Topic: The corruption fallacy - they’re all out to get us!

[BoRed]

Liverpool will win this league if they’re good enough.

The corruption stuff has been argued to death here already, so I'm not getting into it, but even without corruption this bit is blatantly not true. You can accept that every single refereeing error has been an honest mistake, but they can still decide a league title no matter how good you are.

I personally think we were good enough not only in 2018/19 and 2021/22, but also in 2008/09 and 2013/14, yet we didn't win the league on any of those occasions. Like I said, honest mistakes or not, you can't deny that Howard Webb's efforts, Sterling's offside at City or Rodri's handball at Everton not being given had a lot to do with us "not being good enough" to win those titles.

[Armand9]

Calciopoli

Just because one conspiracy of a corrupt high profile major league proves true (Italy in this case) - discovered totally by accident by the way - doesn't mean all conspiracies regarding high profile major leagues is true.

Just because governing officiating bodies/high placed individuals in control of those leagues across the world have been proven to be corrupt in courts of law doesn't mean all conspiracies regarding those organisations are true.

However, not considering the possibility of corruption in the face of officiating a child wouldn't get wrong is a bit like putting your hands over your eyes and thinking no one can see you. Every conspiracy proved true relied on people not entertaining such a possibilty, that even entertaining such a thing is childish and the purview of the tin hat brigade. Grow up people, we wouldn't fabricate a reason to start a war, heaven forbid, that would involved killing people. Puts kicking a football around in a billion dollar industry and the possibility that not all is above board into perspective.

Just because conspiracies prove true doesn't prove them all, just because some are foolish doesn't mean they're all foolish.

To not consider the possibility does, however, appear very foolish. Does corruption exist in our league? It would be more surprising if there wasn't. What we don't know is at what level and to what purpose. Is it like the Italian model for the benefit of particular teams or just for financial gain regardless of football concerns or something we haven't even considered?

I do agree 'growing up' is needed. A child rejects an obvious reality cos he doesn't want it to be true. If that involved something they love even more reason to reject any possibility that something is awry. In fact, nefarious practices often rely on someone's emotions to blind them to the obvious because the truth would be so damaging to them personally. Imagine if the worse case scenario was true and the sport someone's life revolves around proved to be corrupt in favour of certain teams, it would truly be utterly devastating to many many people.

Yep, we could do with some growing up to the state of our game.

[CHOPPER]

The corruption stuff has been argued to death here already, so I'm not getting into it, but even without corruption this bit is blatantly not true. You can accept that every single refereeing error has been an honest mistake, but they can still decide a league title no matter how good you are.

I personally think we were good enough not only in 2018/19 and 2021/22, but also in 2008/09 and 2013/14, yet we didn't win the league on any of those occasions. Like I said, honest mistakes or not, you can't deny that Howard Webb's efforts, Sterling's offside at City or Rodri's handball at Everton not being given had a lot to do with us "not being good enough" to win those titles.

I agree.

We can only truly control the things we have influence on, beyond that, there is fuck all we can do.... and that goes from the Diaz shit show, to the none given penalty against Arsenal. In both games we had enough chances within our own influence, to win the game handsomely, but we never.
Sometimes I find the cry-arsing abar refs is only hiding from the real issue of Liverpool not taking the game and influence it to get the outcome we want, which is a win.

[jepovic]

Anyone who has read the several articles by Tomkins Times can see for a fact that we get worse refereeing decisions that any other club.

No-one can see inside another person's mind (or bank accounts usually) so we can't know if it's corruption or bias, and if bias whether it is unconscious or not, but there's so many stats that Paul Tomkins has uncovered based on objective data that prove something untoward is going on.

Tierney for example is shockingly biased against us, and I refuse to believe that it can possibly be unconscious, it's far too consistent. The same went for Martin Atkinson, he must have known what he was doing.


https://tomkinstimes.com/2022/01/liverpool-shocking-penalty-and-var-facts-dont-fit-hysterical-media-narrative/

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/referees-treat-lfc-very-differently

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/objective-data-liverpool-are-refereed

https://tomkinstimes.com/2020/10/martin-atkinsons-bias-against-liverpool-its-in-the-stats-and-anecdotes/

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/detailed-analysis-the-alarming-abnormal

I think theres solid evidence that LFC is getting shafted by the refs, and the Manchester clubs get advantages.
However, that could be explained by more mundane things than conspiracies or direct payments.
The most obvious explanation is that PGMOL is run by mancs

[Bobsackamano]

Fully agree. The fact that every team has a large section of fans who think the powers at be are out to get their club should be the biggest clue. Either us as Liverpool fans are uniquely correct amongst all the the sets of fans that think the game is corrupt against us or us as Liverpool fans are just like every other set of fans, we have a section who are prone to conspiracy thinking when circumstances go against us. The odds are massively on the latter.

Everton fans should act like the canary in the coalmine for Liverpool fans, nothing good can come from focusing too heavily on our misfortunes.

Have you been in the company of any fans of other clubs when they are going on about things going against them and all the conspiracy stuff that goes along with it? They actually start to sound a bit mad and it's also so fucking boring as well. Don't think that we don't sound exactly like that to other people when we go on about this and that decision that's gone against us.

[rob1966]

I agree.

We can only truly control the things we have influence on, beyond that, there is fuck all we can do.... and that goes from the Diaz shit show, to the none given penalty against Arsenal. In both games we had enough chances within our own influence, to win the game handsomely, but we never.
Sometimes I find the cry-arsing abar refs is only hiding from the real issue of Liverpool not taking the game and influence it to get the outcome we want, which is a win.

There's truth in that, but that has also been the media narrative over the Burnley game, saying we scored in the 6th but then it took until the 90th to win the game, totally missing the two perfectly good goals that were ruled out. While technically Mo was off and obstructing, there is no fucking way an off the ball, two handed push into the back, isn't a foul and therefore a penalty.

The ref to the cryarsing cheats in 2005 was best "I could have disallowed the goal, but then I'd have given a penalty and sent your keeper off" The ref should have applied that logic on Tuesday, pen and defender red carded

[Fitzy.]

Fully agree. The fact that every team has a large section of fans who think the powers at be are out to get their club should be the biggest clue. Either us as Liverpool fans are uniquely correct amongst all the the sets of fans that think the game is corrupt against us or us as Liverpool fans are just like every other set of fans, we have a section who are prone to conspiracy thinking when circumstances go against us. The odds are massively on the latter.

Everton fans should act like the canary in the coalmine for Liverpool fans, nothing good can come from focusing too heavily on our misfortunes.

Have you been in the company of any fans of other clubs when they are going on about things going against them and all the conspiracy stuff that goes along with it? They actually start to sound a bit mad and it's also so fucking boring as well. Don't think that we don't sound exactly like that to other people when we go on about this and that decision that's gone against us.

Fan bias is a blinding thing. We struggle to see beyond ourselves. Just consider how convinced rivals are when they say “LiVARpool”. It’s obvious nonsense.

[naYoRHa2b]

I see it as combination of bias and ineptitude.

It's hard to get away from the tinfoil hat brigade though sometimes especially the more influential ones on social media and forums.

[Fitzy.]

There's truth in that, but that has also been the media narrative over the Burnley game, saying we scored in the 6th but then it took until the 90th to win the game, totally missing the two perfectly good goals that were ruled out. While technically Mo was off and obstructing, there is no fucking way an off the ball, two handed push into the back, isn't a foul and therefore a penalty.

The ref to the cryarsing cheats in 2005 was best "I could have disallowed the goal, but then I'd have given a penalty and sent your keeper off" The ref should have applied that logic on Tuesday, pen and defender red carded

They weren’t perfectly good goals in the truest sense. Diaz’s was obviously. Burnley was unfortunate, but the Elliott one is clearly debatable. It’s not cut and dry.

[Chakan]

Fan bias is a blinding thing. We struggle to see beyond ourselves. Just consider how convinced rivals are when they say “LiVARpool”. It’s obvious nonsense.

Of course it is, because we are supporters, but when evidence mounts up to show that officials contain the same bias then what's it then?

[Fitzy.]

Of course it is, because we are supporters, but when evidence mounts up to show that officials contain the same bias then what's it then?

Evidence is a spurious claim here. It’s guesswork, building a case with selective eyes. There isn’t - yet - a smoking gun to prove that dark forces operate against Liverpool Football Club.

[Chakan]

Evidence is a spurious claim here. It’s guesswork, building a case with selective eyes. There isn’t - yet - a smoking gun to prove that dark forces operate against Liverpool Football Club.

I think Tomkins has shown quite clearly that we get a lot of bad decisions against us no?  That's not bias?

[Fitzy.]

I think Tomkins has shown quite clearly that we get a lot of bad decisions against us no?  That's not bias?

I don’t think it’s systemic corruption. No grand plan. I think it’s fallibility.

[Chakan]

I don’t think it’s systemic corruption. No grand plan. I think it’s fallibility.

So it just keeps happening over and over and over again, but hey that just means it's a mistake every time? I mean if that's your position then fair play.

[Draex]

There is far too much incompetence for it not to be bias at best, corruption at worse.

Especially when you see refs going on all expenses paid jollys to the middle eastern countries on a regular basis. As others have said if you think the likes of City wouldn't bribe refs as they sit with 115 charges of blatent cheating hovering over their head like a Saudi executioner you are utterly naive.

[Bobsackamano]

Fan bias is a blinding thing. We struggle to see beyond ourselves. Just consider how convinced rivals are when they say “LiVARpool”. It’s obvious nonsense.

We are pattern seeking beings, seeing patterns and acting on it has kept us safe and led to human progress for thousands of years, it's hard wired. However unlike Edward Jenner, who used his pattern seeking skill to lead him from the clear skin of Milk Maids to a small pox vaccine, we are mainly using to instigate heated debates about the probity of Simon Hooper and Liverpool's use of asthma puffers.

[MonsLibpool]

The corruption stuff has been argued to death here already, so I'm not getting into it, but even without corruption this bit is blatantly not true. You can accept that every single refereeing error has been an honest mistake, but they can still decide a league title no matter how good you are.

I personally think we were good enough not only in 2018/19 and 2021/22, but also in 2008/09 and 2013/14, yet we didn't win the league on any of those occasions. Like I said, honest mistakes or not, you can't deny that Howard Webb's efforts, Sterling's offside at City or Rodri's handball at Everton not being given had a lot to do with us "not being good enough" to win those titles.

I think people  underestimate the impact poor refereeing decisions have on momentum.  For example, if we got the stonewall pen for a foul on Naby Keita in 2019, we would have gone on to win it because winning that game would have restored the 7-point lead we had going into the City game. See Walker's reaction as evidence of how relieved they were.

1n 20/21, many bad calls were made to kill our momentum and make sure that we didn't retain it.

In 21/22, a blatant handball was ignored. If City dropped points there, we would have overtaken them.

This season, we almost ALWAYS get screwed over when we need a win to go top. See the Spurs, Brighton,  Arsenal and Sheffield games.

I'm no conspiracy theorist but the consistent and systematically dodgy decisions indicate that the league is corrupt.

[Fitzy.]

So it just keeps happening over and over and over again, but hey that just means it's a mistake every time? I mean if that's your position then fair play.

What’s the reason decisions go in our favour? Konate against Everton - should have been sent off really. Soft pen against West Ham this season. Ayew sent off for a soft second yellow. Trent avoiding red at St James in August. We could pick the bones of these decisions and say they were correct, but some say it’s because the refs are pro-LFC. Which is nonsense, but there’s a whole Twitter universe dedicated to showing favourable outcomes for Liverpool. I hate it. I can’t bare it but it exists.


Fallibility and ineptitude is the best explanation.

[kasperoff]

I'm not having it. Several clubs are owned by nation states where money for some people is used as toilet paper. Betting syndicates worth billions are pouring even more money into the sport. The head of fucking FIFA was investigated for bribery just a few short years ago.

It's corrupt to the core.

Came here to say exactly this. Not to mentioned it's generally accepted that Alex Ferguson had the refs in his pocket. We also had he Calciopoli scandal in Italy. We know for a fact influence, bias and outright corruption has existed in the game. It's not some madman's conspiracy. There is a precedence.

I'd say at the very least what we see is a bias against Liverpool, unconscious or otherwise. The handballs as recently as the last few weeks are a great example. Decisions against us usually involve brining out the rule book to justify, often on some obscure subsection. Against City it's conveniently forgotten about and the "refs are human" excuse comes out.

The Man Utd and Arsenal penalties are as blatant as it gets.

[BoRed]

What’s the reason decisions go in our favour? Konate against Everton - should have been sent off really. Soft pen against West Ham this season. Ayew sent off for a soft second yellow. Trent avoiding red at St James in August. We could pick the bones of these decisions and say they were correct, but some say it’s because the refs are pro-LFC. Which is nonsense, but there’s a whole Twitter universe dedicated to showing favourable outcomes for Liverpool. I hate it. I can’t bare it but it exists.


Fallibility and ineptitude is the best explanation.

I'm happy to accept that there is no anti-Liverpool agenda and that everything that happens on the pitch during games is simply ineptitude. Even so, I'm still prepared to call everything that happens off the pitch after the on-the-pitch ineptitude corruption. The lack of accountability, the lack of consequences, essentially mates covering up for mates, it's the definition of corruption, and it's what makes PGMOL a corrupt organisation.

So there's a fallacy in the thread title, it can be corrpution without them all being out to get us (or anyone else, for that matter).

[Lone Star Red]

Maybe we should grow up a bit. Defeat is part of sport. It’s not always about you and your team - Liverpool will win this league if they’re good enough. That’s it.

That’ll be hard for many on here to read but it’s perfectly put.

[Dim Glas]

I don’t believe there is corruption, but there is a problem with bias from certain refs. I don’t know how you can explain Paul Tierney’s games reffing Liverpool any other way than that he has a serious hatred/problem with the club and very likely the club’s manager.

having an independent governing body of officials that isn’t a closed shop would help in cases like this, as the club has legitiamte reason to ask for him to be removed from reffing duties, at a league level, not just for Liverpool.

[darragh85]

i believe there is corruption. ofc there is with the amount of power behind manchester city.

the fact that VAR officials were brought out to officiate in Abu Dhabi  and the mainstream media said little or nothing about it says it all to me. Its all bought and paid for. media, referees etc. 

i am convinced that we only won the league in 2020 because we were miles better than the rest that season and VAR was new and was actually being implemented correctly.

[Red Beret]

Anyone who has read the several articles by Tomkins Times can see for a fact that we get worse refereeing decisions that any other club.

No-one can see inside another person's mind (or bank accounts usually) so we can't know if it's corruption or bias, and if bias whether it is unconscious or not, but there's so many stats that Paul Tomkins has uncovered based on objective data that prove something untoward is going on.

Tierney for example is shockingly biased against us, and I refuse to believe that it can possibly be unconscious, it's far too consistent. The same went for Martin Atkinson, he must have known what he was doing.


https://tomkinstimes.com/2022/01/liverpool-shocking-penalty-and-var-facts-dont-fit-hysterical-media-narrative/

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/referees-treat-lfc-very-differently

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/objective-data-liverpool-are-refereed

https://tomkinstimes.com/2020/10/martin-atkinsons-bias-against-liverpool-its-in-the-stats-and-anecdotes/

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/detailed-analysis-the-alarming-abnormal

This is it for me.

I know we can all disappear up our own arses sometimes when referencing stats, but there comes a point where we have to acknowledge a statistical bias. When does something stop being an aberration and become statistically significant?

Of course, stats only tell part of the story. They can show statistical bias is a thing, but not identify the underlying cause. That's where the shouts of corruption come in. What's the reason for the bias? People point out that referees are human and make mistakes. Well if they can make mistakes then they can be deliberate about it as well - because that is also human.

As match officials they are supposed to be impartial. Naked stats suggest this is not the case, but it is an incomplete answer. Anything beyond that is speculation. My own previously stated belief is an anti city-of-Liverpool prejudice, that just happens to manifest itself most obviously in football.

[jepovic]

What’s the reason decisions go in our favour? Konate against Everton - should have been sent off really. Soft pen against West Ham this season. Ayew sent off for a soft second yellow. Trent avoiding red at St James in August. We could pick the bones of these decisions and say they were correct, but some say it’s because the refs are pro-LFC. Which is nonsense, but there’s a whole Twitter universe dedicated to showing favourable outcomes for Liverpool. I hate it. I can’t bare it but it exists.


Fallibility and ineptitude is the best explanation.

I think we get better treatment when we play smaller clubs, as big clubs do.
So I can see why fans of smaller clubs get annoyed about our complaints.
The decisions against us have often come against the bigger teams.

[Historical Fool]

I think we get better treatment when we play smaller clubs, as big clubs do.
So I can see why fans of smaller clubs get annoyed about our complaints.
The decisions against us have often come against the bigger teams.

Home advantage maybe?

[Fitzy.]

How would you describe the Hillsborough cover up?

I think this is an unfair question that - in all good faith - doesn’t belong in this level of debate.

[Eeyore]

I think this is an unfair question that - in all good faith - doesn’t belong in this level of debate.

The problem though is that the people who are officiating games grew up at a time when Liverpool FC and its fans were blamed for Hillsborough. There are clear stereotypes about people and teams from Liverpool which for me leads to conscious and subconscious bias.

We are talking about marginal decisions here where a persons bias against or dislike of a team can very easily cloud their judgement.

I have watched Liverpool prior to the likes of Heysel and Hillsborough, Thatcher's attack on the City, tragedy chanting and shite like 'feed the scousers' and there has been a clear seachange in the way we are refereed.

I think it is hard to argue that there is a substantial section of the population who have a dislike of Liverpool FC. This is then compounded by an abundance of referees from Manchester.   

[MonsLibpool]

This is it for me.

I know we can all disappear up our own arses sometimes when referencing stats, but there comes a point where we have to acknowledge a statistical bias. When does something stop being an aberration and become statistically significant?

Of course, stats only tell part of the story. They can show statistical bias is a thing, but not identify the underlying cause. That's where the shouts of corruption come in. What's the reason for the bias? People point out that referees are human and make mistakes. Well if they can make mistakes then they can be deliberate about it as well - because that is also human.

As match officials they are supposed to be impartial. Naked stats suggest this is not the case, but it is an incomplete answer. Anything beyond that is speculation. My own previously stated belief is an anti city-of-Liverpool prejudice, that just happens to manifest itself most obviously in football.

It's not a case of them making "honest " mistakes. The refereeing errors that have cost us are blatant and incomprehensible.

[Red Beret]

It's not a case of them making "honest " mistakes. The refereeing errors that have cost us are blatant and incomprehensible.

That's the point I'm trying to make. I know the argument is you can use stats to prove anything, but those dug out by Tomkins suggest a definite bias. It's not a blip, or random, or a figment of LFC fans' imagination. The only question is whether these "errors" are deliberate, or what the general underlying reason might be.

And as I said, most fanbases seem united by a universal loathing for all things LFC. Does that suggest a referee is going to come under far less scrutiny for making mistakes against us, which in turn makes mistakes more likely to happen? A lax attitude along the lines of "meh, it's only Liverpool"?

Or are refs deliberately fucking us over because they are unable to be impartial and know they won't get much flak for screwing us over? They seemed pretty shocked when we finally kicked off and demanded accountability after the Spurs debacle, for example.

[wolves76]

I have for years thought that Liverpool have struggled to get decisions especially at Anfield and especially against the so called weaker domestic teams. This goes back to around the time of Suarez as I recall. I stopped watching LFC in about 2013 because of it and follow it now through RAWK, twitter and watch highlights. It seemed to me that our team would struggle to get free kicks while oppositon players would play for free kicks and regulary get them. I dont believe this is a fallacy and of course while there are exceptions to the general rule as a whole I believe that this bias exists.

[Huyrob]

How does PGMOL square the situation with Elliot’s goal, giving Mo as offside and interfering with play…….against the City v Fulham Ake goal where Haaland was standing offside in front of the keeper and jumped over the ball ….goal given. We just need even a smattering of consistency which is absent.

[DangerScouse]

The problem though is that the people who are officiating games grew up at a time when Liverpool FC and its fans were blamed for Hillsborough. There are clear stereotypes about people and teams from Liverpool which for me leads to conscious and subconscious bias.

We are talking about marginal decisions here where a persons bias against or dislike of a team can very easily cloud their judgement.

I have watched Liverpool prior to the likes of Heysel and Hillsborough, Thatcher's attack on the City, tragedy chanting and shite like 'feed the scousers' and there has been a clear seachange in the way we are refereed.

I think it is hard to argue that there is a substantial section of the population who have a dislike of Liverpool FC. This is then compounded by an abundance of referees from Manchester.   

A very valid point and plausible argument as to why their could be inxecusable but inherent biases against the club.

[Dr. Beaker]

I have for years thought that Liverpool have struggled to get decisions especially at Anfield and especially against the so called weaker domestic teams. This goes back to around the time of Suarez as I recall. I stopped watching LFC in about 2013 because of it and follow it now through RAWK, twitter and watch highlights. It seemed to me that our team would struggle to get free kicks while oppositon players would play for free kicks and regulary get them. I dont believe this is a fallacy and of course while there are exceptions to the general rule as a whole I believe that this bias exists.

Well, the beachball goal goes back to 2009 if my memory is correct. No other team has suffered a beachball or a Diaz incident.

[darragh85]

to be honest i think its more to do with the power and influence of citys' owners than anything to do with Hillsborough and legacy bias from that. I think that was a factor in the past but less so now as most intelligent people realise what actually happened.

you have to try and remove yourself from the mindset of a genuine football supporter who cares about the sport and its integrity and stop thinking that everyone thinks like this. There are many, many people involved in the sport now that couldnt give a damn about these things. they see it as something for the peasants to worry about while they leech as much money from the sport as possible. They couldnt care less who wins or loses. Most important thing is that the people looking after them stay on top.

If you are an average referee, who is likely a narcisstic type of individual in the first place and only cares about number one, and you are being taken on junkets to Abu Dhabi to officiate in their league, are you going to be biased in a certain way when officiating games? I wont paint all of them with the same brush but there are fair few referees in England who are only in it to be seen and for the little bit of fame they get. The likes of Mark Clattenburg and Paul Tierney fit the bill here.

If you are a journalist and also lavished with nice gifts , are you going to write anything about abovementioned refereeing junkets to Abu Dhabi?

people are debating whether there is actual corruption. What ive mentioned above did actually happen and is corrupt so the answer is absolutely Yes.

[Gili Gulu]

Most of us will remember a while ago Jurgen complained that United had received more penalties in 2 and a half years under Solskjaer than Liverpool had in 5 years under Klopp. The following was the result of a statistical analysis by Paul Tomkins



There is no other possible explanation for this other than consistent bias against Liverpool FC, and for Manchester United.
This is based solely on objective data.

United received 25% of the penalties given to the six most successful teams, by far the most, despite have the second worst record of having the ball in the opponents penalty area.

Liverpool received the second lowest number of penalties despite having the second best record of touches of the ball in the penalty area.

This is the period covering the prime years of Sadio Mane and Mo Salah careers.

When this was pointed out by Jurgen, all of a sudden the number of penalties given to United declined to such an extent that Solskjaer complained about it in the press. The fact that there was a decline is definite proof that bias of officials exists and was materially affecting teams' results.

[MonsLibpool]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12553889/ref-watch-dermot-gallagher-gives-verdict-on-the-controversial-penalty-appeal-for-handball-by-rodri-vs-everton

City about to hand the initiative to Liverpool and bottle it after holding an 11-point lead then this happened.  Is this a honest mistake or is it corruption?

Someone should provide a logical explanation. To remind you, they won it by a grand total of 1 point.

In 18/19

City lost to Newcastle and if we beat Leicester, we were definitely going to win it:
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/referee-var-keita-liverpool-penalty-15758661
https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liverpool-vs-leicester-harry-maguire-15757512

In 20/21
We were very confident and City were struggling.  I guess that justified VAR screwing us over, right?
https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_/id/37587139/how-var-decisions-affected-every-premier-league-club-2020-21
https://www.thisisanfield.com/2021/05/liverpool-had-the-most-var-decisions-go-against-them-this-season/

I'd love someone to explain these decisions 

[Eeyore]

to be honest i think its more to do with the power and influence of citys' owners than anything to do with Hillsborough and legacy bias from that. I think that was a factor in the past but less so now as most intelligent people realise what actually happened.

Football is about tribalism though.

The Hillsborough report was published on the 12 of September 2012. Far from accepting what happened that weekend Man United visited Wigan and spent the entire game chanting 'Always the victims, it's never your fault'

Far from accepting it there is a huge amount of football fans from Manchester that have doubled down on their hatred of Liverpool and accused Liverpool fans of 'victimhood' after the overturning of the Hillsborough verdict.

So what are you likely to get from an organisation led by an ex-South Yorkshire Police officer and manned by so many Manchester-based officials?

[Son of Spion]

I think the bottom line is we all know there is corruption in football, and we all know that all human beings are prone to bias, including officials in football. The only real argument is over to what extent, if any, this affects what happens on the field of play.

[JRed]

I am 100% certain that the PL officials are corrupt. I have no doubts about it. It’s just far easier to believe that than to believe that trained professionals are completely inept.