 🙂

  • Gooneress No1

    Zedsaunt – ‘excellent’ was the first word on my lips after reading your post.

  • Gooneress No1

    And Tom Quinn if I think there’s a conspiracy, guess what? I’ll use that word too.

    And as for using Untold as my evidence! You obviously didn’t digest my words… I speak as I find. That’s clearly too much for you to handle.

  • Milan

    So when will we start looking at our own inept performances rather than bang on about referees like some perverse fantasy.

  • rich


    Is it a conspiracy the way Rupert Murdoch has meddled with and corrupted our politics and country itself in recent decades? Does it involve illegality or having to explicitly state, let alone write down, ‘you do this, I do that’, etc?

    Probably not, though as has been proven some illegality has taken place in Murdoch companies. Illegality which, by the way, was accompanied by the most breathtaking hypocrisy imaginable. Deep into the scandal the redhead was using her newspaper to say the Guardian were outrageous liars and deceivers, would pay for it,etc. She was lying her ass off all the while.

    Aanyway…what I’m trying to get at is breaking laws and stuff of that nature isn’t really necessary to achieve results similar to those if you were actually breaking laws. What’s needed is a bad culture within powerful organisations. A bad culture overseen by bad people, motivated by greed, self-interest, nastiness,etc.

    You could end up with the same results- i.e. terrible refereeing- through a seriously bad culture/ system, corrupted by ruthless individuals motivated by personal gain as you would get through actual, illegal corruption. That’s entirely feasible and could look and act much the same.

    That is what I believe the likely explanation is. Rotten people doing rotten things behind the scenes which perhaps aren’t illegal, but are certainly wrong and immoral and which, if known to all, would make their positions untenable.

    In the same way that an omnipotent God with a tape recording function could make it impossible even for Murdoch and co to prosper and thrive, i.e to lie and scheme so successfully, I believe whatever the hell has occurred over the years behind the scenes ,which is equally wrong and immoral (though not as serious nor detrimental to the nation’s health), also could not survive public scrutiny.

    How could a media not pick up on such rottenness? Well, almost half is murdoch owned, most of the remainder by horrendously immoral people. How could a nation not notice it? Well, most of them are people who buy those papers and vote for bastards.

    All people are largely motivated by self-interest, football supporters more so than your average person, and so, sadly, if it were true that we were treated horrendously by referees, you could never expect support from any other club or its supporters. instead you could expect them to be secretly glad and enjoy whatever advantages they get from it.

    As for why Wenger would put up with it? I have to give it to anyone who hones in on that question: it’s the most difficult one for me to try answer. I don’t have an answer in fact. Which means living in the uncomfortable state of uncertainty and deeply questioning my belief on a regular basis. It forces me to row back a bit at times, to stare at my lack of a good explanation, to wonder if there are things I have no inkling of…

    Despite that, i don’t think it is a good enough point to justify me having to abandon my convictions entirely. Even if i tried to do so, I’d have to quit watching football to have a chance of it sticking. Because soon enough, perhaps not in the first game, but soon enough, I’d be watching refereeing again which says loud and clear to me that something is very wrong somewhere and we suffer as a club because of it.

  • Gooneress 1
    Clearly you didn’t read my post or Tony’s so I have no idea why you took the time to tell me your thoughts I have no Intrest in your opinion of what I can handle don’t really see its connection to making allegations with no evidence

  • Gooneress No1

    But yet you keep coming back here Milan!

  • Gooneress No1

    But yet you read my post Tom Quinn.

    May I politely suggest you get over yourself – if you can that is.

  • Gord


    In looking at comments, I see the usual assortment of aaa stuff. There is even one comment about your grammar.

    But, nobody noticed that the article is about Oliver, and the summary is about Mason. Do we just substitute Oliver for Mason in the summary, or is the summary from elsewhere?


  • Gooneress No1

    No evidence Tom Quinn – that’s actually funny.

  • Gooneress 1
    Yes I generally read things addressed to me is that strange ? And you can politely suggest anything you wish although I have no idea how one gets over ones self you have to explain it you are obviously an expert

  • Gooneress No1

    I thought you had no interest in my opinion Tom Quinn…

  • Al

    I only read UA, amd don’t go to those other dumps coz there’s nothing for me there. They’re teeming with people like you, people I am happy to avoid even on UA so why would I follow you lot there??

    Anyway it appears you’re fixated by the thought I go there, show me one post made by me there?? If anywhere else for that matter. Think I might posted one or two posts on PA only over the last two years. My gravatar follows me everywhere so you can easily tell my posts. You think everyone is like you doing what you are accusing me of; go to those other sewers and visit UA too. I don’t have an internal conflict within myself that makes me chase negative and positive news. Positive news only does it for me.

  • Dreadnoughts FC

    I’ve been reading through the posts…can’t we just stop arguing? We don’t have to agree on every detail or share a world view. Even if we strongly believe in our views we should have the courtesy to respect those of others instead of accusing others of being wrong. My personal view on this particular discussion is that there are question marks about the quality of officiating in the EPL. I recommend the book Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny by Amartya Sen. We may all be different…difference in age, gender, ethnicity, language, taste in food, taste in men/women, shoe size, height, class/caste, favourite colour, political stance, taste in music, philosophy, and/or profession. These are all examples of traits that we may or may not have in common. Yet we all share one unshakable identity – Arsenal. I say to all of you, continue to believe what you believe but don’t forget that we all have a unique part of our lives in common. Although Tony and Walter share certain views in footballing terms, they may be different in others (although I would guess that their favourite colour is red. I just hope that our team thrashes Tottenham tomorrow – I know we are more than capable of it.

  • Al

    And just to add, I love it when we win coz it means the aaaa/WOBs retreat into their shells. Those are some of the happiest days of my footballing life, this place will be smelling like heaven. When results don’t go our way you and your crawl out of the woodwork and visiting UA becomes unbearable for the next few days after. So why on earth would I go to a site where I’m sure to meet 1000s of your clones, a situation that’s guaranteed to leave me depressed??? It just doesn’t make any sense to me….

  • WalterBroeckx

    People make mistakes, referees make mistakes.
    Now in all the seasons we have done, even the ones with referees supporting other clubs we never ever found any truth in the oneliner: it evens out in the end.

    So our studying has lead to debunking that myth. Anyone who comes with that is simply….deluded.

    As a referee myself I know that referees support football clubs from a very young age. Most referees found out very young that they usually are not talented enough to play the game. And as they want to be involved they will turn to refereeing.
    Will that turning to refereeing stop them from supporting their favourite clubs? If you think it does… well I can tell you that you are wrong.
    No supporting a club goes under your skin.

    So I think most referees still support football clubs and that includes PL clubs of course. Most referees have once dreamed to play for that club. Human nature you know.

    So deep in the back of their head they might just be biased even unwillingly and unknowingly but still it will influence their decisions.

    I hope those who say it evens out are in favour of video refereeing?

  • timo

    am afraid that people don’t even believe what they see. if u doubt the review, make yours and bring out the fact, its the easiest thing to so. Tony used data. u can use it too. ask yourself a question? why should referee mistakes be too predictable. Atkinson will have a great UCL game and an EPL stinker. Does he get coached to have a better game elsewhere and a worse one at Arsenal games consistently?

  • Jerry


    Excellent ref reviews of Oliver, but the summary states Mason instead.

    You mention the Flamini red card because the media went into an uproar about it because a call actually helped Arsenal, but ignored:

    1) Drinkwater taking out Ramsey
    2) Sanchez getting pushed into a ditch at Norwich
    3) last year Sanchez getting choked by Charlie Adams
    4) multiple clear handballs in the penalty area ignored (West Ham, United’s Rashford)
    5) clear goals being incorrectly called offside (Walcott, Ramsey)
    6) Goals that were clearly offside allowed to stand (Southampton, Williams)
    and many more!

    Now imagine where Arsenal would be if they actually got some of those calls!

  • proudkev


    “The two of you think( by own admission) that Arsene Wenger is the greatest manager in the game, yet both regularly visit the comment section of the one site that denigrates him as a manager and a human being more than any other”.

    Hee hee. That made me laugh Tom you should be on stage.

    I visit the WOB site rarely to try to understand the logic behind the WOB’s, the wobettes and the fake Gooners. From what I read I realise it attracts a certain demographic. I already knew some of the ‘clever’ language that appears on there, the ‘f’ and ‘c’ word for example, words I thought was clever over 40 years ago. I bet most of the crowd over there still laugh at the word ‘bum’. That’s always a side splitter Tom. Bum. Of course, the regular and very selective use of the word ‘frog’ and ‘french’ to insult Wenger, always intrigues me. So too the death wishes I have seen. Must be so proud over there.

    The fact you don’t understand the difference between a troll and someone who ONLY reads a site with opposing views, does not surprise me.

    So I shall explain:

    1. I do create a user account – so I do not post comments on a WOB site
    2. I do not abuse people on a WOB site
    3. I do not start arguments on a WOB site, knowing they have a different view
    4. I do not create multiple user accounts so I can agree with myself and hit dislike buttons

    You see Tom, you can only be a troll if you create an account.

    Trolls create accounts on sites with an opposing view to engage in arguments. To row. To abuse. The really sad ones crerate multiple accounts, so they can agree with themseves.

    It is really pathetic and a sympton of todays modern faceless, internet world of anonymity. When you give anonymity to idiots, this is what happens.

    Only people with low intelligence, a small manhood and an argumentative nature would create accounts on sites with a different view to their own, so they can start arguments. It is pathetic and actually pointless. If you hated cats, would you log onto a cat lovers blog?

    On Untold, we have several ‘trolls’ like you who disagree with the views on the site but pop over to have a row. Usually after a defeat because it makes you feel smug. The manhood swells, if you get my drift. On many occassions it has been easy to identify those with multiple accounts because they make basic errors because, lets face it, they are a bit dim.

    My energy efficient lighbulb is brighter and that’s saying something.

  • Gonneress 1
    I was not aware I asked for your opinion only your expert advice on how to get over yourself and no I have seen no evidence that refs are corrupt or deliberate cheats but I’m happy to look at it with an open mind if you can produce it

  • Tom

    I hate to stick a pin in your party balloon my friend but Arsenal have suffered three very disappointing defeats on the spin, and I didn’t comment either during or in the immediate aftermath of neither of them.

    Not that a fact like this makes a difference in this make believe world of yours.

  • thierryhenry22

    Only halfway through these comments and I don’t care what anybody says, this is the best Arsenal blog around right now. Even those commenting against the website have to admit we’re commenting on every aspect of the game- especially the stuff people are scared to touch with a bargepole. It’s brilliant. Thoroughly enjoying this whole website. Sorry Arseblog, I was a big fan, but you crumbled last year and are crumbling again this year, and it’s tiresome to indulge in. Untold on the other hand… wow, keep it up guys!!! Not bored one bit!!

  • Florian


    It would be nice if people could respond to a rational argument, like you attempt here. Unfortunately we live in a mass of hysteria, in which rational debates are few and far between. Congrats for following Untold though.

  • How people cannot see what is right in front of their eyes I will never know. My two older brothers who are Spurs men have even commented that their is a bias because surprise surprise they witnessed it with their own eyes and even though they love and support their team they do not wear blinkers and are both honest men. When Ozil was dragged down with the arm around his neck they could not believe that after it happening against Leicester that the ref knowing it was been televised went along his merry way and he give us a rerun on Wednesday . Now when they are getting away with this they are sticking to fingers up to a club I love and a manager I have the utmost respect for and let’s face it they are sticking two fingers up at the Arsenal fan’s because I’m sure they are having a great laugh at how they have divided the supports over the matter. Sooner or later this is going to come out just as the truth always does and I wonder will we see the same people on here dishing the club I love, I think not. COUG

  • proudkev

    Evening Linda.

    I have to say I find it strange that some Gooners blame wenger for everything yet never allow a referee to be blamed for a bad decision.

    The foul on OZil was right in front of the referee and it wasnt even subtle. If he’ld have hit Ozil with a baseball bat it wouldnt have been any more obviously a foul. I have no idea why the referee decided to ignore it, blatant. I laughed at MOTD when ex Spurs Danny Murphy said the foul on Ozil was a 50/50 and was allowed to get away with that biased rubbish. If it didnt happen so often it would be unbeleivable. Unfortunatley, these decisons and this kind of post game punditry is the norm.

  • Gord

    That is quite the article Walter.

  • Mama Mia what the heck??Yes it’s kinda of cold that’s why all the sewers rats are out,guess what by tomorrow they will be back to where they came from.

  • Zedsaunt

    For the decades that Murdoch has been a newspaper owner in the UK, the paedophile Saville was allowed free rein to continue his criminal activities without restriction, and he finished up with a knighthood given to him by a Prime Minister who could always rely on the strong support of Rupert Murdoch.

    Saville was not publicly, officially, exposed until after his death. Was there a conspiracy to keep his activities secret – no. Was there a culture which allowed him to function without being disturbed by prosecution, by the police, by journalists – yes.

    Every journalist in the UK used to be enjoined, by a code of ethics, to stand up against the powerful and defend the powerless. No longer. Over 50% of journalists listed as members of the NUJ – National Union Of Journalists – now work in PR, public relations. The spinning of reality to present a version of reality that provides a profit, advantage, game mover, image, for those who employ the PR staff to do this work.

    The EPL is driven by PR to provide profits for the broadcasters, advertisers. It has therefore, to be enthralling. It has to be returned to, as the viewers return to East Enders. It has to have storylines. It has to have multiple narratives. It has to have enough content to provide interest at any given moment, 24/7. Therefore, it requires characterisation. It has to be based on widely assumed assumptions which strike an immediate chord with large groups of viewers. These assumptions have to exist before the viewer turns onto the latest episode and exclaims, yes, that’s it!

    It does not have to stand up to reality. It has to stand up to the vision of reality which the EPL is projecting for the purpose of profit. In reality, the result of a football match is not known before the game is played. In reality, almost all fans, as sporting people, accept, expect, the referee to be fair.

    The drive for fairness is pitted against the drive for profit. The referee stands inbetween. This is his culture. He is at the fulcrum. The referee, on the pitch, is paramount. Nothing is higher than his authority. His decisions determine a game. The referee exists and works in a culture which is predetermined, and driven by the profits and interests of the broadcaster, and yet has to correspond to the fairness demanded by the human instincts of fans.

    This who demand UA provide proof of ”conspiracy” miss the point completely. What is the culture in which football is played? What is the culture in that realm of football broadcast around the world as the EPL? This site is, as far as I know, the only site which allows a critique of how football is being played out game by game.

    Two further points – Tony mentioned the 1970s and manipulation of football. In the 1960s and 1970s I lived in Copenhagen. In the Danish football season winter break, because of the demands of the Danish football pools industry, Danish TV showed live games from the English 1st and 2nd Divisions. English people passing through, who were regular viewers of MOTD, always came very quickly to the conclusion that the actual presentation of the game they were seeing on Match Of The Day, was being manipulated. It was being made faster. More action was being created than actually existed.

    Secondly – should video replay technology go ahead, football as viewed, will be radically rewritten. There will be consequences. It will be very quickly seen that referees did repeatedly get it wrong, and continue to get it wrong. It will be seen, very quickly, that because referees did get it wrong, and their getting it wrong simultaneous with the results of the game being left unchallenged, even when they did get it wrong, automatically rewrites the history of football, every trophy tainted by our failure as football fans to demand the best from the administrators of the game.

  • Menace

    There is sufficient TV footage & past history for me to state categorically that the FA & their officiating organisation PGMO are corrupt. The conspiracy bollocks thrown up by rhose who are psychologically blind is typical of those in denial. I have alredy described the Chelsea v Arsenal match. There is a whole history of media collusion with the corrupt.

  • Menace

    Tom – after proudkev explained the bright side of intelligence you still come up dim. We know when we lose a match because we get a whole load of sewer rats driving the result home.

    Strangely I do not get mad at you guys because I know how mentally challenged you are. I do get angry with the establishment because they have held back progress of sport by allowing corrupt officiating aided & abetted by corrupt media reporting. Arsenal gets the brunt of the corrupt reporting despite showing the world the corrupt English racist media is alive & well.

  • omgarsenal

    Many of you know me as a contributor to UA and as a retired professional referee. I religiously try and avoid criticizing other officials, whether retired or active, because it is a fraternity/sorority and we work in teams (usually), are often under serious scrutiny and even threatened violence or abuse, so cohesiveness is important. That said, I cannot accept that all of Walter & Usama’s work means nothing.

    1)I was also an referee assessor so know what to look for in a the officials’ performances, and can assure you that there is a tremendous inconsistency in the application of the Laws, a visible indifference to serious foul play and misconduct when it comes to fouls against Arsenal and a persistent, unremitting prejudice displayed in almost every match, and on occasion, matches other than Arsenal’s, by the PGMOL.

    2)I attribute these lacunae to a shortage of officials (too many games with the same teams from the same officials), an unwelcome familiarity with the players due to the above, the pace and speed of the modern game, the hometown effect for officials living near the club they are officiating, constant misinterpretation and excessive tolerance of events that breach the Laws, a failure of the PGMOL to scrutinize their officials and help them improve and possible political pressure from the PGMOL to approach certain teams with kid gloves.

    3)I know how easy it is to throw a result one way or the other. An unmerited or excessively strict penalty call, a goal given offside or disallowed because of a phantom foul previously or concurrently, because of two questionable cautions a player dismissed, etc. Most spectators and fans do not know the Laws and the spirit of those Laws well enough to make statements that discredit Walter & Usama’s efforts!

    Whether the bias shown against certain teams in the EPL is due to officials being incompetent, bent or downright bias is beyond my perview and very difficult to prove but all the research and analysis Walter & Usama have done, clearly shows there are serious problems with EPL officials…..and we can do nothing about it as long as the PGMOL, the EPL, the FA and the authorities are indifferent.

  • John

    Menace you said-We know when we lose a match because we get a whole load of sewer rats driving the result home.
    You make it sound like we have just lost one run of the mill game but in reality we have lost 3 very important games that not only have ended our champions league campaign but probably cost us any realistic chance of winning the premier league.
    Why play it down??Aren’t you upset and angry because once again we have capitulated under pressure.Probably not because you like our club and coach have no ambition..

  • Menace

    Ah the sewer rat is here nibbling at the ‘queens jewels’ in the john.

  • John

    I dont think it bothers you that we have under performed once again when it matters.As long as wenger is still the manager everything is rosy with arsenal!!

  • Evening ProudKev, I could not agree more. We see it with our own eye’s and yet the supposed Arsenal supporters blame Wenger. It’s seem’s I missed Wenger holding Ozil in a headlock and oh yes I also missed missed him giving the thumps up sign for a goal that was offside. This is how bloody stupid people are if they have to abuse our manager and hurl abuse at the players, that’s really going to give them confidence. Players have been below par and instead of the foul remarks made and little boys thinking they are smart( did you here what I shouted at Wenger mate) now is the time that every Gooner who loves this football club get 100% behind this club because if we don’t then we are just as much to blame. Let me put it like this if I may, would you hurl abuse at your mother or father if you think they made a mistake and how would you feel if it was another person doing it, tell me would you cheer them on. Those players and that manager have families and they must burn up inside at the abuse that is thrown at them so the next time any on you Supposed Arsenal fan’s think that it is so clever to do so then go support another team because it see’s you have know heart for the fight. It is only for the title after all. Sorry Kev but I just don’t understand how people say they support Arsenal yet run it down as soon as things are’nt as they should be.

  • Mandy Dodd

    Conspiracies.who could be behind them should they exist.
    For starters, illegal bookies, …..hundreds of millions, and more are betted illegally on some EPL games. Anyone who thinks a very small portion of that sort of money cannot buy a ref , or a player, or a manager, or agent…..or pretty much anyone really ….is naive. There has been proven fixing in many European leagues. Cricket is riddled with criminality.
    Top refs get a hundred grand a year…..not bad, but I am sure they get offered more. I am not saying all of them would take it, but if any do, once you take it, they have you., for good. Our friend Mike Dean was once suspended for endorsing a legal gambling firm…..just think about that…
    And, if our refs are so honest, why are they paid fifty grand to keep quiet when they leave? Know any other professions that do this?
    If there is a conspiracy in football ….I would rather call it criminality, refs are the tip of the iceberg. Criminality is a lot more easy to accept for many than conspiracy.
    Tom, agree, , Arsenal players, of all players should know to play to the whistle. What happened to Ozil against Swansea also happened against Leicester. This seems to be a bit of a tactic…..our players need to respond to it…..cheating happens, would like to see a lot more of our players surrounding these refs, can only conclude they have been told not to……but doesn’t seem to be working. Our players, compared to other teams are too honest…..a virtue in life, a flaw in this league.

  • Menace

    Mandy – If Arsenal players so much as breath near the ref they get carded. The system is such that EPL, PGMOL & FA punish severely when their ‘integrity’ is questioned. It is a rule by dictat. The say whatever they want whenever they want & no one can question them.

  • Gf60

    @ Andrew Crawshaw/Walter/Usama
    Two previous comments on this but no acknowledgement. The review of Oliver concludes with a review OF MASON.

  • Menace

    I can understand Tony’s position with regard to proof in court. Criminality can be proven by the negligence in the level of protection afforded to players by the officials. If a policeman behaved in a similar manner there would be an outcry.

    I would not have the slightest hesitation to fight this in a court of law. The financial evidence will surface very quickly once proceedings start. The beauty of technology is that I will not have to as exposure of corruption on TV can draw huge advertising revenue & upset some very rich people.

  • Menace

    Tom Quinn – go away you stink.