I must say Eeyore I'd admire you even more than I do now if you gave RAWK a holiday, stopped visiting all these other football fan forums, and dedicated yourself to the task of getting your theory out in the wide world. Get it published!
If I were as absolutely convinced as you are that there was a massive and systematic conspiracy against Liverpool (and any other club whose manager complains about referring standards), and I honestly thought I had the evidence to back it up, I'd write up my results and send the article or the book to a magazine or book publisher.
If I can anticipate you for a moment, there's no point saying that no publisher or newspaper would carry such a report. Of course they would, if it was convincing. You might even get a substantial wedge of green coming your way, not to mention numerous invites to appear on radio, podcasts, and even TV. We're talking about something which affects millions of people after all, and which involves billions of pounds. And everyone in the publishing trade loves a controversy.
So stop wasting your time on here and turn your face to the world. You have the facts, you have the theories, and you certainly have the evangelical spirt. Do something!
Boom the Yorky trademark exaggerated Strawman.
Except I am not arguing that and never have. Time and time again I have said that I believe two things.
1. That individual referees are human and have conscious and subconscious biases that play out in their officiating of Football. Furthermore for a number of reasons. Such as the predominance of Manchester officials. The predominance of ex Police officers running the PGMOL. The politics of the City and being anti-monarchy, anti-establishment and the anthesis of the people in charge of the PGMOL. Then we have far more reasons for an official to be biased against us.
2. That the PGMOL is a backwards, dreadfully run and corrupt organisation. An organisation that closes ranks and backs each other to the hilt. An organisation whose natural reaction is to react against criticism by doubling down on those who criticise them. An organisation that likes to show how strong it is by looking to punish those who criticise it. A thoroughly corrupt vindictive shit show of an organisation.
Unfortunately, you quite simply refuse to argue against those two points. Instead you either cherry-pick one line of a post or create bizarre over exaggerated strawmen.
Instead of doing that please explain what is wrong with points 1 and 2.
Recent Posts