At least 3 decisions since his trip to UAE:
1- Not sending Kovacic off for 2 red card tackles v Arsenal.
2- On VAR- gave City a penalty from a corner v United. For grappling that happens on every corner in every game, and has never been penalised before or since.
3- Doku
I’ve argued with people here that I don’t think there’s widescale PGMOL corruption/agenda against us. This could never stay hushed up. But I can absolutely believe that a couple of refs could be bent
Soft influence is a thing. There doesn’t have to be suitcases of cash, smoke filled rooms, and shadowy figures in leather armchairs.
Michael Oliver is paid by City’s owners to ref games in UAE. It doesn’t take a lot, even on a subconscious level, for him to favour his benefactors in key moments.
Though I’m sure the suitcase of cash helped also.
In all seriousness…being paid by the owner of a PL club for a side gig, then refereeing that club’s biggest games. It’s absolutely astounding that this conflict of interest isn’t being discussed more widely in the media.
I think I’ve read about the mathematics behind how heard it is to maintain a cover-up, and it is quite interesting although I can’t find the link now.
Suffice to say, it’s harder the more people involved. That said, I don’t think it has to be, or even necessarily is corruption. Just one or two bad decisions, the media influence, and you start to see attitudes shift and/or harden.
And the really pernicious thing with this sort of bias is that the people most likely to be swayed by it are the ones most resistant to the idea that they have been affected.
I genuinely think a lot of these people are really twisted up about Klopp. He is an antagonist, but one that gets a LOT of love from the broader game and I think that interacts badly with the sort of mentality you see common in refs to the point they have developed a sense of wanting to get one over on him or at least say to themselves that its important the world see they are not swayed by his intensity and charm and then go WAY over
That might well be how the officials have come to use it, but the rationale from IFAB was sound. They took the proper steps of getting feedback from the game on what the priorities were and then came up with a protocol that focused on respecting those. The two primary things that needed to be achieved were:
That is where clear and obvious comes from. It is an attempt to define when it is used within a limited scope to try to retain as much of the natural flow of the game as possible. It was initially explained that it is not to be used to second guess a decision made, but to evaluate the accuracy of the information used to come to that decision. e.g.not “I think that contact was not really sufficient for the forward to go over so I think giving a pen is incorrect”, but “you failed to give a penalty there because you thought it was a dive but you appear to have missed contact that was actually made on his heel…you have used the wrong information to come to your decision.”
I think there is a lot of dissonance among fans on what they say they want out of VAR and then how they expect to be used, but I think if they take a step back most people would agree with the guiding principles IFAB focused on in developing the protocol. So I think the problem is less the protocol as written and more how it has been overseen by the refereeing authorities. In what has been an enormous PR failure their lack of communication over the first several years has created a situation where no one has any faith in it anymore. I dont think that can be fixed without a root and branch redesign of its application to create a clean slate moving forward.
Then, to your suggestions…
I think it’s important to appreciate those are not so much alternatives, but approaches designed to achieve different goals so you pick your preferred option based on the outcome you want to achieve. If you go with option 1 you are not implementing it to root out the biggest mistakes because you are relying on the ref to appreciate he might have made one. Instead what you are doing is saying you want it used as a way to augment the ref’s own decision making. I think what needs to be appreciated with that line of thought is, assuming the refs have the humility to use it, that it necessarily will result in more stoppages of the game. I think fans really dont grapple enough with that part of the equation when arguing what they thing a better VAR system would look like.
On the same weekend.
Red Card:
Yellow Card:
Yeah but I think you’re the only person on the planet who had an issue with the McGinn red. It was a proper “fucking have it” that he sprinted into with no interest on the ball. That makes it judged far differently than a legit attempt at a tackle, even a bad one.
They were both red cards in my view. Though Rodri does the McGinn foul numerous times every game, just more subtlety than the Scottish version
Moder’s challenge is far worse than when Jones got sent off, as Moder is out of control, late and using excessive force as he is sliding with his full force behind the challenge.
CONSISTENCY PLEASE!!!
You are making it sound like a refereeing equivalent of a ‘six-pointer’- a bad decision against us plus a decision that the referee missed, also against us. But IMO it’s only one of them.
Curtis’ tackle was a red. It looked red live and I was wincing , then the replay showed some doubt, but if this was a match between two neutral teams. I would err on the side of it being a red. Correct call IMO.
The Doku non-decision is the proper bottle job by the ref. Too scared to decide a game on his decision. The refs association may come out with a statement about getting the ball first or some nonsense, just because they think that excuse might stick in the media thanks to Dean, but anyone with some common sense understands the rationale behind that non-decision.
Clatters releasing the article about giving evener-upper decisions in a match when they make a poor call really opened my eyes to the U-10’s level of refereeing incompetence in this league. It actually has helped me completely rule out a massive conspiracy by the refs against Liverpool: The refs are just not that smart to be able to pull such a feat off.
I have no difficulty with your viewpoint and right to express it…
However the way to counter any argument of biases against anything is to use the conspiracy theory narrative.
Make it sound like flat earthers or chem trail believers.
Not sure why that language even enters the discussion to be honest.
Lets talk about bias.
Could Oliver be influenced by large amounts of money he receives from City owners for a private enterprise?
The arguments are presented here time and time again, and its your absolute right to counter, or believe what you believe. But using conspiracy adds nothing to the debate. Thats all been done.
PS
Curtis Jones was among the “softest” red cards of this or any season. Doku should have got red on Sunday.
If some of the decisions that have gone against us over the years were translated into say general business or insurance practices, there would be a strong case for fraud or corruption investigations.
But because it’s “only sport” and it’s self governed, people questioning the authenticity of how the rules are being applied are often labelled as paranoid or conspiracy theorists.
Football is rancid with corruption
100%
There must be a stage when Liverpool decide to bring a case to law.
They won’t, and rightly so.
It needs high profile exposure on TV though.
If only we had an ex player who is on TV regularly and could highlight these examples.
But nah, he’s more interested in acting the clown for the cameras and dancing to the tune of the vile corporations creaming themselves over Abu Dhabi and Arsenal.
Gutless wanker of a man.
https://twitter.com/CBSSportsGolazo/status/1767707642913235378
Faith is the right word. Take Sunday’s latest debacle. VAR believes that Oliver’s error to not award a penalty isn’t ‘clear and obvious’. But Oliver can’t see it. He is stood outside the box, behind Mac Allister, and if he believes it’s a natural coming together, he is basing that on nothing but guesswork.
When VAR is refusing to intervene even when a Referee literally cannot make the decision he made, then it’s obvious that ‘clear and obvious’ is being used to protect the referee, manage the outcome, or a mix of both.
I totally understand the caution about re refereeing the game, but when VAR is not intervening even when a referee has not seen the incident he is adjudicating on, then it needs a rethink.
I think C&O is creating too much confusion in VARs application, and it would be better for VAR to simply get big decisions - penalties, red cards etc
I think that if any of us were regular commentators we would be continually bringing up bad/incorrect calls by refs as well as the charges against City and theories as to where their money really comes from.But if we were to do that we wouldn’t be able to do it for long as we’d be quickly dropped by whatever broadcaster/media outlet held our contract as i’m sure each and everyone of them and their employees have been warned to be careful as to what they say for fear of being sued by city or have refs in someway look even more negatively on your team.
The ref should be there to keep the game flowing as naturally as possible.VAR should be there to inform the ref to look at the screen when they think something of significance may have been missed.
On Sunday they should have sent him to the screen to take a closer look.If he still decided the right decision was to not award a peno then so be it.
It’s actually quite sad what’s happened to Carragher. I suppose when you’re prepared to do or say whatever is necessary to stay on the gravy train then it’s quite easy to lose sight of how much of a fucking embarrassment you’ve become.