Swango1980
Well-known member
No it's not, you are being extremely loose in your definition of corruption there.
simsini
Active member
It certainly is. It would be completely dishonest to referee in that way.
How can someone be dishonest over something subjective?
simsini
Active member
If the press is saying for example, a ref doesn't give any penalties that other refs do, and he allows that to influence him into giving a soft penalty in his next game that he wouldn't have otherwise given, that's dishonesty and corruption. He would be deliberately treating the incident differently because of an outside influence.
Reemul
Head Pro
Yep and that's why Man Ure will go another 10 years without winning the league, employing rubbish managers.
I hated it when Kloppe became Liverpool manager as I knew he would do the business for them and as an Everton supporter I wanted Brenda to stay and keep screwing it up. Kloppe is an excellent manager and 100 times better than Eric Ten Hairs who I would not want at Everton at all.
It's not really about likeing the manager, he's not gonna be my best friend, I don't really like Dyche but I had confidence he would do what was needed for us and a million times Kloppe would do the business for Man Ure. He is going to be a loss to the league as he was one of the only managers giving Pep a run for his money over teh last few years.
samthom99
Active member
Are we all Brighton fans tonight?
Reemul
Head Pro
Absolute rubbish, you continue to come out with some real whoppers on here.
Dictionary definition - dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery.
Simsini definition - Whatever I want it to be.
simsini
Active member
My definition matches what you've put there. Doesn't have to be bribery. It's dishonest conduct.
If an outside influence affects the referee's decision, and he's not basing his decision solely on what he sees in that instance, it's dishonest and corrupt.
Reemul
Head Pro
Rubbish it's not a 1 word definition, it's like you have pulled out the part that really matters, you know like bribery. It is not corrupt to be dishonest that's just being dishonest, it is corrupt to be dishonest with bribery, you need a payment of some form for it to be corruption.
You have just reinforced what I put above - Whatever you want it to be
simsini
Active member
There's a reason why bribery and corruption have different legal definitions. Even your definition uses the word typically. Maybe look that up.
Swango1980
Well-known member
So, if someone ever criticises your performance at work, you'll simply never change. Just consistently annoy people?
simsini
Active member
Who's doing the criticising? My boss, football clubs, football fans or the press?
Reemul
Head Pro
Yep and your use of corruption is wrong, you are the very reason there are so many issues with the issues we have, it's full of hyperbole and fan angst rather than correct and accurate. The issues are so big and already a problem we do not need fans like you and your rubbish muddying the water.There's a reason why bribery and corruption have different legal definitions. Even your definition uses the word typically. Maybe look that up.
The minute you add the tin foil hat to your argument it gives those in charge an excuse to just ignore you. They look at you and go, these people are idiots. Every time you say refferrees are corrupt and bent and dishonest and cheat you will be ignored because most people do not believe that rubbish. What they think is they need better training, clearer rules (handball rule for example is dreadful) and better behaviour, players to stop diving and trying to con the referee.
There is so much wrong with reffeeing and Var at the moment we don't need the ridiculous corruption and dishonest rubbish that is not true.
One thing we can say is that Everton and Forest have been dishonest and cheated around FFP and we have both been punished for it. Everton should have been relegated last year and the way it was handled last year was so poor we got away with the points reduction this year. Forest well you signed 30 players and loads of those never even played so we add stupidity to that as your overspend could have been easily avoided unlike Everton who's board were so inept we were always screwed.
Of course it's always easy to through around terms incorrectrly and blame others for issues, typical fan behaviour
simsini
Active member
The reason we have the issues we have is because referees could hide behind the fact that they could only make a split second decision in real time in the past, and were given more leeway. Now they are still making howlers when reviewing video footage from multiple angles. While the laws of the game could definitely be clearer, the best solution is maximum transparency. Remove all doubt. I've said it before, broadcast the live audio and video as it happens in the stadium and on the TV feed. Rugby still has to make subjective calls and it works.
As for tin foil hats, what do you make of ex refs like Mark Halsey? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...-incident-he-claims-he-was-told-to-lie-about/
Or Mike Dean?
Mike Dean admits avoiding VAR call to spare referee ‘more grief’ last season
Mike Dean has admitted he failed to correct a mistake in a Chelsea v Tottenham match last season to prevent his friend Anthony Taylor receiving extra ‘grief’
There's a great interview here with Kevin Lynch too.
No tin foil hat required, they admit to doing it.
Swango1980
Well-known member
The referees are reviewed each game, pretty sure there is a referee accessor at the games. At the weekend, the big decisions will have been discussed, what was correct, what was not. No idea what was said, but suspect at least the 3rd decision not to review the penalty was incorrect.
If that is case, I don't think the referee said "cheers for that, but I'll continue to not award penalties for that, just to remain consistent"
As for the midweek game, I assume we are talking about the same referee, who was now onfield. He didn't give a foul, goal scored. Then a different VAR recommended a review, as they clearly thought there was enough in it to be a foul? Once any ref is called to screen, it is difficult to go against the VAR. They've seen the incident multiple times, different angles, and there is at least a couple of them in VAR to discuss it first. To stick with original decision, it means the onfield referee needs to disagree with his colleagues who have had more to work with.
And had he stuck to his original decision, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if people like yourself still argued he was corrupt, and continuing to make "corrupt" decisions like last weekend.
I feel you lose credibility every time you keep raising the subject. If you want to accuse corruption, give the evidence. Making mistakes is not corruption. Inconsistency is not corruption. Those are traits of every human, and perhaps holes in their training.
IanM
Journeyman Pro
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 12,383
- Location
- Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
Let's mess about in our own penalty area and see how many goals we can give away cheaply!
Swango1980
Well-known member
It's games like this that makes me uncertain that DeZerbi is the great manager some people seem to believe.
nickjdavis
Head Pro
This is death by a thousand cuts football.
The third City goal they were like an Anaconda, gradually constricting the space Brighton had to play in before extinguishing the life from the Seagulls by means of Fodens left foot.
The third City goal they were like an Anaconda, gradually constricting the space Brighton had to play in before extinguishing the life from the Seagulls by means of Fodens left foot.
samthom99
Active member
The gift from the referee for the 2nd goal was laughable.Let's mess about in our own penalty area and see how many goals we can give away cheaply!
Yorkhacker
Well-known member
That lasted well
