57 responses

  1. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    Great couple of articles. It is clear the pgmol in England have much to hide. Riley clearly wants to keep it that way, we can all guess why. With him, the damage is done, when all this comes down on him, I see no route of escape.
    Not only is he letting down the game, he is letting down referees country wide. Most refs surely begin with perhaps an ambition, but also a love of the game. Our so called elite refs have worked hard to get where they are, I am sure most if not all have started as honest men, maybe one high profile ref has found his inner honesty again as his career reaches an end. But if, as it seems you have to do the bidding of Riley, his bias, his prejudices and who knows what else to succeed, refs have to compromise themselves to get to the top.what message does this send to refs in Sunday league games, or players and fans who would abuse or even attack them. Refs at all stages have to be seen as whiter than white, Riley has taken away any chance of this in this country. I once met an ex EPL ref at a function, a man still in touch with current refs. He told me a thing or two off the record, he mentioned a few things about fergie, but also mentioned that refs going against their bosses wishes received no backing or support, upset fergie and you are thrown to the wolves. This is not new, this is a common theme on here , and from ex refs in general. So , perhaps talented, honest individuals are being forcably corrupted just to stay in their job, let alone move ahead. This will be the legacy of mike Riley, protection of certain teams and a manager, enforced corruption on his maybe otherwise honest staff and abandoning the refs of England. When all this comes to light, and it will in due course,the first thing I will do, go straight to untold!

  2. chuks
    22/02/2015

    Please Who employs the head of the pgmol(Riley)? Who is being called upon by Hackett to remove him? How can he be removed?

  3. jambug
    22/02/2015

    Mandy Dodd

    Without the Medias complicity in all this, we would never of got to this point.

    To this day the Media still deny there was any wrong doing at OT in 2004. If the media had called out Rileys diabolical performance for what it was, Riley might never of risen to where he has, and this resultent decent into the disgraceful situation we are in now may never of happened.

    They still see nothing wrong in the Referees performances in the Arsenal Villa game last year, or the Cup Final against Hull.

    The Media are complicit in creating a group of Referees that are utterly incapable of making decisions without first considering how it may impact on there career.

    And that’s not because they’re worried as to whether they’ve made the right or wrong decision, but as to whether it is the decision they are expected to of made.

  4. mike in atlanta
    22/02/2015

    I have lived long enough to see the bible of the AAA (leGrove) say this: A quick word for Mark Clattenburg, who was fucking abysmal yesterday. Whilst referees make mistakes, which I can live with, it’s a lack of consistency in their decision-making that riles me. He was happy to book our players at the earliest opportunity, but will let Palace players get away with cynical fouls throughout the game without getting his card out. The standard of officiating has gone down the toilet and seems to be getting worse – I have no idea what the answer is, but a greater level of accountability for referees would be a good start. As for Clattenburg – he should stick to Ed Sheeran concerts, which is a sackable offence in itself.

    How the worm turns!

  5. Gunnerjoe
    22/02/2015

    I read le grove this morning turns out it wasn’t written by the normal self opinionated idiot.

  6. TailGunner
    22/02/2015

    le grove has mellowed a lot lately. The commenters are still mostly shit, but the articles are generally supportive. This probably coincides with our recent run of good form.

  7. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    Anyone watching the game? Southampton have had three pen appeals turned down!
    Very true Jambug about media complicity, and refs scared to make instant decisions.
    But when it all comes tumbling down, watch the media turn on the likes of Riley and any ref manager or player found to be involved in any corruption, despite the media silence for now

  8. Al
    22/02/2015

    Southampton should have had 3 penalties, none given. And the Liverpool keeper handled the ball outside his area. Can it get worse than this?? Even I can do a better job.

  9. ThomB
    22/02/2015

    mike in atlanta, I don’t think anyone, le grove included, has ever rejected the poor standard of refereeing. The frustration at the lack of consistency has been highlighted long before Untolds bow. Its the idea that poor officiating is down to corruption as opposed to incompetency that is the biggest issue.

    I have said it before and I will say it again, the PGMO are merely a team of consultants, like most consultants being paid to produce the results that their clients who pay their wages expect. He who pays the piper calls the tune

  10. ARSENAL 13
    22/02/2015

    Is Liverpool in champions league???….

    Somebody educate these commentators.
    Thursday night ≠ champions league.
    Thursday night = Europa league.

  11. Al
    22/02/2015

    I long for the day I’ll watch a match the ref plays no part in influencing the result of. At this rate it’s fair to say I could be waiting for ever.

  12. bjtgooner
    22/02/2015

    Friend certainly tilted the Dippers game today, not just in major decisions but in a lot of not given fouls and cards. Part of the PGMO master plan?

    Sky have just advertised a rerun of the this morning’s Goals on Sunday interview with the Poisonous One – there is certainly an agenda some where.

  13. Dave C
    22/02/2015

    The PGMO came out in defense of the refs decision on the Minolet call. Surprise!

  14. TailGunner
    22/02/2015

    bjtgooner

    Dippers?

  15. Gord
    22/02/2015

    I will guess it has something to do with taking a dip in the pool.

  16. St Totteringham
    22/02/2015

    A question for Walter regarding the Spud’s equalizer against West Ham. As the time had expired when the penalty kick was taken, shouldn’t the game had finished the moment the penalty was saved and the ball was moving away from the goal. I have some vague memory of such a law when I was a kid, or have the rules changed since them to accommodate the allowance of a player to score from a rebound even though the scoring shot was over a minute beyond the 5 minutes additional time shown on the board.

    Just wondering.

  17. colario
    22/02/2015

    PGMOL. Just noticed we are missing a vowel between the P and the G.
    Now let me think, which one should it be? A or E or I or O or U?

  18. TailGunner
    22/02/2015

    St Tooteringham

    I think the law was changed many years ago to end the match when a particular play has finished, to prevent a complete car crash like the one where a ref whistled ( I think in an international game ) for time during the flight of the ball at a corner kick from which a goal was scored. So the goal was not given because he’d blown for time.

  19. TailGunner
    22/02/2015

    Sorry, St Totteringham

  20. Jerry
    22/02/2015

    The PGMOL response to the Mignolet Southampton penalty claim was very surprising, quick, and revealing. Surprising because they actually responded, quick because it was prepared before the match was complete, and revealed why the refs make so many errors – PGMOL and it’s refs have no vision both figuratively and literally!

    PGMOL claim it bounced off his chest so the ref was correct, yet video replays show that Mignolet had a nice shot block according to the rules (in the NBA [basketball]). Walter, now you know why the PGMOL numbers are 98-99%. They just say they are correct disregarding the truth.

  21. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    ThomB, some very true words regarding pipers and tunes.

  22. Gord
    22/02/2015

    There is 1 timekeeper, the referee. While the 4th official might indicate time added on towards the end of the half, that is either a guess on the part of the 4th official, or the result of a communication with the referee.

    If the ball has gone out of play, time is to stop (that is why time is added on, for stoppages). If in the referee’s opinion, time had ended as the ball crossed out of play, the referee can signal the end of the match.

    If the referee has blown his/her whistle to indicate a foul or some other circumstance, he/she has instigated a stoppage. If the referee then determines that time had ended at the time the stoppage was called, the referee can end the match.

    In any other circumstance you can think of, the ball is still in play. And when time is up, the referee is to end the game when time is up. There is no specification of what direction the ball is travelling, whether it needs to be in contact with the ground, or if it can have blades of grass stuck to it.

    The referee probably should not indicate that time has expired in such a way as to draw suspicion upon him or herself. Which is what the referee did with the Tottenham/WHam game.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_football#Duration_and_tie-breaking_methods

  23. bob
    22/02/2015

    St. Totteringham, Walter,
    That equalizer would be at 5:57 – 57 seconds later than late. Fergie time on tap for these Spuds?

  24. Gord
    22/02/2015

    I am presuming that you are saying that the 4th official indicated that there was about 5 minutes of time to be added on.

    At the moment the 90 minutes of running time occurs, a strict-ish interpretation would be that someplace between 4:30 and 5:30 of extra time was needed. If the amount required was 4:30.5 seconds, that would be rounded up to 5 minutes. If the amount required was 5:29.5, that would be rounded down to 5 minutes. In the course of adding another 5 minutes of playing time, even more time may need to be added on for stoppages during the extra time.

    If the end of regular time arrives and the indication is that 1 minute will be added on for stoppages, if 5 minutes of time is added on, it looks suspicious. Likewise, if the end of regular time arrives and the indication is that 7 minutes are to be added on, if the game is ended after 1 minute of time added on, it again looks suspicious.

    But there is only 1 timekeeper at the game, that being the referee. And whenever the referee feels time has ended, the referee is supposed to stop play at that point.

    People have mentioned before, that if you use a stopwatch to measure the length of time the ball is in play, it usually ends up somewhere between 70 and 80 minutes. Some stoppage time is not added back in.

    When I was refereeing, if the ball rolled out of play and stopped close to the field, and the throw-in was taken quickly, I would not add time for the stoppage. If the ballw was kicked a long way off the field, and you had to climb a fence and wade into water in the ditch to retrieve the ball, some time would be added on.

    But, because there is only a single timekeeper at the field, almost all arguments about too much or too little time added on fall on deaf ears.

    A contrary example. Say the referee is keeping track of time closely, and notices that time should expire “quickly” (a few seconds). A breakaway happens and the goalkeeper is stranded upfield, and a player streaks towards goal, and if that person scores it would result in that team going ahead, or tying the other team. If there are 4 seconds left, and it would take 5 seconds for the player to get to range to shoot, and then another 1 second for the ball to get to the goal, it would look suspicious to call time on the game while the ball was in flight towards the game. It will look less suspicious to call time 2 seconds earlier, before the shot is taken. Lots of referees do not keep track of time that closely, some do. What does one do?

  25. bob
    22/02/2015

    Football TV rights have now just had a record 5 Billion sell-off to Foxy and the Beeb. The delivery of the precious to the eyeballs on the screen is in the hands of two teams of mechanics: the refshite and certain shows on the medja. Both tell us what we have seen (or not).

    With so much money now in play, the question is whether the pgMOB is going to be deemed a capable enough – that is, plausible enough – cabal to deliver the product to the eyeballs (aka viewers). If it is judged that enough viewers (a critical mass) have become or are close to becoming seriously discontented with the state of the refshite – that it becomes a national if not worldwide joke – then it may be jeopardizing the product and the return on investment by Foxeys, the Beebs and the Sponsorship. Even by today’s lowest standards, don’t these stakeholders need better guarantors of the value of their product with the consumers than what is consistently (way more so than not these days) on display from the refshite?

    So, can the commerce of the game really afford the ineptitude/ questionable integrity of the House of Riley? Perhaps Atkinson will be the fall guy – that is Riley will throw him to the wolves – or perhaps Riley will be the fall guy; but this media-abetted Maureen-Ho platform against the referee (perhaps unprecedented in its scope, what with re-runs, etc.) is perhaps the sign of a “reform” (or fascimile thereof) in the wings.

    Granted that there’s little to go by in predicting this (as there’s been precious little push for reform); however, with world-record investment in the product, investor-stakeholders might want at least some form of cleansing of the stables to reassure themselves against a cascade of surprise revelations or two or ten about the “integrity” of their product. With investment that high, can they really risk the possibility of an expose that turns off enough of the fanbase to damage the stakeholders’ investment? For example, a mass defection by a few major sponsors?

    This may be unlikely of course, based on the past as we know it; but Investors on this scale, imho, are not going to feel comfortable with the level and layers and slow but growing discontent with the Riley-ites (the most visible tip of the ROT, and perceived to be that) lest it metastasize into something that impacts their bottom line.

    Perhaps they’ll do it like Rugby and like the Detestable One has just suggested – and start to finally “test” video replay (- that is, not just this useless goal-line review) and introduce it here and there, if not everywhere: to ensure the precious golden game against the loose cannons and pikers like Atkinson/ Riley who are fast bringing unwanted scrutiny as perhaps not in recent or even distant memory.

  26. Gord
    22/02/2015

    A GPS receiver can also be a high accuracy, high precision clock. If a camera had a GPS receiver, and was set up to be such a clock, the following should result in action against the referee.

    The referee indicates the start of the second half with a blow of the whistle, however time does not start until the ball moves. A person takes a picture which inidcates the ball has moved minimally, which is perhaps 0.25 seconds after time starts. The person with the camera takes a picture indicating play when the referee stops time “before 45 minutes has elapsed”. The local FA may want proof about the precision and accuracy of the camera as a clock, but that should be evidence that the referee has stopped play before it should have been.

    Incidentally, the accuracy and precision can be as small as a few microseconds for a civilian GPS receiver. Military receivers can be quite a bit better.

  27. Gord
    22/02/2015

    Bob, until the system gets better trained officials, there will continue to be problems. Having video replay can help, but unless the TV signal is running much faster than 24 frames per second, it will still be ambiguous in too many situations. Broadcast TV is probably 24 fps, but I would like to see about 10 times that (240 fps) for replays (or more).

  28. Pete
    22/02/2015

    Another thought. Maybe Riley has “lost the dressing room”? Perhaps something has been intimated that he will be stepping down at the end of the season – honourable departure, full pension etc – so the existing refs now feel they have to referee to the best of their ability to impress the next guy (and they don’t know who he will be, and what his biases etc are).

    Just a thought…

  29. Gord
    22/02/2015

    The table that Tony and Walter provided outlining the bias of Dean as a function of time, to me is a smoking gun with respect to showing the system can be manipulated. With the amount of money involved, I would expect that criminals will try to take control of PGMO long before the Serious Fraud Office might decide to investigate. At which point, I would think all the original evidence, possibly explaining how all this started in the first place, might be gone.

  30. bob
    22/02/2015

    Walter,
    I’d wager that the 98/99 percenters know that an increasing number of fans and medja figures do realize the absurdity of their percentages. It has only “worked” to the extent that there is no pressure brought to bear (except from Untold) to have to prove or justify those number. They just have had to say something, rather than nothing in the age of Riley. What may be new now is, perhaps, a coincidence of the vast amount of TV dollars and something brewing that threatens the investment such as a major scandal that must be headed off, or the potential for such a scandal. This 98/99 percent fig leaf has outlived its usefulness; and, in fact, is or will soon become a national joke and a stick with which to discredit their enterprise. They have to abandon it in favor of video replay to save the starship enterprise. Perhaps, in this moment of possible weakness, UA would consider the all-out renewal of a call to immediately implement full video replay to save the game. There’s no need, methinks, to make that 98/99 percent nonsense of theirs the main target. It’s more to the point to build momentum toward the long well-known solution that so many other Leagues have turned to; because to them it matters enough to protect their investment. Is the BPL and its mega-stakeholders going to allow the 98/99 percenters to be their investment guarantors? Would you? 🙂

  31. bob
    22/02/2015

    Gord,
    Have you downloaded the Old Travesty evidence of 2004? Surely someone has: perhaps exhibit A of the planting or flowering of The Bad Seed. 🙂

  32. bob
    22/02/2015

    Gord,
    Is the 24 fps also the case for High Definition TV? Or does HDTV have nothing to do with more fps? Are commercial TVs that far away, do you think, from the 240 fps standard that you’d prefer?

  33. Usama
    22/02/2015

    Just as Walter and Tony have said about the Type III match fixing (calciopoli) in the Premier League, we are seeing increasing signs of it day by day.

    Now in 2006 Italian League Match Fixing Scandal a total of 5 teams were found guilty of varying levels of corruption.

    1. Juventus – (Was title contender along with Inter)
    2. Milan – (They were fighting for a Champions League Spot)
    3. Fiorentina – (They were also fighting for a Champions League Spot)
    4. Lazio – (They were initially in the run for Champions League but were fighting for UEFA CUP place at end)
    5. Reggina – (Relegation Threatened Team)

    Now if we look on the premier league, We have Chelsea and Man City for League Title. What I think Mourinho is trying to create a smoke-screen (distraction) in the media and public that they are innocent and not the team that is favored by referees throughout the season, even though they have been favored in every minute possible this season. Hence a bit equivalent of Juventus.

    Arsenal, Man Utd, Liverpool, Totts, Saints are in looking for UEFA CL spot. Now if you look in Italy 3 teams were part of Calciopoli who were fighting for UEFA CL Spot.

    Arsenal – We all know how we are crushed by referees every game,every minute for the past 8 years. Not in Type III match fixing.

    Liverpool – What everyone saw today against Southampton is evidence enough.
    High chance in Type III fixing.

    Totts – Oh my word, these people favored every last 20 minutes of every EPL game and somehow get penalty or a major decision their way. High chance in Type III fixing.

    Man Utd – Won against Arsenal (by highly cheating their with ref help). Very high chance in Type III fixing.

    Southampton – From what saw today against liverpool how they were crushed by Kevin Friend (not a keen friend is he 😀 ) they are slowly being thrown out of UEFA CL Spot race as the season draws near. very low chance in Type III fixing.

    Last but not least my eyes are on West Bromwich to get out relegation battle. Why ? because Jon Moss and Mike Riley that’s why ! Aston Villa their local have somehow managed to find themselves slowly in relegation spot where West Bromwich were before Tony Pulis took charge.
    http://footballisfixed.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/doing-little-deal-down-moss.html

    So a we can see a mirror image of whats happening in EPL that happened in Italy.

    Chelsea
    Man Utd
    Liverpool
    Totts
    West Bromwich

    They are looking to be the equivalent of the 5 teams that were found guilty.

  34. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    Yes, FIF has a real downer on moss, a recurring theme with him

  35. Al
    22/02/2015

    Some damning figures on Moss, Usama. I initially thought he was one of the better refs but the last two seasons has shown he can be taylor-sque when he wants. And now this…

  36. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    Pete at 7.56, you may be right, Riley has become a liability, he seems to be hiding, it seems the refs are getting very little if any leadership. If people at the top are hiding agendas, the hapless, weak,Riley is not the man to help them. Nobody believes that 98 % stuff! at least when it comes to key match changing decisions.. And even today, two of the recent usual suspects on the end of some very charitable match changing decisions by refs. High profile managers are complaining, the media are chirping. Think we will soon see the end of Riley, the only problem, he is likely to be replaced by another pro establishment, Manc sympathiser who has already taken up post in the higher echelons in the pgmo. But maybe they figure Webb is more media friendly, and seemingly a stronger personality, as well , at his best, away from Fergies influence, a better ref?
    Still, even if Riley does step down, sometimes, retrospective justice can apply in this country, he will not be out of the woods, not by a long way.

  37. Gord
    22/02/2015

    > The HD ready 1080p logo program, by DIGITALEUROPE, requires that certified TV sets support 1080p 24 fps, 1080p 50 fps, and 1080p 60 fps formats,

    I think the fastest shot is about 75 mph (or 33.5 m/s). A person’s leg is about 1 m long, and the path of a foot from cocked, through striking the ball and follow through is about 1 m as well. So, in taking that fastest shot, the foot is moving from well behind the body to well in front of the body in a time similar to 1/33 of a second. If we take a picture at either 24, 50 or 60 fps, the foot is just a smear, it is only a matter of how much of the image has the foot smeared out.

    Where 24 fps comes from, is that is just a little bit faster than the threshold for perceived movement is with people. If you are an accountant running a business, you want to transmit as little information as possible to satisfy the customers, which is why so much is at 24 fps.

    Let’s look at Rooney’s dive. You probably want to see if one 10cm piece of person A contacts another 10cm piece of person B. We need something like 360 fps to start to resolve 10cm of person. That 33 m/s was a fastest kick. The closing speed for 2 people running towards each other is going to be about 22 m/s, which is about the same speed as 33 m/s.

    I know gamers want higher fps for playing their systems, so maybe there is a market for 50 fps. But I can’t see there being a market for 250 or 300 fps. So, if the TV system films at that high speed, they end throwing away 80% of the data because there is no market for it.

    Making the sensors faster is one thing, but if we produce 10 times as many frames per second, we really want the same amount of light in each picture. Is the lighting a existing fields good enough to support high speed video?

    I don’t know.

  38. Yassin
    22/02/2015

    Usama,

    Awesome, i think you should make an article and aend it to Tony. Specially what Chelsea and PGMOL are doing, yes its definitly a smoke screen.

  39. bob
    22/02/2015

    Mandy,
    What Mikey R. has on his betters is that some of them would (at best) have ignored his prior track record (including, exhibit A, Old Travesty/2004) or (at worst) be seen to have elected him because of that track record (Old Travesty 2004 being exhibit A). He and those betters (Don Fergus) have had a “deadly embrace”, if one is found culpable, then they all are. In any case, a quiet stepping down with payout would seem the most cosmetic way. A Thank You for your services; we are turning the page; and moving more fully into the “high tech” era toward which you led us with your wondrous Goal Line Technology. We and our fans shall ever be grateful that you’ve pointed the way ahead.” Amen.

  40. bob
    22/02/2015

    Gord,
    That said, if there is pressure on those who replay the videos (like those during the match) to deliver multi-camera images so that the whole viewing audience can see it, then surely this will bring to light a very large percentage of what has happened on the pitch. Yes, maybe some events will escape scrutiny, but I don’t think it would be a large number. In sum, where you are no doubt right about the need for the highest fps to be at or close-to fool proof, it strikes me that we should not let the perfect become the obstacle to the good. So that video replay, even at the current 24fps, would be a meaningful step forward. Do you think not?

  41. Pete
    22/02/2015

    Just seen the first 8 minutes on Arsenal player:

    – Ozil offside was on – but I think it is a bit of a stretch to say he would have scored as the whistle went before he finished off.

    – Coquelin high foot was foolish on his part. Definitely accidental (unlike De Jong’s which was deliberate) but they sometimes attract a red.

    – No question that the Welbeck penalty was inside the box. The defender did not dispute it either.

    – Pitch was dreadful. It looked like they had returfed it recently. Is that right? I recall they did that somewhere recently just can’t remember where.

  42. Gord
    22/02/2015

    Anything will help. Having good video at 60 fps will help. But I think we need better trained (and probably equipped) referees.

  43. Pete
    22/02/2015
  44. Mandy Dodd
    22/02/2015

    Jose has really raised the issue on refs into the media. Whatever his self serving motives, that can only be a good thing. The fact is, there are now so many mistakes on key decisions, if they are honest mistakes, refs need video help, if they are dishonest mistakes, people should be behind bars, if they are mistakes arising from pressure from above, their bosses need replacing, their ruling body needs full, transparent auditing from an external body with audits , KPIs and performance figures on individual referees made public.
    Anything less, and we can draw our own conclusions, so should those pouring billions into our game, which may….or may not be tainted

  45. Mandy Dodd
    23/02/2015

    Should anyone be taken in by Mourinhos recent attacks on the pgmol, worth remembering his memory is selective, here is his view on a high tackle by mikel which split artetas shin pad, needless to say, mikel was not sent off

    https://vine.co/v/OQ1jaE0JEhw

  46. bob
    23/02/2015

    (1) Ok, so this weekend it is
    Jose first;

    (2) Then ‘Arry ‘as ‘is ACCURATE criticism of the Refshite (aka Moss): http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/559835/Tottenham-West-Ham-match-report-Allardyce-fuming-NFL-time

    (3) and more of the same by Koeman at Southampton’s being nicked: (see next posting)

  47. bob
    23/02/2015

    (3) [continued from the previous:] http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/559836/Match-Report-Southampton-0-Liverpool-2-Brendan-Rodgers-eyeing-fourth-outstanding-win

    So that’s it ladies and gents! Another weak end at the orifice.

  48. Mandy Dodd
    23/02/2015

    Bob, the refs , for now, will surely ensure at least one north west giant in the top four. Have the powers that be given up on Utd? They have a difficult run in, or will they try and do us to ensure both NW clubs make it, but perhaps exposing themselves for what they are if they do so.

  49. Mark
    23/02/2015

    It is encouraging that at least one league in the world is doing things right.
    Yes, Riley should be sacked! The whole thing needs to be cleaned up!

  50. Pete
    23/02/2015

    Mandy – slightly harsh not classifying Man C as a “North West Giant” although acknowledge they don’t have the same fan base as MU and Liverpool!

  51. trapper
    23/02/2015

    In the article it is stated that other countries are more open and only Belgium is put forward.

    How open are
    Italy
    Spain
    Germany
    France.

    Italy, because of past corruption is the most interesting. Are they more open.

    France. I have read often on betting forums that french football is corrupt and is best avoided.

    Spain and Germany because they are the other 2 big leagues in Europe.

  52. WalterBroeckx
    23/02/2015

    Trapper,
    We have written about the (r)evolution in Holland that is taking place where they are testing video assistance for referees.
    They even asked Fifa permission to organise a test in real matches to help the ref out. I would like to think that this is a very big step to open up referee decisions to the public.

  53. trapper
    23/02/2015

    It is all a step in the right direction but it doesn’t mean all associations will take up any advancements to help refs.

    I will use these small examples of differing views on the game from the different fa’s

    Italy has the 2 extra officials by the goals

    Sorry but I forget which countries have the multi ball system but some do have it

    England has goal line technology

    Belgium has openness about the refs ( thank you untold)

    France has artificial pitches in the top league(other countries do but not 100% sure which ones)

    I am just trying to say just because some countries are open regarding refs or trying to help refs don’t expect our fa to follow. The fa don’t think there is anything wrong so there is no need to change things

  54. goonersince72
    23/02/2015

    The expected rubbish from refs this past weekend. One of the worst this season. Ironic that Arsenal weren’t savaged as usual. Two questionable calls; one against us (Ozil) one for (Welbeck). Not bad from the shites of the UnProfessionalGMO.

  55. bob
    23/02/2015

    goonersince72,
    yes, the seed of a new one there:
    UnPGMO – as in Genetically Modified Organism. That’s Riley’s clones for us.

  56. goonersince72
    23/02/2015

    bob
    That’s a good one. Enjoy your posts. The other ones above are spot on, also. Do any fans think there WON’T be a suspicious call v. MU in the FA Cup? Didn’t think so. I thought Fergie Time was over, but we know it’ll never be over for the FA, UnPGMO and the media. The Manures are their darlings. Only club in Britain, must be protected, best in the world, etc. With no European football. On form and squad Arsenal are the better side. Won’t appear that way come the 9th of March. And that’s my daughter’s birthday. She’ll be crying instead of smiling, I’m afraid.

  57. philo
    24/02/2015

    i just hope with all the noise going around before our game at old toilet, we might get a fair treatment.we might

Back to top
mobile desktop