Arsenal News

Live Arsenal News

Arsenal latest news

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

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News


June 2021

Substantial supportive evidence that Sky Sports is utterly and hopelessly in the pocket of PGMO

by Tony Attwood

There was an incident in the first half last night in which a Middlesbrough player grabbed hold of Oliver Giroud in a rugby styled tackle in the penalty area and held on to him for several seconds, stopping him getting to the ball.

It was clearly shown on the live footage, so Sky had no chance to go back and edit it out, and thus the commentators were forced to deal with it, showing the replay a couple of times and suggesting that the Boro player was “very lucky” both in a) not giving away a penalty and b) not being sent off.

True the commentary could have gone a bit further in dealing with the incident itself, for example in wondering how the event of not getting an utterly obvious penalty would affect the Arsenal players, but the immediate coverage was reasonable.  It was captured by the camera and treated as a major incident.

Except for one thing.

No one, either in the live commentary nor in the half time or post match resume (which on Sky goes on for quite a long time – I stayed tuned and watched it all) asked the most fundamental question: how on earth was it possible that neither the assistant referee covering that goal area nor the referee himself actually saw it.  I mean, it wasn’t just a split second issue, it went on and on as Giroud tried to get away from the player’s arms that were completely around him.

That question, I would suggest, is fundamental to the whole game, for if the referee and his assistant could miss that, then what else were they missing.  Indeed that incident threw the credibility of the whole game into question, and yet Sky did not mention it once, after it happened.  Not in the game, not in the half time chatter, not in the long, long, oh so long, post match, lets draw lines on this magic box and argue, section of the programme.

Yet not only was it a major issue in the game, it is also one that would have been captured over and over again on the multiple cameras that the TV companies now use.   I have seen them before use these to create a “referee’s view” of an incident to prove that he didn’t see something.  But this time?

In essence one of the two officials must have seen it (because it was so blatant) or else they should be removed from officiating either for gross incompetence or corruption.

So given that Sky chose not to question the decision and non-action of the referee I want to ask, why not?  Not even at half time, when they spent the whole of their time criticising the Boro goalkeeper over the goal, and showing it time and time again.  In doing that it seemed as if they were trying very hard to stop us asking, “why did the ref not give a penalty and send the player off?”   Also “why just call the player ‘lucky’? rather than a man who will stop at nothing – no matter how illegal – to try and keep Giroud away from the ball.”

Watch Arsenal Live Streams With

There are two answers I guess.

One is because our referee preview pointed out that this sort of thing might happen and the media don’t like it when we are right.  True we couldn’t know exactly what gross miscarriage of justice would occur (I simply added the headline phrase “If we end up with 11 on the pitch we’ll be lucky” to Andrew’s original headline to make the point) but we knew something would happen, because of this referee’s appalling history when in charge of an Arsenal game.   Sky don’t like it when we are right.

Second, Sky, as part of its deal with the PL, has to sign up to the notion that PGMO is a straight organisation, whose officials have an accuracy level (as claimed again in their latest press release) of 98%.

But the fact is, since this event was potentially a game changer (robbing Arsenal of a penalty and possibly making them feel that this was another match with the ref against them), it was bizarre not to ask the question.   Indeed unless the level of production in Sky is itself bordering on the grossly incompetent (which given the sophistication of the output, is hard to believe) the only way you can avoid this question about why and how the ref and linesman missed the event, is because you have been directed not to talk about it.

This is a real problem not just for Arsenal but for football, because history shows that all realities that are manipulated by the media eventually have a habit of bursting into the open.   Indeed it is a question that goes beyond the media’s favourite topic concerning the future of our manager.  For whatever manager we have next season the referee issue is going to be the same next season.

So, post match, we again had the long, long, long discussions about the goalkeeper’s  positioning of his line for Arsenal’s first – which showed that Sky pundits can do “why” questions.  But not the most interesting and revealing “why?” question.

That the issue was not picked up by the newspapers was no surprise – they, like Sky, are resolutely in the “referee is ok” camp.   But the issue remains: how could the ref have missed the obvious penalty?

It was either gross incompetence or he had been bought.   Of course I have no evidence that the referee was persuaded to give Middlesbrough a helping hand in the “Type III match fixing” style that we have examined so often before.  But it either was an attempt at match fixing or gross incompetence, given that the event was not a quick split second issue, but one that lasted several seconds in an area of the pitch where all attention was focused.  Sky’s failure to ask the question, suggests again either their incompetence or that they were ordered to let it go.

If it was incompetence this raises two questions: why is PGMO continuing to allow grossly incompetent referees and their assistants to continue to work at the highest level, and how come we were able to predict it, and no one else did?

I leave you to work it out.

Middlesbrough v Arsenal; 17 April 2017 – The Match Officials. If we end up with 11 on the pitch we’ll be lucky.

Middlesbrough – Arsenal : 1-2

48 comments to Substantial supportive evidence that Sky Sports is utterly and hopelessly in the pocket of PGMO

  • Leon

    I’ve not seen this mentioned in any of the dailies either (although The Guardian did bring it up on their live report yesterday).
    We all know that Taylor can be incompetent, but it’s obvious that he has particular issues with Arsenal. I doubt that he’s been bought (but you never know), or that it’s a PGMO directive.
    It’s just personal IMO. Taylor hates Arsenal and in particular Wenger.

  • ALAN

    You want to get out more. Grappling in the penalty box happens in every game by every team. I too would like it stopped but to suggest that this ia an anti Arsenal conspiracy beggars belief.. My bigger issue, as a.Boro fan, is the massive bias towards the big. Clubs when it comes to time allocated to discussion. People living in Teesside pay just as much subs as you do and deserve just as much of time allocated to them.In our case the point is particular valid as we are not going to be there long!

  • John L

    Unfortunately, Tony, it was all so accurately predicted on UA. Taylor lived down to all expectations – his enthusiastic booking of Ox in the 4th minute left no doubt what was to follow. As well as the failure to give that obvious penalty, there was the series of fouls given against our players for no good reason, plus the disregard if numerous fouls committed by Boro players. Both illustrated by an incident late in the game when Alexis was scythed down and then penalised for falling in such a way that his hand appeared to touch the ball.

    I am visiting South Africa and watched the Sky footage, which has different pundits. The theme throughout the game was how fragile Arsenal are and how they were losing the midfield battle (quite extraordinary with 70:30 possession) – how Wenger looked anxious, how Mesut and Alexis will be off soon, how we cant compete in a physical encounter – the usual shite that we have become used to hearing. The half-time pundits, Townsend and Hargreaves, did confirm that we should have had a penalty, but excused Taylor by saying that he could not see it because of his position – ignoring the question why, if that was the case, was his position so inappropriate, not to mention the assistant referee who must have had a completely clear view of the incident.

  • ClockEndRider

    Given that I attend matches every week and see the same style of officiating in Arsenal matches and I think that your view of the officiating is being, at best, kind. Unless almost every referee, as shown by this sites excellent analysis, by some fluke are all personally anti Arsenal. Far more likely that there is direction from above I’d have thought..

  • Rich

    Don’t know if it’s correct Sky are in pocket of pgmol; would be unusual given the former have billions behind them and the latter a budget of just over ten million (last I knew- might be double that now).

    Sky are certainly broadly protective of them, though. Pure self interest would be enough to explain it but there’s almost certainly more to it.

    Think the record of ‘Arsenal are a bit unfortunate there’ was the Hull cup final. 3 or 4 strong penalty claims and each time they said that while never adding up the misfortune or mentioning it amounted to an extraordinary amount of bad luck in one game.

    Similar story if you can bear the highlights of game 50. Commentary has evolved since then, in sync with the refereeing, but on that occasion the commentators did seem surprised by how much went against us, and added it up during the game. Or rather Gray did, while his co-commentator, Tyler, worked extra hard to try and normalise and defend it.

  • Menace

    ClockEndRider how can you criticise Leon’s thinking. He is always on the fence so much so that his backside has the picket imprint.

    The truth is simple. The PGMOL is a corrupt organisation with very wrong methods of preparation. They are in league with Sky who have a proven track record of bias & are part of a corrupt Murdock empire.

    Look for the programme ‘On side with Carragher & Neville’, where the PGMOL & Sky try to show the ‘human’ side of the officials. You will notice the token black & the token woman amongst the ‘select’ officials. It is an eye opener for anyone who distrusts the geriatric controlled FA & their partners in crime, the PGMOL.

  • Menace

    Leadbetter got studs in the face from his No 4 but shouldn’t have been on the pitch anyway. The foul on Xhaka was not booked. It was another possible Red.

  • Pat

    Very pleased that our players did not allow the obvious injustice from the referee to ruin the game and kept playing and kept fighting.

    Player confidence, which Arsene Wenger again emphasised in his post match interview, is bound to be affected by the clear and justified perception which the players are bound to have that we are always on the end of biased and unfair refereeing.

    So all the more credit to them for giving their all, and good luck to them in the fight till the end of the season.

  • ob1977

    For me another ref lowlight was their “refereeing” of Giroud, pulled up for an early header in the first half where both players in the box were grabbing each other, and was then fouled for the rest of the match getting nothing including the clear bearhug for the obvious and easy decision of a penalty for any honest refereeing team.

  • Leon

    Such a pleasure to be able to post an honest opinion.
    Please note the 3rd party trolling

  • finsbury

    Poor old Apprentice Taylor.

    He’s never been as “good” as his heros such as seen during the “performance” witnessed by 50,000 people last week against West Ham, this particular bungle was right up there with those two non-penalty calls against Arshavin at home to Sunderland during that title tilt which wouldn’t have even fooled his doting mother, but bless him he keeps on trying

    *gollum gollum*

    The FA’s football team may not be able to beat the likes of Iceland but at least they’ve got the best officials thanks to the pgMOB. Lucky us.

  • finsbury

    Please note the internet troll’s inability to troll this article on the internet or the archive of data on the officials hence as witnessed previously the failed attempts to disrupt the comments sections. Almost as useless as Taylor…

  • Leon

    …..and even more 3rd party trolling
    What is going on here Tony?

  • finsbury

    *Genius* at work

  • Brickfields Gunners

    @ Menace and Fins , nice comments ! Sometimes I wonder how when he bends over so far backwards , that he doesn’t end up snapping his spine ?
    Unless of course…..?
    What’s that you say? Jellyfish don’t have neither brains nor spines ?
    Oh !

  • finsbury

    What was the most disingenious facet from the sky post match coverage?

    For me it was this drawing out of the ‘keeper’s role on the first Arsenal goal. Generally when a ‘keeper is beaten on a free kick it is because they’ve taken a half step or placed their balance on the wrong foot relative to the placement of the shot from the opponent.

    Whether it’s Ospina against Clyne (two years off a long shot for Southampton) or Cazorla in the FA cup final (some people say Podolski did nothing in that final but given the distance on that free kick it would be a dishonest to dismiss his dummy on that free kick and how that dummy put the hull keeper on his wrong foot… 🙂 )

    To focus for so long on the keeper being on his wrong foot, can anyne recall plundits ever spending so much time on something that occurs all the time? As the author above accurately implies it appears as if the broadcasters were trying very hard to not discuss other items or incidents from the match.

    Speaking of dummies it appears as if this abusive aggressive troll has spat it’s dummy out 🙂

  • Great read Tony! One thing: reluctant credit where it is due- the American half time report slammed the ref for that incident. I darn near choked on my drink

  • Leon

    I was watching on a Russian stream and they repeatedly showed that incident plus the earlier one, and although I couldn’t understand a word they said it seemed as though they took issue with it too.

  • bjtgooner

    My view is that with the advent of Sky and the level of domination they have acquired over football broadcasting, the level of anti-Arsenal bias by the PGMO has steadily grown.

    I am not sure that Sky are in the pocket of the PGMO – rather whatever the arrangement is between the FA, PGMO and cash rich Sky, it looks as if the money calls the shots.

  • John L

    It is not a new phenomenon. The 2001 Cup Final comes to mind, in which Liverpool, (including that fount of wisdom, Mr. Carragher,) got away with 3 blatant handballs in the penalty area in the first half.

  • Andy L

    I think the reaction by the players at the end and in particular Alexis and Mesut was that they had overcome the usual 14 against them .
    For the first time I can remember I saw a refereeing exhibition that was on a par with what we usually get and that was the Man U v Chelsea game Saturday. Not only was Chelsea denied an obvious handball , which led to the first goal , but Kante could not make a tackle for the first half without being penalised . The look of confusion on his face was all too reminiscent of our players and indeed it makes you wonder how effective he would have been for us had we signed him at the start of the season. Needless to say it would benefit the Premier League to make the run in a close affair and thereby keep the interest up until the end of the season but also help Man U to get into the top 4 which must be their priority. After all a successful Man Utd is a successful Premier League according to Richard Scudamore Executive Chairman of the Premier League.

  • Menace

    Sky showed their hand earlier than the birth of PGMOL by buying into ‘select’ clubs that have since been passed on to dirty money (it is what oil does). Sadly one of the clubs went down so low it is still trying to come up for air (time that is).

    The fact that the Sun shines from the Sky & they both are owned by the mob that hacked a dead girls mobile & they also impact the elections that are soon due.

  • Alan I don’t think I suggested it was an anti-Arsenal conspiracy. As I think my headline suggested, it showed that TV station was in the pocket of the PGMO in not criticising them, and that the ref was either incompetent or biased, one cannot say which.

  • Ben

    So with video refereeing coming into place can they still turn a blind eye to such incidents?

  • Norman14

    I actually thought that Taylor was looking straight at them.

    To those who don’t buy into the Sky/PGMOL/FA conspiracy theory, follow the money – Especially the GAMBLING money!

  • luscious lisa

    A blatant penalty and may well have been given earlier in the season when refs were focusing on grappling, but we now seem to be back to where the Borgo fan says we are, that it’s mostly not given. As for Sky, both pundits are former defenders and probably natural, albeit unsatisfactory, that they analyse from a defensive POV, hence the ridiculous over-analysis of the wall and the lack of focus on the penalty not given. Not sure it means a gorilla is in the pocket of a mouse. But back to the refereeing, I thought the ref let quite a lot go, often in favour of Arsenal, so sometimes its good to be thankful for small mercies.

  • finsbury

    Changing IPs doesn’t really help the cause dear.

    However if you could write a review with the numbers attached, going back several seasons with the support of a cross section of fans/former refs not attached to a single football club in order to support your spirited suggestion that “it all evens out in the end”, to support your failing efforts to troll this blog and the years of referee reviews, that would be most welcome.


  • GoonerDave

    Controversy sells newspapers and generates clicks.
    The man who owns the Sky empire also owns the tabloid media. Its not even a conspiracy – it is just business. Why on earth would Rupert allow video refereeing or anything which removes controversy? That would reduce clicks, call in shows and newspaper sales.
    Football is rotten to the core.

  • Hunter13

    Mr Murdoch is running a casino. the EPL. In this casino for dealers see referees.

    Now then, in this casino we have long time guests, vip guests, newcomers etc etc.

    Here comes Mr Abramovic …1 billion on our tables.
    Here comes Mr Saudi Oil….2 billion on our tables….
    Here comes Glazer family with Soros, Adidas, Facebook and Major League Baseball franchise in scouting and marketing expertise/ tehcnical know-how etc etc

    And here comes Arsenal …no billions on the table… on the contrary these fucks are trying to take money OUT of our casino to fund their stadium or their next youth project who gives a shit….

    Which fine member will enjoy the Casino vip treatment i wonder ? The cheapskate who has gone there with maths and probability statistics to grind it out and build his stack or the cowboys who come in and give money like confetti?

  • Hunter13

    option one: we build/buy a team that can also beat referees. we need either half the german team or half the spanish team. Unrealistic.

    option two: we bring in usmanov and dein and turn into mafia like the rest

    option three (my personal favourite) : the next time the refs cheat arsenal as blatantly i demand Wenger orders the team off the pitch and create furore everywhere and bring the EPL in paralysis.

    For option three though we must be prepared ..with our video evidence, dates , names etc files and lawyer fees ready. And not just any lawyers…i want those italians who got Moggi/The Agnelli family relegated and Silvio and the rest to go hiding for two years……

  • Norman14

    Kroenke has billions doesn’t he?

    When have the Arsenal hierarchy EVER complained to the FA/EPL/PGMOL?

    It appears that AFC is already at the table, I’m afraid. Otherwise, the club would have got behind the fans “Dean” petition.

  • NuttnTiddy

    Of course the TV companies want Man U to get into Europe they are the best supported club in the world and viewers are always high for their matches….and no doubt advertising income for the TV companies.

  • Nitram


    Great analogy.

    It really is about who brings the most ‘goodies’ to the table.

    ALAN (The Boro Fan)

    “I too would like it stopped but to suggest that this an anti Arsenal conspiracy beggars belief.”

    Whether it’s an ‘anti Arsenal conspiracy’ or not, there is something very sinister going on with the way we are awarded penalties, and have penalties awarded against us.

    I would bet 10 to 1 on that you and your Boro friends think ALL the BIG teams, including Arsenal, get favourable treatment from refs, including penalties. Think again.

    We get not favours at all from refs regarding penalties, OR Red and Yellow cards for that matter. Bellow is a link to a UA article (one of many) showing just how badly we fair in respect to both those issues.

    Don’t get me wrong, I don’t blame you for thinking it about Arsenal. You are brain washed to believe it by the media, and as this article highlights, last night is prime example as to why.

    Whenever a ref makes a bad decision in our favour, and of course it does happen, we never hear the end of it from the media. Going into minute detail as to how we ‘got away with it’. But should a decision go against us, as it clearly did last night, they hardly say a Dicky Bird.

    So go on, follow the link and read the stats and then tell me we get the same favours United, Chelsea and City etc. get. Take note especially of this particular highlight:

    Penalties conceded

    1 Chelsea, City, United 24
    4 Everton 30
    5 Liverpool, Tottenham 35
    7 Sunderland 39
    8 Arsenal, Stoke 42

    ‘Arsenal has the highest number of penalties conceded (tied with Stoke), 75% more than Chelsea and the 2 Manchester… Another quick remark, Arsenal actually conceded 6 more penalties than they were awarded : the only team of the Top 6 (or even Top 7 if you add Everton) with a negative balance. Compared to City with a +34 balance, that is 40 penalties deficit. 40 PENALTIES! And then people talk about big team bias from the referees. Well based on this we are not a big team…’

    As you will see, all the stats relate from the time Mike Riley took aver at the PGMOL to present.

    As I say, I understand why you would lump us in with the ‘All the big teams get all the favours’ but is simply not true. As those are statistics, NOT opinions, show.

    Anyway, good luck with your battle for survival. I wish you well, and that is despite being at Ayresome Park back in May 1980 when you stuffed us 5 – 0.

    I had just been to Wembley to see us lose the Fa Cup final 1 nil to West Ham, and Just travelled to Belgium to see us lose the Cup winners cup final on penalties to Valencia. Then I travelled from London to Middlesbrough for you lot to do that to us. Very harsh.

    And Arsenal fans of today moan.

    To use a favourite phrase of my old man…’they don’t know they’re born’.

    Good luck.

  • Hunter13

    Kroneke may have his personal billions but what the Casino sees is that Mr kroenke does not play like Mr Abramovic.

    ‘When have the Arsenal hierarchy EVER complained to the FA/EPL/PGMOL?’

    Thats what im asking as well. Either they feel they are too small to influence things or they have chosen not to get involved in mafia ops and simply exist in this industry to make money via finishing positions and qualifications in europe and player development/sales. Thats fine with me but at least they shouldnt leave their golden goose out to dry and face media and fans wrath on his own.

    Some fans actually believed that by building the Emirates, Arsenal would automatically become the Real Madrid of England and would go dethrone Bayern, Ac milan, Juventus Liverpool etc and knock them all off their perch. Thats the level of intelligence we are dealing with. The executives at Arsenal know all this but had they told us in 2006 ‘ Hmm you know what people, were only interested in top4 money for a good decade till we recover’ ..i doubt these ‘uberfans’ would pay for tickets and the priority was selling out that 60k seater and getting money in from all, player sales, top 4, sponsors..sell our mothers if need be..

    these things dont have to be said..the fan can use his/her brain and put 2 and 2 together….

  • Gooner In Exile

    We all know how bad Taylor is as a referee, but last night was quite bizarre.
    Not sure if anyone else noticed but he didn’t use the marker spray for any free kicks given, not once.
    He didn’t even seem to be carrying the can.
    Is he exempt, maybe he is allergic to the spray who knows.

  • Nitram


    “..I doubt these ‘uberfans’ would pay for tickets and the priority was selling out that 60k seater and getting money in from all avenues, property, player sales, top 4, sponsors..sell our mothers if need be.”

    Exactly. Well said again.

    I had people say to me, “all we wanted was to be told the truth”.

    What a crock.

    Now I’m not saying the plan was to struggle to win things quite as much as we did, (but there was no way the Club could of predicted the arrival of the Oil money or even the recession), but they sure as hell knew we would be up against it for a fair few years.

    What did people expect Arsenal to say?

    ‘Okay ladies and gents, we are building this nice new stadium but beware, because of that the chances are you are not going to see us win anything for quite some time. Oh, and while we’re at it, for the privilege of watching us win nothing we are going to double your season ticket price.’

    That would of been really smart wouldn’t it.

    They was in a no win situation. Tell it as it might well be (and actually was as it turned out) for 10 years, and commit financial suicide. Or tell a few porkies.

    I know what I would of done. Which is exactly why I was never fooled, and more, never BOTHERED at what we was told, because I CAN put 2 and 2 together.

  • para

    Gray always seemed pro football to me, sad that he was “sacked” in such an obvious way? Some of his comments about Arsenal were magnificent, using words like sublime, and at one time failing to find a suitable word to describe a goal by Arsenal. Maybe there is another reason for him being “sacked”.

    When i used to listen, they always criticized Arsenal players when they made a mistake and went into depth on it(is this how the other teams learned to outplay Arsenal?), yet for the other teams players they always made some sort of excuse.

    I wonder if it is because Arsenal does not “offer bribes” to them to influence games that they tread so heavily on Arsenal?

  • Menace

    Watching the Leicester v Atlico game & an incident where Schmichael fouls an Atlico player within 4 feet of the goal line official & it is a penalty. Surprise surprise but there is no interference from the man with the dildo. Yet the man with the dildo got Kos sent off against Bayern. Double standards or just plain corrupt don’t know which. But I’ll plump for corrupt particularly that interference agains Kos.

  • Menace

    Atletico not Atlico

  • Goonermkey

    I just hate the BBC bias. Their half-time headline in the Leicester game is “one chance, one goal” as if somehow Athletico have only crossed the half way line once. They’ve actually had four shots, two of which were on target. How the feck does that equate to “one chance”. I didnt hear the BBC banging on about “one handball and one deflection” when Man U only had three shots on target in the entire game against Chelskii. Anybody would think there’s a major conspiracy to ensure that Man U get positive assistance from the press as well as the PIGMOB…….oh wait, that’s blatantly feckin true…………

  • Nitram


    It’s even worse in the other tie.

    Watching yet another set of officials play for a Spanish team.

    A dodgy sending off. 2 off side goals.

    And as usual the commentary team not really bothered.

    “Yeah, Bayern have been a bit unlucky with the decisions tonight, but lets not dwell on that, no let’s all hail the magnificent Real Madrid”.

    ‘Just a little bit lucky’ is all we get.

    The game is corrupt. End of.

  • Vince

    Bayern second goal was also offside, Lewandowski is clearly offside when Muller deviate the ball from his chest. Actually I think that offside was a lot more easy to see for the linesmen, compared to the Ronaldo offside based on two points :
    – the distance between the ball and the player offside. How can a man follow at the same time the ball (to see exactly when it is played) and the position of Ronaldo compared to the defenders when those 2 scenes are 20 or 30 meters apart?
    – also the combination of Ronaldo and Douglas Costa (not a 100% sure it was him) movements led to Ronaldo actually behind behind him just after the ball was played. I’m sure a lot of very good linesman would have been fooled by this.

    On the other hand, the Lewandowski offside, even if it was a couple of feet offside, was quite a easy call to make

  • Vince

    And you cannot say that the Vidal sending off is dodgy when he could and should have received a second yellow way before he did…

  • Nitram


    I can and have.

    If you don’t think the two Spanish giants receive favourable treatment from referees that’s up to you.

    I beg to differ.

  • ob1977

    @Goonermikey just try reading the review of Utd’s win against Boro compared to ours, and thats with the relevent stats from each match showing otherwise, they make it sound like we were battered and Utd’s was an easy win…

  • ob1977

    And @Nitram & Vince, you have to give the referee and assistants some slack in this match, with 2 of the 4 UEFA pets playing eachother they wouldnt have known what beief to follow and which way to point, they will probably be seeking councilling after that one…

  • ron de jonge

    on dutch tv, pundits Heitinga and R de Boer, together with the host, went full throttle to trash the referees in the RM – BM game, for the whole post match segement, shouting for video assistance. that was nice to see…

  • Nitram

    ron de jonge

    That is good to hear.

    Compare that to Macmanaman and his co, who actually sounded as if they found it mildly amusing.

    Compare that to how they sound when Arsenal have the audacity to be on the receiving end of a favourable decision.