We are already seen as the enemy, the upstarts who cause problems. I know that’s an unfair label but it’s how the authorities in the game view us. So I’m not sure public outcry or a threat of legal action would help at all. Their Manchester and London based darlings would just get ever more luckier and we’d be ever more hard done by.
1 Like
If that is true, then it’s even more a reason for the club and it’s people to stand their ground.
2 Likes
The more you tell people how unreasonable they are being the more unreasonable they become. You either have to make them see it for themselves or hope the whole thing gets ripped up and restarted which is what needs to happen here. Ex refs have spoken about how they do their homework etc so one reason Kane would have got away with it was how long since he was last sent off. But now it’s going to be even longer so next time there’s even less chance of him being sent off. And after that less so an so on. This is where the media is so powerful at creating a bias. If certain players are pegged as divers for embellishments on real fouls they are more likely to get a card than a player labelled “intelligent” for going over and forcing a foul by leaving a trailing leg. And then the “diver” is more likely to be ignored when hitting the deck in the future and the “intelligent” player more likely to be believed based on past decisions.
2 Likes
Just seen the decision in the Newcastle v City game in this summary:
How the fuck is that not a penalty for Newcastle?
8 Likes
I kind of half buy the “oh shit we’ve been too easy giving penalties out” one week leading to less penalties the following week… if it weren’t for nearly always giving advantage to the same sides and harming the same sides.
Last week it was City getting a ridiculously soft penalty against Wolves for “handball” to help them this week its City getting a ridiculously lax no penalty due to being off the ball (bullshit rules) and Jota not getting a cast iron penalty for err stopping? What?!?! Literally everything benefitting certain teams and harming other certain teams.
2 Likes
This is a good article.
3 Likes
I’m in work my future financial stability probably can’t handle me getting too angry… is that article safe to read? I feel like it wouldn’t be safe!
you can put the shovel down, besides if you try to hit a horse with a shovel it will kick you
So that’s his reward for his utter shit-show yesterday? Well done Kavanagh and PGMOL.
1 Like
Gaslit By Opaque and Shady PGMOL Who Make Up Surreal Excuses To Hide Mistakes
PGMOL Are Bringing the Game Into Disrepute
2 hr ago [4](javascript:void(0))
This is the newsletter version of a free piece on The Tomkins Times. The article can be debated there by paying TTT subscribers, who get to read paywalled articles too.
PGMOL Are Bringing the Game Into Disrepute
Really, the PGMOL and its spineless little leader, the toady Mike Riley, have really jumped the shark this time.
According to them, if you make a 100%-clear red-card foul but it doesn’t injure someone because they took split-second evasive action to save themselves, then all is fine. Nothing to see here.
And, if you break your stride when about to shoot with a clear-cut chance to score and someone barrels into you from the side to totally take you out, you’re not due a penalty as you slowed down, as if a) that makes a difference in most cases, and b) you can easily shoot while running at full-tilt, as Jürgen Klopp pointed out.
(As Klopp towers over all these generally little pale grey men, it’s like they feel emasculated, and need to try and get back at him somehow.)
To adjust your feet to shoot you need to break your stride in some way, and the closer to the keeper, the closer the control has to be, too (which also slows you down). Also, to look at the keeper or gather your bearings slows you down. The aim is not to run with the ball at full-speed over the end-line, like in other sports, but to take a shot at goal.
And if you’re not one of those players who gets sent off – because the referees research the kinds of players who should be sent off – then that’s proof that you should not be sent off. Your innocence becomes self-perpetuating. If a banker is never arrested for fraud, year after year of committing fraud, that proves he’s not the kind of guy who should be arrested for fraud. It’s simple – indeed, it’s IQ levels below 80.
Three stances from referees and ex-referees in the aftermath of just one game; a game that drew parallels, to me, to the Formula One farce in that most people could see that the officiating stank, favouritism was involved, and it ruined the outcome. (I gave up on Formula One 20 years ago and don’t regret it.)
The dullard Peter Walton in The Times, offered this utter guff – but it what later seemed to be the genuine stance from the PGMOL.
“What saves the England striker is that Robertson’s foot was not planted. The Liverpool man’s raised leg limited the force of the tackle and convinced Tierney that there was no serious foul play. Both a booking and a red card are justifiable, therefore the referee did not make a clear and obvious error, and VAR was correct not to intervene.”
(Walton was right to later point out the inconsistent application of VAR, but he often just toes the party line and contorts himself into excuses.)
Then, Walton – who sounds like the kind of mid-ranking officious person who was never quite sharp enough to think analytically – follows it with admittance of prejudicial thinking. If you’re “that kind of player” who does something that looks like a foul you’ll be sent off, but if you’re “not that kind of player” who puts in a leg-breaker, but never gets sent-off (being England’s star man and captain playing a huge role in this too), then you can act with impunity.
“Referees do study players and formations ahead of a game. They are aware that certain players need to be dealt with proactively. Kane does not fall into this category. It has been more than ten years since his last red card — for Leyton Orient away to Huddersfield Town in League One.”
Harry Kane thought it was a “good, strong tackle”, but he’s also a bit thick, and has been known to claim goals when he wasn’t even on the pitch. That he contradicts the video evidence sums up just how untrustworthy he is; he can’t even admit it was a bit late and try to minimise it, like most flawed people would. This is a striker who jumps into defenders to then fall over and try and win penalties. Good old Harry (another reason I gave up on the England football team).
David Ornstein in The Athletic has clearly been speaking to someone in authority, given that the dumb narrative is the same:
“While most pundits complained about inconsistency, The Athletic understands the main reason for the VAR not punishing Kane more was that Robertson was jumping when fouled — meaning the England captain did not catch him as badly as Robertson did Royal.
Klopp said after the game that if Robertson’s foot had been planted, Kane could have broken his leg but because that is hypothetical, the officials were comfortable with their decision.”
Yup, jumping out the way of an x-rated tackle makes it fine. You’re not in hospital, so get up. Sorry, but the pundits are 100% right on this one, as people who understand these aspects of game, and don’t try to misinterpret the law.
What wasn’t hypothetical is that a full-force lunging studs-up tackle is dangerous play, with excessive force, from a well-built 6’2″ athlete. The damage is does to someone is irrelevant. And the idea that Robertson was jumping when fouled misses the point that he was desperately trying to jump out of the way of a leg-breaker, and still got one on the shin.
Plus, as you can see from the still image above from the BBC, Robertson’s foot was still mostly planted on the floor at the time of impact. Again, Kane is a big centre-forward who is totally out of control. It was 20 minutes into a crucial game, and he got away with, as he always does. It cost Liverpool an improved chance of winning the game, on the day when Man City got yet another bizarre decision in their favour.
If a player punches someone, and the player being punched sees it coming and instead of getting a broken nose gets a graze on his cheek after taking a slight step to the side, THEN THE PUNCH IS THE FUCKING SAME. It’s a red card, regardless of whether it’s a glancing blow or a 10-count knockout. The severity of the injury may then come into the equation at a later date, but it’s still violent conduct. Kane now plays the next game, while Robertson gets a ban, to add to a very bad joke.
The ex-player pundits, many of whom made bad tackles and received bad tackles, know about how bad tackling works.
On a roundup from the BBC:
Ex-Wales midfielder Robbie Savage said: “I thought VAR was supposed to come to the correct decision. Honestly, I’m getting fed up again.”
And former Celtic forward Chris Sutton added: “What frustrates is the inconsistency. It is one rule for Tottenham today and one rule for Liverpool.”
Former Liverpool defender Jamie Carragher, speaking on Sky Sports, said: “You cannot condone speaking to a referee but managers are emotional. We want managers to be honest and emotional and the decisions that go against Liverpool, it was a blatant penalty. Harry Kane should have been sent off.
“We were frustrated with VAR a year or two ago; we are OK with it at the moment but we have gone right the other way. Now we are thinking what is the point of VAR with penalties? It is not VAR, it is who controls it.”
On the penalty that wasn’t given, ex-Reds midfielder Jamie Redknapp said: “He just barges him. At least get some opinion from VAR. There is not a fan of football, ex-player who would say that is not a penalty. It is a joke of a decision.”
Remember, none of these largely hardened bunch of ex-players was arguing it was fine, and saying that these things were normal in their day. They’re saying that it stinks, and the majority of them have no affiliation with Liverpool FC. They just had really abominable officiating, like the rest of us. The game needs a good strong bunch of referees to keep it legitimate and keep it as a sport. It needs to avoid the nonsense of Formula One, or indeed, the WWE.
All this is before the utterly bonkers explanation from the other game that mattered in the title race: that because Man City had possession of the ball, Ederson – who slid straight into the Newcastle man – did not foul Ryan Fraser. To take out a player, off the ball, in the penalty area … is a penalty! Fraser cannot try to win the ball back or do anything. It’s beyond stonewall. It’s stonewall cemented to breeze-block, bolted to titanium.
Listening to the PGMOL is like hearing “the dog ate my homework”, when the student doesn’t have a dog, and everyone knows the student doesn’t have a dog. And the homework was to weigh and examine the properties of a 5kg iron bar.
The bad decisions are hard enough to take, but the excuses and post-hoc rationalisations are perhaps the bigger disgrace, and insult the fans and undermine the league. These buffoons genuinely make it up as they go along (a bit like politicians), to try and fudge their mistakes, rather than own them. They make their decisions in shady silence, then deliver us the nonsense afterwards, often via an intermediary. It’s time for the VARs and refs to be hooked up to microphones, so we can hear what they’re saying, and if they are making honest decisions they should have nothing to fear.
Clarity. Consistency. Transparency.
Without it, VAR is just a tool – that mostly gets used well in other countries – operated by a cartel of Mike Riley’s chums, many of whom are from his time as a ref many years ago, as if it’s some old-boys’ network. Indeed, it’s a big tool used by even bigger tools.
Keith Hackett, who used to be in charge of the referees, said that Riley must be sacked. He also said that Michael Oliver is the only good ref. This is a damning indictment of the game, not least as he’s clearly right – as we’ve been saying on this site for years, based on data. (I also rate the Mancunian Anthony Taylor, based on the data.) Indeed, this season hasn’t been as bad for Liverpool as most previous seasons in terms of big decisions, but the standard of the refereeing is just appalling, regardless.
It’s got to the stage where I’ll be delving back into the big, big data we’ve collated on officiating on TTT over the past 5+ years to prove a few more points about how clear patterns show that officials do not apply the laws blindly or fairly, but with prejudice and favouritism, even if it’s not provably due to corruption (beyond the corruption of cronyism and accepting incompetence, as well as lying to the fans and viewers).
While I may be emotional about all this stuff, it’s from years of seeing the patterns in the data, that show how unbalanced the officiating really is. These are not one-off incidents but part of a years’-long trend.
5 Likes
It’s a very balanced view with re-inforces my view that it’s not a conspiracy but more incompetent mates protecting incompetent mates…
2 Likes
We shouldnt read too much into Walton’s comments or those anonymously sourced ones that Pearce is quoting as they are just after the fact thoughts on what the ref might have been thinking to come to his decision. However, they are evidence of the nonsensical thoughts a ref can have and so demonstrate that the frequent calls for refs to publicly explain their decisions wont actually help as it will just anger people at the absurdity of what actually happened.
For me the biggest issue that needs to be addressed is the demographic. The pathway to elite status requires that for a ref to have got there they spend their teenage years refereeing rather than playing. That creates the problem of people who don’t understand the game being in charge of it. It’s the equivalent of a 150lbs academic who has never touched a barbell in their life telling a world champion power lifter their approach is wrong because they have read a couple of research papers. I don’t know how to change that, but I think its at the core of the issue. I think if you had proper ex-players in charge of games, you don’t just get a different perspective on key incidents such as the Jota one, but you gain an overall more player centric attitude to how games are officiated in terms of the attitude, which in my experience just naturally results in a better officiated game.
5 Likes
an ex-player wouldn’t have let Kane get away with that tackle, by instinct of a player’s experience alone. Thus, cannot be manipulated…
2 Likes
There is also the massive problem of lower league officials being abused almost weekly.
I’d say the types of personalities who stick it out must be egotistical narcissists.
3 Likes
I wanted to avoid that in case there were people on here who ref (I think there are), but yes, I think this plays a roll as well. Right now refs are a demo that is self-selected. I think more could be done to go and find people who have been involved in the game at a good level on the verge of dropping out and giving them a path to stay involved.
2 Likes
I used to ref, still play. I even see it from my own team, way too much yelling at the ref for calls that don’t go “your way”.
there’s a critical shortage of referees these days and it’s very telling as to why.
4 Likes
[quote]
Salah unintentionally handling the ball: Doesn’t matter as Mo didn’t score himself [/quote]
Never knew that, one learns all the time I guess.
1 Like
Sorry no that’s from when Kavanagh got promoted to this level in 2017, a product of Manchester…
For context this referee once believed Alexander-Arnold was guilty of giving away a penalty for being ran into when he was on the floor because the player he couldn’t see tripped over/kicked the back of his head whilst trying to run past him. But Jota wasn’t a penalty because he was standing still when taking an American Football style block from behind by a player he couldn’t see.
He’s either against Liverpool players or doesn’t like people not seeing things being used as an excuse. Maybe he caught his missus getting Rogered from behind by a scouser and her excuse was she didn’t see him?
4 Likes
Sometimes an answer to a problem can be solved by asking the correct question…
Whatever the quality of the referee out on the pitch, they are one person, one set of eyes, one opinion, one bias, one level of competence… one human being that comes with the flaws that being human brings…
If we want consistent decisions in the matches, then put a panel of three on VAR, with a zillion cameras to monitor, and let them start dictating what happens out on the pitch… in short, take the refereeing out of the hands of the numpty’s that display every single week… they are not up producing the goods for the long term good of the game
2 Likes