absolutely- a wink and a nod, "courtesy", "respect", deference, "a favor"- so many ways for these kinds of things to come to fruition.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Competition Is It Match Fixing?
- Thread starter Matt1882
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
I think Guardiola will say something once the season is over.
The preferential treatment of that lot this season has gone off the scales of justice and right into the pit of inequality.
Why do you think that is?
For me its because the bar for better performance is non-existent.
OK, who is match-fixing for what?
I keep hearing different culprits.
If sky/the PL wanted it to 100% go to the wire on the last day, then they would have engineered a loss for Woolwich last night, no? The smart thing would have been to send Havertz off?
Now, if City doesn't win, there is only one potential story of last-day drama - why leave it up to chance? Or will they fix it tonight to make sure City win?
Who would be match-fixing help Woolwich win the league and for what reason?
I keep hearing different culprits.
If sky/the PL wanted it to 100% go to the wire on the last day, then they would have engineered a loss for Woolwich last night, no? The smart thing would have been to send Havertz off?
Now, if City doesn't win, there is only one potential story of last-day drama - why leave it up to chance? Or will they fix it tonight to make sure City win?
Who would be match-fixing help Woolwich win the league and for what reason?
Because they'll be protected by the league. They know nobody cares enough to take any legal action, and that building a legal case about it would extremely difficult, if not impossible. It will be public controversy for a short while, and then will be swept under the rug and forgotten about by the short-remembering public in the course of time, as are most other things...
It could be as simple as Woolwich and their owners pumping money into far-flung subsidiaries of seemingly ancillary figures invested in the league, with power and connections with the refs to actually effect this sort of subtle manipulation.
brown paper bags, except in digital funds, probably offshore, never even coming on the radar of any UK watchdog authorities.
Ok so Woolwich are behind it?
i think true match fixing for bettors is less wide spread but i'd be shocked if it wasn't occurring. i think that favoring the bigger clubs and being unwilling to step in and affect matches that are important to them is a bigger problem and even if not spoken about directly, it is understood. do i think the refs talk about how shit we are and how much they don't like us amongst themselves or with their friends? yes i do. two giant red clubs really dislike us and it shows, especially since that liverpool diaz decision. we have had hands on the scale against us for years and i don't think it's debatable really.
How about just the weight of the entire global betting market? Do you think there would not be enough incentive there either?
It feels like you are deliberately lacking imagination about this subject.
They don't have to answer to anyone.
If a player does something badly, the Premier League punish them. A totally different body to their employers.
A ref and VAR do something badly, their bosses, at worse, say it was wrong, but quite often deny it was even wrong.
did you believe in Santa as a kid? Imagine the amount of people that needed to be involved in that........
Playing along with shit about a mythical being to entertain children is just bit of fun. so people happily do it, as adults we all know we're doing it and play along, it's a carry on, same as the ghosties at Halloween.
Corruption in football isn't the same as entertaining children about a mythical character, be it Santa, Easter Bunny, or the tooth fairy. I'm supposing you were being facetious because it's not the same as rigging sports events where it's not a societal expectation to play along in a harmless activity where society creates a bit of fun for children.
I am not lacking imagination - lol - I have honestly heard that line from flat earthers - lolololol
- I'm trying to understand who people think is behind it -
The outcome needs to benefit someone???
God wants a word.....
The bit that I don't like is why does the referee need to go to the VAR screen?
In rugby the TMO official just view the footage and make the recommendation to the on-field referee and he takes their judgement as valid, makes the recommended decision, and the match simply restarts and the incident if left at that.
In football we need the drama of the referee approaching the VAR monitor and different supporters of the two teams either boo or cheer.
So for me it seems like entertainment in football, the whole VAR pantomime comes first, and applying the rules as a team of officials is a secondary consideration. The VAR has become an element of entertainment, when the VAR officials could just announce their recommendation the on-field referee takes that as what to do, the decision is made, the match moves on.
It's like TMO in rugby is for adults and VAR in football is for children.
In rugby the TMO official just view the footage and make the recommendation to the on-field referee and he takes their judgement as valid, makes the recommended decision, and the match simply restarts and the incident if left at that.
In football we need the drama of the referee approaching the VAR monitor and different supporters of the two teams either boo or cheer.
So for me it seems like entertainment in football, the whole VAR pantomime comes first, and applying the rules as a team of officials is a secondary consideration. The VAR has become an element of entertainment, when the VAR officials could just announce their recommendation the on-field referee takes that as what to do, the decision is made, the match moves on.
It's like TMO in rugby is for adults and VAR in football is for children.
I hear you and yes, the idea of certain bias due to crowds, profiles etc is a legitimate concern - a concern many smaller clubs have had over the years when they play us BTW......
But match fixing to determine the outcome of the Premier League winners?
Or for Sky to keep contests exciting - I'm not so sure
I was replying to Santa not God.
perhaps i'm biased but i disagree with this. we aren't the type of club that inspires this and i think they actually go harder on us so they can't say they don't favor the big clubs against the smaller ones. we are their safe space to drop the hammer on a bigger club.
You're a dick for comparing me to a flat earther.
Uncalled for- this is far from a flat earth conspiracy theory.
My proposal to fix the constant incompetence and accusations of bias around referees and VAR is simple. Put 3 people on VAR:
Crucially:
It creates a closed loop where weak on-field decisions survive, obvious errors get protected, and accountability disappears into technical wording. At the moment VAR feels less like an independent review system and more like referees marking each other’s homework.
Adding ex-pros brings actual football understanding, while independent silent voting removes the pile-up effect where one dominant voice sways the outcome.
Would it eliminate every bad decision? Obviously not. Football is subjective. But it would add accountability, transparency and independent judgement instead of the current officiating echo chamber that nobody trusts anymore.
- 1 qualified referee
- 2 ex-professionals with no involvement in either club
Crucially:
- the 3 reviewers are not allowed to talk to each other during the review, in separate rooms.
- no leading the referee towards a decision through the headset
- once the ref goes to the monitor, he reviews it himself in silence and makes the final call
It creates a closed loop where weak on-field decisions survive, obvious errors get protected, and accountability disappears into technical wording. At the moment VAR feels less like an independent review system and more like referees marking each other’s homework.
Adding ex-pros brings actual football understanding, while independent silent voting removes the pile-up effect where one dominant voice sways the outcome.
Would it eliminate every bad decision? Obviously not. Football is subjective. But it would add accountability, transparency and independent judgement instead of the current officiating echo chamber that nobody trusts anymore.
Far from it sure.
But my imagination should not be the bar for whether or not this is a real thing.
And me asking a relatively simple question - who is this match fixing benefiting - is quite fair.
It could be x or y is not a convincing answer IMHO