Is There Corruption By Match Officials In The Premier League

[milla]

No corruption, they are just shit. And the FA is complicit in their shit-ness, simply because it doesn't want to lose such time honoured classics such as "You dont know what you're doing!" and "The referee's a wanker" from the repertoire of the English football crowd

Fuck this shite. If our local refs are bad, let's bring competent refs from Poland, India and Romania. They will be a lot cheaper too.

[Bumble]

Not corrupt, and I doubt anyone on here would do a better job. Footballers make more errors than referees ever do.
Very rare that a ref really changes a result as opposed to the striker who misses 5 chances.

Mistakes happen everywhere in life, continually complaining about referees is tragic as it's only football.

[Özim]

Not corrupt, and I doubt anyone on here would do a better job. Footballers make more errors than referees ever do.
Very rare that a ref really changes a result as opposed to the striker who misses 5 chances.

Mistakes happen everywhere in life, continually complaining about referees is tragic as it's only football.

Pretty much agree with this, when a footballer missed most of his chances, he's just having a bad day (and yet footballers have been proven to be involved in corruption in other countries), but when refs make a mistake it's down to corruption.

They're human, the game is played at a fast pace and there's a lot of pressure on them from fans and players, so yes they do make mistakes but it's not down to corruption.

You could argue they should do better, but I think the rules of the game don't help them to make decisions based on common sense.

[Fist of Lehmann]

Whether you automatically say yes or no depends on your own inherent cynicism or basic faith in humankind.

The question is, with so much money swilling around the game and so many crooks, is it plausible that there is NO corruption in the English game?

Even if there isn't in the sense of taking bribes, how can anyone be sure that games are called straight down the line, fairly, and without personal bias?

Look at our record when Mike Dean's in charge and tell me that f*cker isn't bent.

[LDG]

[She Wore A Yellow Ribbon]

[Letters]

Look at our record when Mike Dean's in charge and tell me that f*cker isn't bent.

OK. Let's. Our first 12 games when he reffed us our results were W10 D2 L0. But
a) They were almost all games we 'should' be winning and
b) They were from 2000-2006 when we were a better side than we were after that.

Since then the results when he's reffed us have been worse. Did he suddenly become biased against us? More likely it's that:
a) He's been put in charge of bigger games and
b) We've not been as good and we've been losing a lot of those big games.

It's not much of a head-scratcher if you look at the games...

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/ar...in_11_379.html

[Power n Glory]

Whether you automatically say yes or no depends on your own inherent cynicism or basic faith in humankind.

The question is, with so much money swilling around the game and so many crooks, is it plausible that there is NO corruption in the English game?

Even if there isn't in the sense of taking bribes, how can anyone be sure that games are called straight down the line, fairly, and without personal bias?

Look at our record when Mike Dean's in charge and tell me that f*cker isn't bent.

and food for thought. I’ve seen people cut corners in McDonalds and try to scam free food so I don’t think it’s implausible for there to be corruption at a higher level in football.

Genuine mistakes can happen, they’re human, but being human also means refs are open to personal bias and corruption. It’s only a part time gig and I’m always wary of an institution that operates behind closed doors with no accountability. Faith and trust that everything is above board and fair is what keeps this system running. Appearances are everything and a story about corrupt refs would put a lot of people out of work. They could easily sweep such a scandal under the carpet and deal with it internally. I don’t understand why they are so reluctant to embrace video technology but it’s either corruption or incompetence.

[Syn]

OK. Let's. Our first 12 games when he reffed us our results were W10 D2 L0. But
a) They were almost all games we 'should' be winning and
b) They were from 2000-2006 when we were a better side than we were after that.

Since then the results when he's reffed us have been worse. Did he suddenly become biased against us? More likely it's that:
a) He's been put in charge of bigger games and
b) We've not been as good and we've been losing a lot of those big games.

It's not much of a head-scratcher if you look at the games...

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/ar...in_11_379.html

Oh what a poast.

[Fist of Lehmann]

OK. Let's. Our first 12 games when he reffed us our results were W10 D2 L0. But
a) They were almost all games we 'should' be winning and
b) They were from 2000-2006 when we were a better side than we were after that.

Since then the results when he's reffed us have been worse. Did he suddenly become biased against us? More likely it's that:
a) He's been put in charge of bigger games and
b) We've not been as good and we've been losing a lot of those big games.

It's not much of a head-scratcher if you look at the games...

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/ar...in_11_379.html

And yet even when you remove results for games against Chelsea, City or Utd (weirdly he has never reffed us against Liverpool) our win percentage is still around 10% lower than where you'd expect it to be.

And taken in isolation, of those tough games I removed, our records are still better under other refs.



DO NOT FORGET his gay Riverdance celebration after Spurs scored against us.