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

[Egyptian36]

I feel sorry for Tierney. Klopp should have been nicer to him

https://tomkinstimes.substack.com/p/paul-tierney-refereeing-liverpool

[DiggerJohn]

I never believed this corruption thing. I just think Tierney isn't a very good ref. Alot of the epl refs are poor. Question what type of person grows up wanting to be a ref, players fans coaches all shouting and disrespecting you? Love Nigel Owens "come on fella this isn't football we are playing". How is rugby so different

[mikey_LFC]

I never believed this corruption thing. I just think Tierney isn't a very good ref. Alot of the epl refs are poor. Question what type of person grows up wanting to be a ref, players fans coaches all shouting and disrespecting you? Love Nigel Owens "come on fella this isn't football we are playing". How is rugby so different

Rugby is easier to ref. It’s a stop, start game with much less chaos. The rules are also more black and white, compared to the interpretation driven laws of football.

[DiggerJohn]

The ethos in rugby is different too. The officials who run the game don't tolerate dissent or diving. Fifa and uefa have never tried seriously to stop it. But that's other topic. Back to is Tierney corrupted, shite or both 🤔

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Didn’t go out of his way to fuck us up or not fuck us up? Sounds like he was doing his job. It’s possible Tierney has acknowledged some sub-conscious bias against us and tried to rein it in, because it was affecting his reputation.

Yeah that seems plausible to me.

I have noted of late that media articles had started to mention him and Liverpool and his 'spats' with Klopp on a regular basis.

If you do have bias (Unconcious or concious) and it becomes 'common knowledge' with the unwashed masses that you have a 'problem' with a certain club or player or manager than that then starts to become newsworthy.

Keeping his head down is how that felt to me - looks like he's been talking to Antony Taylor, he tends to hide his (concious or unconcious) bias by tending to not referee the game much when we play and pretty much letting everything go without too many contentious decisions. I'd rather have a ref that refs the game and not the team that's playing.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

Tierney is public enemy number 1 in this thread and the last two games he's reffed us we have had hugely important moments go in our favour. Now the imaginative, tin foil lot can talk about Lance Armstrong and how "well he's just got to be seen to be evening the decisions out hasn't he?" but the bottom line is that, if there is a deep dark conspiracy to deny us a title, or indeed the lesser charge of a wide scale subconscious anti-Liverpool bias, then Tierney is doing an awful job on the conspiracy front and a great job hiding his subconscious bias. The drop ball, the added time, these are small decisions he easily could've made with zero controversy to help ensure vital points dropped.

What united game are you referring to? I don't tend to wind myself up by watching them. Is the conspiracy not just against Liverpool then? It's pro United? They're doing great for it over the last decade aren't they? But hang on, it's also pro City. A grand Manchester alliance? I imagine if you grew up in Manchester, supporting one of the two big clubs there as you would expect,  you would probably grow up despising the other. Odd that they're suddenly brothers in arms rather than trying to mug eachother of points.

I appreciate that my tone will be called condescending and yeah, fair enough. But this really is a load of absolute cringeworthy bollocks and deserves to be treated as such. The reason I bumped the thread yesterday was because usually after, or during, a game where there are a couple of 50/50s against us it is open season on the refs. It was unusually quiet yesterday.

Football is a wonderful, head destroying sport where sometimes it feels like you get nothing from refs and sometimes you get the rub of the green. Does it even itself out? Well no not really, that's not how the world works. The spurs saga robbed us of at least a point and probably three and that overrides most contentious decisions. But you do have to accept and acknowledge that fact. You're so far down the rabbit hole that anytime we get a big call go our way there are only two possible explanations - 1. The refs are going against the conspiracy for a week to make it look like it's not really happening or 2. Actually, that was the correct decision against all my football knowledge, plus didn't you see at 22 minutes 37 seconds the ref gave them a throw in when it clearly should have been ours? The obvious answer, that refs are human and the people running VAR are wildly incompetent and struggling to get to grips with when and when not to intervene, doesn't strike you as an option.

I absolutely adore Jürgen Klopp, but I'd even go one step further here and say it's the one thing that I don't enjoy about him. He is in a bubble, obviously, in an extremely high pressure environment where he is desperate to win and often sees incompetence get in the way. I get why he gets so angry. But his haranguing of refs, the way he made it personal with Tierney I think is distasteful and has given unwelcome credence to the types of posters on here that used to just get laughed off. Back in the good old days where it was Fergie bribing them. I always thought the shout of giving a good example for kids was overdone but I coach under 10s matches and you can see the kids copying what they see on TV from the likes of Jürgen and feeling empowered to argue and shout at referees. And don't get me started on the parents. Now of course I can nip that in the bud quite easily with my own team but not every coach will. Abusing refs is so normalised at the top level and it trickles down to what is often a genuinely dangerous degree in the grassroots game. All players and managers at the top level should be setting a better example and Klopp is, IMHO, one of the worst for it.

While Im already upsetting the tin foil brigade I may as well also mention that I genuinely felt sorry for Tierney at the end yesterday. The abuse from the Forest players, staff and owner (FFS!) was actually very uncomfortable to watch on a human level. He's a bloke trying to do a pretty thankless job. He's got our coach berating him on one side and calling him out publicly to our millions of fans, and the other side also seemingly wanting his guts for garters. I'd he paid handsomely? Yes, obviously. Does he deserve that level of intimidation? Absolutely not. When we go down the road of every fanbase in the league beginning to truly believe not just that referees often make mistakes but that they are genuinely trying to harm their team, which is the position we have found ourselves in of late, the situation spirals out of control and the abuse ramps up. It's not sustainable and it will end badly one of these days.

Anyway. The reds are top of the league, it's Sunday morning, I'm having a cuddle with my little daughter who has finally decided to get some sleep. Life is good without the belief that a Manchester coalition has infiltrated the premier league with the express desire of fucking up my hopes and dreams. I would strongly recommend it.

In what way did we 'get the rub of the green' against Forest?

The biggest shouts were;

1. Penalty for us - and a pretty obvious one - ignored
2. High boot on our player - ignored
3. Penalty for them - clearly not a penalty even if you're being generous - ignored


Then we had the two dropped balls - one for Forest and one for Liverpool


Is that the bar now for 'having the rub of the green' - if you look at the raft of laughable and mind boggling decisions against us this season* then when is the last time we've had a truly 'contentious' decision going for us? It shows how little we get when we have a fucking dropped ball in our own fucking half all the way back and that's seen as everyone losing their fucking heads.


*That have been shown time and time again across many other games this season to have been absolute bollocks.

[Yorkykopite]

We both had the same thing happen to us and he dealt with it in the same way, so Forest have nothing to complain about.

Exactly! They should shut up about conspiracies and bias against their club. It makes them look ridiculous. Same with all the Li-VAR-pool stuff that gets routinely rolled out after one or two things go in our way. Those idiots conveniently forget the decisions that went against us. They isolate the ones that went in our favour and build a system out of them. Madness.

[Garlic Red]

I couldn't be happier that they are going down, I hope they stay down.

Agreed. Despicable bunch of scabs.

[Hazell]

In what way did we 'get the rub of the green' against Forest?

Yeah, I find it a bit strange how yesterday proved anything or we've gotten the 'rub of the green' and 'hugely important moments go in our favour', mainly based on the ref not giving Forest the ball back near our area. The officials also got another drop ball for us when Elliott's shot hit the Forest defender on the head. He also didn't give us a corner when Clark's shot deflected wide (and like Jenas said yesterday, who knows how the game would have gone had that happened). That's not really evidence of anything other than the officials making errors.

Amazing is all it takes is for a relatively minor decision to go for us and all hell breaks loose - not necessarily just on this thread but MoTD, Clattenburg and heaven knows who else are all up in arms.

[mikey_LFC]

Don’t know if anyone else saw it but the Jayden Danns one must have been very close to being a penalty as on our next corner Tierney called Danilo over to warn him about doing the same. I don’t get that interference from the referee at all, if it was a foul then give it, you can’t be giving them a warning on a foul in the box.

[Draex]

Amazing is all it takes is for a relatively minor decision to go for us and all hell breaks loose - not necessarily just on this thread but MoTD, Clattenburg and heaven knows who else are all up in arms.

It's a joke, this is exactly how Salah got a label as a diver and never gets a decision.

The whole Clattenburg thing is bizzare, he was interviewed on tv after the game, when you think the game has already gone, then it finds a new level of shit.

[Red Beret]

The ethos in rugby is different too. The officials who run the game don't tolerate dissent or diving. Fifa and uefa have never tried seriously to stop it. But that's other topic. Back to is Tierney corrupted, shite or both 🤔

It's quite the opposite, really. Fifa and Uefa seem to have actively encouraged diving. Sky commentators have rebranded cheating as "clever play" - except when it's us of course.

Contentious decisions create talking points, which drives clicks, media attention etc.

[Garlic Red]

Don’t know if anyone else saw it but the Jayden Danns one must have been very close to being a penalty as on our next corner Tierney called Danilo over to warn him about doing the same. I don’t get that interference from the referee at all, if it was a foul then give it, you can’t be giving them a warning on a foul in the box.

The Danns one was a foul on Danns, I think the issue was it wasn’t really near the ball or in the direction of where the ball was travelling. If he’d give it on the field they wouldn’t have intervened, but for VAR to get involved I think it would’ve had to have been clear that Danns was getting on the end of it. I had no issues with it not being given just as I didn’t have an issue with the one Gomez did not being given. They were up to that sort of stuff on every set piece, pushing players, holding players etc.

[Yorkykopite]

The biggest shouts were

1. Penalty for us - and a pretty obvious one - ignored
2. High boot on our player - ignored
3. Penalty for them - clearly not a penalty even if you're being generous - ignored


Then we had the two dropped balls - one for Forest and one for Liverpool

Andy, they weren't the biggest shouts. Not if you believe there is systematic bias or corruption in PGMOL against Liverpool. If you believe there is corruption and bias (and maybe a conspiracy) against us then the biggest shouts were:

1. The decision not to award a penalty against Joe Gomez near the end.

2. The decision not to blow the whistle and end the game after Forest cleared the corner.

The first of these would have been really harsh on Liverpool, possibly an outrage, but would not have been so 'out of the ordinary' that a corrupt PGMOL could not have plausibly defended Tierney's decision. The second was a much easier decision for Tierney. If he'd blown his whistle after the initial clearance I doubt even you would have complained!

Both were real opportunities for Tierney to ensure Liverpool dropped either two points, or possibly three. Neither was taken.

That is what needs explaining.

[mikey_LFC]

1. The decision not to award a penalty against Joe Gomez near the end.

2. The decision not to blow the whistle and end the game after Forest cleared the corner.

1. Not a single Forest player, including the player Gomez tussles with appeals for that penalty. It’s stretching to even bring it up.

2. Tierney didn’t even blow after the kick off but played a minute on more. Of course he could have blown whenever he wanted to, as he has done when we’ve been in on goal before the minimum time is up previously, but as mentioned this is only him playing to the laws. They had two bookings and a prolonged case of the keeper being down in injury time. Adding on two minutes was the minimum any ref would do.

I get the points you’re trying to make but you are quite reductionist on this subject. The Italian corruption scandal for instance was not something clear cut that every fan could see from simple decisions. It was sporadic and inconsistent with four teams done for it in the end after a sustained period. I’m sure there were Inter fans calling out their fellow supporters as conspiracy theorists at the time.

Corruption and bias doesn’t take one form.

[Fromola]

It's quite the opposite, really. Fifa and Uefa seem to have actively encouraged diving. Sky commentators have rebranded cheating as "clever play" - except when it's us of course.

Contentious decisions create talking points, which drives clicks, media attention etc.

In the 90s any 'foreigner' who came over and dived would be hounded - Klinsmann for example. It wasn't tolerated. Mourinho was the turning point once he rocked up at Chelsea with all the dark arts and was fawned over. Then all the English players started diving and that's when it was labelled 'clever'.

Liverpool have always been treated differently though. If any Liverpool player wins a contentious penalty he's automatically branded a diver. Imagine Bruno Fernandes in a Liverpool shirt and the shit he's get for his antics. And rightly so, but you're treated differently playing for them.

[Yorkykopite]

Conspiracies exist. Corruption exists. There are numerous examples of both, not just in history, but in the history of football. I don't think anyone is denying this. I certainly am not.

But pointing out that Calciopoli happened and that Lance Armstrong happened - in other words appealing to general principles instead of hard evidence to support your case - is quite telling. This is truly 'reductionist' to borrow your phrase. The thing about actual conspiracies and acts of corruption is that corroborating evidence can - and is - found. It's not enough to say Lance Armstrong's cycling was 'unusually good' and therefore he must be corrupt. It would be like saying Messi's ratio of goals per game is 'unusually good' and therefore he must be corrupt. Or that Don Bradman's batting average is 35 runs better than the second best Test cricketer in history and therefore he must also be corrupt. But that would clearly be stupid. To prove corruption there needs to be hard, corroborative evidence. There was plenty of this in Calciopoli. An absolute abundance. The same is true for Lance Armstrong.

But Calciopoli and Lance Armstrong, even though they happened, are emphatically NOT evidence that Tierney is bent. That's not how evidence works. If Tierney is bent and PGMOL is a system that is designed in part to stop Liverpool winning - as has been routinely said on these pages - you will need to find better evidence than you've got to so far. You will also need to explain little things like "Why didn't he award Gallagher a penalty in the first five minutes against Liverpool?" and "Why did he not give a penalty to Forest in the 97th minute?" And it will not be sufficient to answer "Because neither were penalties". For the whole point of corruption is that justice need not be done.

[Eeyore]

Exactly! They should shut up about conspiracies and bias against their club. It makes them look ridiculous. Same with all the Li-VAR-pool stuff that gets routinely rolled out after one or two things go in our way. Those idiots conveniently forget the decisions that went against us. They isolate the ones that went in our favour and build a system out of them. Madness.

If I was you I would ask for the data that shows it up. You don't like data though do you much easier to babble on and try and build a conspiracy strawman and then attack it.

[Yorkykopite]

If I was you I would ask for the data that shows it up. You don't like data though do you much easier to babble on and try and build a conspiracy strawman and then attack it.

I explained what I thought was going on regarding Mo Salah's data a couple or so days ago. You ignored it and preferred to babble about something else (as you always do). I'm not saying I'm right about Salah - there's no way of proving it - but I think his honesty is one of the reasons he's rarely awarded free kicks.

I've also written, in the recent past, about low-level racial prejudice amongst referees. I think it's harder for overseas players, especially brown and black-skinned ones, to get free kicks than its is for players like Grealish and Harry Kane who have established positions in the England national team. But, I admit, I can't prove this either. This is not a problem suffered exclusively by Liverpool of course. 

[jillcwhomever]

Andy, they weren't the biggest shouts. Not if you believe there is systematic bias or corruption in PGMOL against Liverpool. If you believe there is corruption and bias (and maybe a conspiracy) against us then the biggest shouts were:

1. The decision not to award a penalty against Joe Gomez near the end.

2. The decision not to blow the whistle and end the game after Forest cleared the corner.

The first of these would have been really harsh on Liverpool, possibly an outrage, but would not have been so 'out of the ordinary' that a corrupt PGMOL could not have plausibly defended Tierney's decision. The second was a much easier decision for Tierney. If he'd blown his whistle after the initial clearance I doubt even you would have complained!

Both were real opportunities for Tierney to ensure Liverpool dropped either two points, or possibly three. Neither was taken.

That is what needs explaining.

The first incident wasn't a penalty none of the Forest players appealed for it. In football nowadays every corner involves defenders and attackers holding each other's shirt, or pulling shirts or holding onto other players. It's impossible to decide what is a penalty when that's the normal situation now. 

[Pistolero]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

[Redley]

For the whole point of corruption is that justice need not be done

Which it often hasn’t been, to the point of it costing us league titles.

If a certain referee, or referees, have a history of properly dodgy decisions against us, that isn’t suddenly negated because of one or two matches where they don’t. It still exists, it still happened. And a few posters jumping in to start mocking about ‘tin foil hats’ after a drop ball going in our favour and us scoring two minutes later is even more bizarre than the media furore over the same thing.

I suspect if you take every goal we’ve conceded this season and rewind two minutes before, there’s at least a couple where you could find something to complain about that didn’t go in our favour

[Redley]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

Imagine doing that after keeping quiet over the last week when we had an ankle breaker not even given as a foul and an ‘offside goal’ disallowed which was then allowed three days later in a United game (against Forest no less). But a drop ball two minutes before a goal is where you draw the line for dodgy calls

[Eeyore]

I explained what I thought was going on regarding Mo Salah's data a couple or so days ago. You ignored it and preferred to babble about something else (as you always do). I'm not saying I'm right about Salah - there's no way of proving it - but I think his honesty is one of the reasons he's rarely awarded free kicks.

I've also written, in the recent past, about low-level racial prejudice amongst referees. I think it's harder for overseas players, especially brown and black-skinned ones, to get free kicks than its is for players like Grealish and Harry Kane who have established positions in the England national team. But, I admit, I can't prove this either. This is not a problem suffered exclusively by Liverpool of course. 

The thing is Salah gets a far more normal number of free kicks when he plays in Europe or for Egypt. So is he only honest in the Premier League.

More specifically is he only honest in games officiated by certain officials who just point blank refuse to give him a free kick.

The thing is you freely admit that referees are almost certainly biased against certain players. Tomkins has provided data that shows English attackers get free kicks and penalties at a much higher rate than foreign attackers.

He has also provided data that shows that certain officials are biased against Liverpool. You though only choose to believe one set of data.

I mean Klopp who is a wonderful human being and extremely fair has come out and stated that Tierney is biased against us.

[kavah]

Also we fucking despise the royal family and the tories.
Most folks in England do not like that

[tubby]

Who will the ref favour in the Manchester derby today?  Their darling Utd, or the team closest to us in the league?

[Eeyore]

Andy, they weren't the biggest shouts. Not if you believe there is systematic bias or corruption in PGMOL against Liverpool. If you believe there is corruption and bias (and maybe a conspiracy) against us then the biggest shouts were:

1. The decision not to award a penalty against Joe Gomez near the end.

2. The decision not to blow the whistle and end the game after Forest cleared the corner.

The first of these would have been really harsh on Liverpool, possibly an outrage, but would not have been so 'out of the ordinary' that a corrupt PGMOL could not have plausibly defended Tierney's decision. The second was a much easier decision for Tierney. If he'd blown his whistle after the initial clearance I doubt even you would have complained!

Both were real opportunities for Tierney to ensure Liverpool dropped either two points, or possibly three. Neither was taken.

That is what needs explaining.

I think a perfect example of the bias against Liverpool is that people resort to perfectly normal occurrences as a way to try and show that Liverpool are favoured.

For me the bias we are talking about a small amount of close decisions consistently going against us.

Your argument is akin to saying the house don't have an edge on a roulette wheel because every time you go red the ball doesnt end up in black.

[alonsoisared]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

that you think anyone offering any sanity on this subject is somehow just 'obsessed' with pgmol sums it up. Watch your blood pressure while you keep angering yourself over the grand conspiracy against Liverpool, what else are you into? Covid vaccines? The American election being rigged? Did man land on the moon? Spot any chemtrails this morning?

[DelTrotter]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

Yep, proper weird, barely a word to say about the team but will write enormous essays at 7am wanking over referees, it's a strange old world!

[Kashinoda]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

As soon as the game ended this thread had people calling Tiearny a wanker who gave us nothing

Probably been more posts on here than the actual game thread. None of you are capable of enjoying it, last time I bother sticking my head in here. Life's way too short

[alonsoisared]

Imagine doing that after keeping quiet over the last week when we had an ankle breaker not even given as a foul and an ‘offside goal’ disallowed which was then allowed three days later in a United game (against Forest no less). But a drop ball two minutes before a goal is where you draw the line for dodgy calls

be as snarky as you like, nobhead. You've spent a lot of time talking about bias. I'll give you a clue. You are a Liverpool fan. When you watch united or city you are deeply biased hoping they lose. A decision goes their way, you're gutted, you get annoyed, you use it as evidence of corruption. Same as when decisions go against Liverpool. That's the crux of it. If you're that devastated by it, why bother with footie at all? Get outside, get a new hobby.

Yep, proper weird, barely a word to say about the team but will write enormous essays at 7am wanking over referees, it's a strange old world!

I've had a lot to say about the team. Apologies for trying to add thoughtful posts to the forum. Next time I'll just fit in with whatever you want. "Shit ref wasn't it?" It'll be a much more interesting read then. What have you added to the place with your 12000 posts in five years? Not even bothered making a little contribution to the sites upkeep. Good on you.

[Garlic Red]

Who will the ref favour in the Manchester derby today?  Their darling Utd, or the team closest to us in the league?

Probably United, that offside last season when Rashford left it for Fernandes was as bent a call as you’ll see in the sport.

[DelTrotter]

I've had a lot to say about the team. Apologies for trying to add thoughtful posts to the forum. Next time I'll just fit in with whatever you want. "Shit ref wasn't it?" It'll be a much more interesting read then. What have you added to the place with your 12000 posts in five years? Not even bothered making a little contribution to the sites upkeep. Good on you.

Ahh yes, your beautiful posts calling people a "knobhead" or some snide shit about vaccines, how incredibly thoughtful and interesting. Maybe one day you can defend Darwin "not good enough to start for us" Nunez as passionately as you do fans chanting shit at our supporters or Paul Tierney.

[Redley]

be as snarky as you like, nobhead. You've spent a lot of time talking about bias. I'll give you a clue. You are a Liverpool fan.

What was snarky? You’re as bad as the ‘tin foil hat’ brigade. Your argument is literally the same, you’re jumping on a ‘dodgy’ decision going for us as evidence that nothing untoward is going on. That’s literally the same as people on the other side jumping on a ‘dodgy’ decision going against us as evidence that something untoward is.

And you keep talking about blood pressure, calling people knobheads, covid vaccine nonsense and questioning people’s sanity so not sure you can really preach about being snarky mate, it’s not that deep.

[tubby]

Imagine - after a monumental, potentially season defining victory like that - you're first instinct being to camp out on here writing chapter and verse in defence of the PGMOL......fcukin obsessed doesn't come close ...

Thinking there's no corruption =/= defending the PGMOL.  I don't think there's anyone on RAWK who doesn't think the refs are shit.

[mikey_LFC]

that you think anyone offering any sanity on this subject is somehow just 'obsessed' with pgmol sums it up. Watch your blood pressure while you keep angering yourself over the grand conspiracy against Liverpool, what else are you into? Covid vaccines? The American election being rigged? Did man land on the moon? Spot any chemtrails this morning?

I don’t disagree with some of what you’ve written in here, but I’d say even for the purposes of exaggeration comparing the suggestion of corruption in football to anti-science nonsense is in bad taste.

[Hazell]

I don’t disagree with some of what you’ve written in here, but I’d say even for the purposes of exaggeration comparing the suggestion of corruption in football to anti-science nonsense is in bad taste.

There's been corruption in football in Italy and France, Barcelona have been charged with corruption over the past year. Not saying there's definitive corruption in England but I find it a bit strange that anyone who thinks it's a possibility is dismissed as a loon, given what we know football and other sports. For what it's worth, I don't think there is anything close to Calciopoli or anything like that going on.

[Pistolero]

that you think anyone offering any sanity on this subject is somehow just 'obsessed' with pgmol sums it up. Watch your blood pressure while you keep angering yourself over the grand conspiracy against Liverpool, what else are you into? Covid vaccines? The American election being rigged? Did man land on the moon? Spot any chemtrails this morning?

Fuck me, talk about projecting 😂....I think it's you who needs to watch the arle blood pressure son... bouncing around like Darren Till in Slaters, shouting the odds and spitting insults cos you had the piss taken out of one of your thread bumping essays 😁... have a biscuit and watch Escape To The Country...

[HARD AS HELL]

Just dropped in to see if anyone is still pedalling the conspiracy theory. Yep, they still are - absolutely laughable.

[Eeyore]

Thinking there's no corruption =/= defending the PGMOL.  I don't think there's anyone on RAWK who doesn't think the refs are shit.

Do you think Dean not sending his mate to the screen was not corrupt. Or Clattenberg evening up a decision because his lino made a mistake is not corrupt behaviour.

Or how about Mason basically getting sacked for being completely inept then months later being given a role coaching refs.

Or my favourite match officials being allowed to go and referee games for the owners of Premier League clubs.

Or the PM intervening to allow the Newcastle takeover to go through. Or the Premier League not interving when Newcastle owners admitted that were state owned in a court case.