If someone who worked for you was doing a bad job you would deal with it, no? And then get rid of them?
Unless, of course, there was reason to keep them.

Now, if you wanted a ref to do your dirty work you need a bit of leverage. Money troubles? Dirty secret? Or in danger of losing their job due to poor performance. They are the easy targets.

Plus, if Jon Moss has a stinker no one is surprised as he is seen by fans of many clubs as a fat useless tooosser. Prime target I would say.

Right, so what benefit do the corrupt people / organisations get from employing people who are bad at their job?

comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
I’m not a Spurs fan mate.

I just find it reduces the credibility of corruption claims when it’s based on perceived bad decisions against your own team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When you've played football all your life, done youth coaching & youth refereeing you're quite capable of watching your own team and judging decisions without bias. When it's happening in nearly every game so blatantly biases don't even come into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough.

I don’t remotely agree but hey ho, appreciate you feel strongly about it.

Arsenal look like a side that could be relegated next season. I thought Newcastle United were going for the league title and Arsenal were bottom of the league watching this game.

Only surprise is how Newcastle only scored 2 instead of 4 or 5 at least lol.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
I’m not a Spurs fan mate.

I just find it reduces the credibility of corruption claims when it’s based on perceived bad decisions against your own team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When you've played football all your life, done youth coaching & youth refereeing you're quite capable of watching your own team and judging decisions without bias. When it's happening in nearly every game so blatantly biases don't even come into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough.

I don’t remotely agree but hey ho, appreciate you feel strongly about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't really care whether you agree or not. I know, as do many others.

Do you work for the PL Winston?

comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by You Can't Buy Class ¯\_/^v^\_/¯ (U12019)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
I’m not a Spurs fan mate.

I just find it reduces the credibility of corruption claims when it’s based on perceived bad decisions against your own team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When you've played football all your life, done youth coaching & youth refereeing you're quite capable of watching your own team and judging decisions without bias. When it's happening in nearly every game so blatantly biases don't even come into it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair enough.

I don’t remotely agree but hey ho, appreciate you feel strongly about it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't really care whether you agree or not. I know, as do many others.

Do you work for the PL Winston?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ouch, no need for that.

I guess it’s been a bad night for you, so I’ll leave you to it. Maybe chat another time.

I mean you are here defending oddly against there being corruption with no real argument yourself.

Seems strange.

Also not sure what's "ouch" about that.

Against there being corruption I should say.

Which I did say

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 30 minutes ago
Right, so what benefit do the corrupt people / organisations get from employing people who are bad at their job?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Explained that, they are easily controlled and manipulated. And being bad at your job is a plus for someone who wants the job done badly!!

Also, it is a 2 way thing. If you are being used then you know you are a valuable commodity, thus you also know you are well protected, so no need to work hard to improve

Right, so the people in charge - who want corruption - employ people bad at their job so they can be manipulated by someone else?

Are the people manipulating the referees in on it with the people who hire them, then?

This all seems a bit far fetched to me, sorry!

I think you not working for the PL / PGMOL is starting to seem more and more farfetched

Thing is mate, I haven’t said there isn’t, if you check back.

Genuinely interested in how people arrive at their conclusions and what logic they apply, that’s all, as to me it just seems coincidental that the accusation seems to come out when a team has a perceived injustice against them.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 29 minutes ago
Right, so the people in charge - who want corruption - employ people bad at their job so they can be manipulated by someone else?

Are the people manipulating the referees in on it with the people who hire them, then?

This all seems a bit far fetched to me, sorry!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The people who employ them are the people who manipulate them.
But when they are employed they are believed to be good. It is only when they prove themselves not to be (and for many it is a decline rather than a starting point) that they become corruptible.
Anyone who has ever managed a work force knows the people who are not very good at their job (out of ability not cos they dont give a fack) are the ones to pick out when you need something not exactly by the books done!


The most blatantly corrupt game this century (October 2004 Old Trafford) was officiated by... the man who is now at the top!!! And he certainly kept a few favourites around him. Shame for him they are retiring now (but at least 1 has already got a cushy job in the organisation...)

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 minutes ago
Thing is mate, I haven’t said there isn’t, if you check back.

Genuinely interested in how people arrive at their conclusions and what logic they apply, that’s all, as to me it just seems coincidental that the accusation seems to come out when a team has a perceived injustice against them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With Jon Moss and Mike Dean it is most games they ref, not just Arsenal. And don't get me started on that Aussie they brought over, probably with a huge carrot dangled in his face.

It would be really interesting to investigate how comfortable these refs are in retirement despite being apparently paid so poorly.

Honestly a life of relative luxury wouldn't surprise me if we're right on the corruption. Brown envelopes & Swiss bank accounts quite possible.

I’m still really struggling with this logic!

If it’s the people in charge, why are incompetent people more susceptible to corruption?

Since when did honesty and integrity become so linked with being good at your job? Can’t you be incompetent but honest?

Also, if it’s most games they ref, what’s the benefit for the corrupters? Are they just accepting bribes from anyone?

And if that’s the case, why are Arsenal being adversely affected by all this?!