Corruption or pure incompetence?

[southwest6]

Genuine question [mods, please don't remove]. Do you think that some referees are corrupt? Whether pure bias, taking bets, cash from other suitors? Or are they genuinely that bad at their job?

What would it take to be able to hear the referees reason over their decisions, such is the case in rugby? Does anyone know?

[Marcus]

Football is now rotten to the core - you just have to accept it - state backed criminals and terrorists buying titles - referees and now VAR cheating for favoured teams - just look at the play-off final - and us yesterday - countless other examples - the game stinks - and if you moan about if - you're penalised further - were yesterday's events linked to Marco's quite reasonable question about Chalobah's sending off a week earlier? Quite possibly.

[Rambler]

I don't think the English game is corrupt regarding the officiating, I just think that there is a degree of incompetence with the quality of referees.

[Whitestone]

I don't believe the referees are corrupt but there does seem to be some unconscious bias on occasions. This appears to favour the big teams and home teams. I mention home teams because at times it does seem that the crowd can influence a referees decision. Just a gut feeling.

[RaySmith]

I don't believe the referees are corrupt but there does seem to be some unconscious bias on occasions. This appears to favour the big teams and home teams. I mention home teams because at times it does seem that the crowd can influence referees a decision. Just a gut feeling.

Only at Fulham the loud away fans influence the ref, especially if those of a top club, who always bring a huge support - well, many of them live in London anyway!

[toshes mate]

Corruption AND pure incompetence, perhaps to differing degrees.  Tick box assessments are wide open to corruption and are just a way of authority watching its own back.  Once you have corrupt practice within an organisation you have incompetence above and below it.  When two teams square up for a game it should be a binary decision making game, the kind that may regress to the mean over the course of an infinite number of choices between right and wrong but that logic is deeply flawed as follows:

1. There can never be an infinite humber of games because infinity is unreachable.
2. The mean point cannot be reached given infinity is unreachable.
3. Bias can exist at any level within a human being - knowingly or unknowingly - especially when the authority figures tasked with ensuring fairness are not competent (and may never have been competent) to understand it.  Even a coin toss data progression should have a random appearance of the coin landing on its edge because, scientifically speaking, in research it does happen with the perfect coin.  Bias would mean the coin is never going to regress to anything except its biased mean (i.e. the heavier side will be face down more often than not).
4. Randomness cannot be replicated by a human being with or without assistance since our brains are not hard wired to understand it.  Infinity is in the same boat misunderstood and abused.

If a binary decision (heads or tails) can be messed with then what of a multiple choice situation?  That is where we really see the benefit of real science where a hypothesis may remain true until a new study debunks it.   Einstein only ever claimed that his theory of relativity would remain true until someone disproved it or, in other words, improved it.   We desperately need geniuses in all walks of life but they are terribly hard to find wherever there is corruption at work.   Humans reap what they sow and that should be our bottom line in all things - integrity, honesty and hard work.     

Just look at FIFA and understand why football is steeped in greed.

[bobby01]

I would say the main factor is no accountability, you can cock up as many times as you like with no consequences.

[LittleErn]

I have heard - with no evidence - that clubs do attempt to influence referees. For examples giving them gifts "as a thank you for what you do" but with no strings attached. The hope is that this will pre-dispose the ref to favour their club if they are ever in charge at one of their matches. This was told to me many years ago and I have no idea how true it is. Apparently it was much more prevalent with foreign clubs involved in European matches, where a ref might be met at the airport by a luxury chauffeur driven car, given an expensive coat because they hadn't packed the right clothing for the very cold weather, and put into a top hotel instead of the cheaper one booked.

[alfie]

Corruption AND pure incompetence, perhaps to differing degrees.  Tick box assessments are wide open to corruption and are just a way of authority watching its own back.  Once you have corrupt practice within an organisation you have incompetence above and below it.  When two teams square up for a game it should be a binary decision making game, the kind that may regress to the mean over the course of an infinite number of choices between right and wrong but that logic is deeply flawed as follows:

1. There can never be an infinite humber of games because infinity is unreachable.
2. The mean point cannot be reached given infinity is unreachable.
3. Bias can exist at any level within a human being - knowingly or unknowingly - especially when the authority figures tasked with ensuring fairness are not competent (and may never have been competent) to understand it.  Even a coin toss data progression should have a random appearance of the coin landing on its edge because, scientifically speaking, in research it does happen with the perfect coin.  Bias would mean the coin is never going to regress to anything except its biased mean (i.e. the heavier side will be face down more often than not).
4. Randomness cannot be replicated by a human being with or without assistance since our brains are not hard wired to understand it.  Infinity is in the same boat misunderstood and abused.

If a binary decision (heads or tails) can be messed with then what of a multiple choice situation?  That is where we really see the benefit of real science where a hypothesis may remain true until a new study debunks it.   Einstein only ever claimed that his theory of relativity would remain true until someone disproved it or, in other words, improved it.   We desperately need geniuses in all walks of life but they are terribly hard to find wherever there is corruption at work.   Humans reap what they sow and that should be our bottom line in all things - integrity, honesty and hard work.     

Just look at FIFA and understand why football is steeped in greed.

That was a fascinating read, but I'm not sure what it is actually implying, are refs - not, might be, are corrupt, or indeed all 3.

[MikeTheCubed]

I have heard - with no evidence - that clubs do attempt to influence referees. For examples giving them gifts "as a thank you for what you do" but with no strings attached. The hope is that this will pre-dispose the ref to favour their club if they are ever in charge at one of their matches. This was told to me many years ago and I have no idea how true it is. Apparently it was much more prevalent with foreign clubs involved in European matches, where a ref might be met at the airport by a luxury chauffeur driven car, given an expensive coat because they hadn't packed the right clothing for the very cold weather, and put into a top hotel instead of the cheaper one booked.

Perhaps the club can accommodate the officials within the new Riverside development, all amenities included. Contingent on Fulham maintaining Premier League status, of course.

[Mr White]

Rashford goal disallowed, West ham goals allowed. All down to human error or corruption.
var is only good for offside or line calls, any decision, fouls handballs etc will always be controversial.
Might as well stick to one ref for those  calls because Var is f@cking useless.

[Sgt Fulham]

Both for sure. We see the same thing as these referees. Unless they've experienced some extremely acute head trauma, there is no excuse for decisions like yesterday. Corruption is rife in society, and wherever there is power there is corruption. It has always been there, but the speed at which it is becoming more and more blatant and shameless is very worrying. Football is meant to be an escape from it all but it's the same poo.

Blaming it entirely on incompetence is letting them off the hook, and that is what they rely on each and every time.

[Lighthouse]

First of all I am not convinced individual officials are corrupt. But the system and the organisation at every level behind it, is. We have seen this in choice of World Cup venues.  We have seen this in VAR camera angles when an incident and angle is used to support a sometimes wrong decision.

I have always said that VAR should used for incidents of reality not opinion. Offsides, balls crossing lines etc.

But was it a sending off or a booking? Or a handball or did the ball just touch his hand a couple of times and was just fortunate. Rules need to be clear and VAR used as fact and not opinion.

[Tempest]

Football is as previously mentioned, rotten to the core. There is a drug issue within football but how many players are highlighted? They just become "long term injuries" whilst in rehab.

The power football has to deal with things in house is unacceptable.

Cannot fathom how anyone can genuinely believe the PL is immune to money laundering, bribery, match fixing etc especially when there are admissions and evidence previously when the money wasn't what it is today.

Greater the reward the greater the chances of corruption.



Sent from my SM-N976B using Tapatalk

[Woolly Mammoth]

A referee has to climb through the 9 levels of refereeing including reaching level 1.
He is responsible in enforcing the 17 laws of the game.
To get to that level he has gone through much monitoring and accessing, practical, theory and oral.
So by the time he gets to Premier League Level he is identified as being the cream of the cream.
Taking into account that they are only human and mistakes can happen and they can only give what they see as they do not have eyes in the back of their head.
However, they have the support of two assistant referees a 4th official and now VAR.
Plenty of eyes for the back of his head you would have thought.

So a referee at that level cannot be incompetent, otherwise he would not have reached that level in the first place.

So corruption comes to mind, it has happened in the past especially in European cup competitions.
Therefore in the absence of another reason it is natural that we have to ask what on earth goes through a referees head, if he is bottling a big decision that is cheating, if he pretends he did not see it that is cheating, if he clearly favours the big clubs because he is in awe of their players and the club or is he intimidated by the players and the club.
Does he decide it is best to take the soft way out and penalise the smaller club as it would be easier, who knows what goes through their minds at that moment.
Then you add VAR into the equation and justice is still not seen to be done, and this happens far too often to overlooked in my opinion.
Then my feelings are that it is not incompetence it is nothing less than corruption.

[gang]

VAR should be abandoned, the only modern invention in football that I agree with is goal line technology. When a player is deemed offside because his toe is in front of the last defender is ridiculous.
Where money is involved there is always the possibility of corruption.

[LittleErn]

I have heard - with no evidence - that clubs do attempt to influence referees. For examples giving them gifts "as a thank you for what you do" but with no strings attached. The hope is that this will pre-dispose the ref to favour their club if they are ever in charge at one of their matches. This was told to me many years ago and I have no idea how true it is. Apparently it was much more prevalent with foreign clubs involved in European matches, where a ref might be met at the airport by a luxury chauffeur driven car, given an expensive coat because they hadn't packed the right clothing for the very cold weather, and put into a top hotel instead of the cheaper one booked.

Perhaps the club can accommodate the officials within the new Riverside development, all amenities included. Contingent on Fulham maintaining Premier League status, of course.

Sounds like a plan!😇😇

[Mince n Tatties]

It's happened many times north of the border where the old firm run the show alongside the sfa in Glasgow.
Ex Aberdeen manager Derek Mcinnes  highlighted the fact on talksport last year,where he said it was incredible how many times in his 8 years at Aberdeen whilst playing the old firm in games,that decisions late in games ie free kicks and penalties were awarded to the old firm teams if they weren't in a winning position,he was backed up in his comments by few other managers.
So if that is the case,there could be certain refs down here who like to see certain clubs win,and are in awe of that clubs and players status in the game.

[cookieg]

Rashford goal disallowed, West ham goals allowed. All down to human error or corruption.
var is only good for offside or line calls, any decision, fouls handballs etc will always be controversial.
Might as well stick to one ref for those  calls because Var is f@cking useless.

According to the BBC who spoke to VAR it has all to do with the phases of play. What utter bollox!

[Twig]

A referee has to climb through the 9 levels of refereeing including reaching level 1.
He is responsible in enforcing the 17 laws of the game.
To get to that level he has gone through much monitoring and accessing, practical, theory and oral.
So by the time he gets to Premier League Level he is identified as being the cream of the cream.
Taking into account that they are only human and mistakes can happen and they can only give what they see as they do not have eyes in the back of their head.
However, they have the support of two assistant referees a 4th official and now VAR.
Plenty of eyes for the back of his head you would have thought.

So a referee at that level cannot be incompetent, otherwise he would not have reached that level in the first place.

So corruption comes to mind, it has happened in the past especially in European cup competitions.
Therefore in the absence of another reason it is natural that we have to ask what on earth goes through a referees head, if he is bottling a big decision that is cheating, if he pretends he did not see it that is cheating, if he clearly favours the big clubs because he is in awe of their players and the club or is he intimidated by the players and the club.
Does he decide it is best to take the soft way out and penalise the smaller club as it would be easier, who knows what goes through their minds at that moment.
Then you add VAR into the equation and justice is still not seen to be done, and this happens far too often to overlooked in my opinion.
Then my feelings are that it is not incompetence it is nothing less than corruption.

Excellent analysis and one I am slowly coming to agree with (sadly).