Referees/VAR in the Premier League

[6666]

4 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yeah tbf most hostage situations involve both the hostage and the hostage taker visibly high as fuck on cocaine & it's famous that many hostage takers regularly refer to their hostages as "legends" 

Why are you so personally upset by this? 

Just call the guy a dickhead and be your way. You don't have to take the fight to everyone that's not equally outraged as you at this referee calling the fake cunt, a German cunt.

[Dr. Gonzo]

3 hours ago, 6666 said:

Why are you so personally upset by this? 

Just call the guy a dickhead and be your way. You don't have to take the fight to everyone that's not equally outraged as you at this referee calling the fake cunt, a German cunt.

I’m not so much upset about it as I think you saying it looks like a hostage situation is fucking stupid

[Dave]

There's a middle ground here, most officials probably do hate the managers that shout in there face and try every underhanded trick to gain an advantage and make a referee look stupid. If somebody tried to undermine and influence any of us everytime we came in to contact with them in the workplace, I'm sure we'd all be thinking expletives about that person.

Jurgen Klopp in particular was horrendous, I remember being by the dugout in a boring 0-0 match and I couldn't believe what I was seeing from him. He chewing the side of his face like an addict that needed his fix and losing his mind over anything and everything. 

At the same time I don't think 90%+ of people would put themselves on offer by making such comments to somebody that's recording or reference somebody's nationality in such a way to imply that somehow makes them worse than anybody else.

His careers pretty much over, I remember ten years ago there was a PL referee who went quietly and it later came out the FA were made aware of a Snapchat of him using a derogatory term. This feels far worse than that.

 

[LFCMike]

 

[Rick]

2 hours ago, LFCMike said:

 

He didn’t officiate a game for us in any capacity between 2020-2023, which would suggest this being correct. PGMOL are bent as fuck, but we knew that anyways. 

[MUFC]

I want to watch Coote rogering Klopps wife while she is face down to the floor. While Klopp and @Dr. Gonzo are tied to chairs, and forced to watch.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, MUFC said:

I want to watch Coote rogering Klopps wife while she is face down to the floor. While Klopp and @Dr. Gonzo are tied to chairs, and forced to watch.

Can I do cocaine with Coote before/after he's done?

[Whiskey]

1 hour ago, MUFC said:

I want to watch Coote rogering Klopps wife while she is face down to the floor. While Klopp and @Dr. Gonzo are tied to chairs, and forced to watch.

I want there to suddenly be a call for it to go to VAR, and when Coote goes to the screen it's his mother in a spit roast with @Rick and @LFCMadLad. 

@Dr. Gonzo consoles Coote with a foot massage whilst @MUFC takes notes with a pencil.

[Dr. Gonzo]

FA investigating Coote now.

@Bluewolf & @Cicero... now's the time to prepare some lines for Anthony Taylor and get your cameras ready

[MUFC]

1 hour ago, Whiskey said:

I want there to suddenly be a call for it to go to VAR, and when Coote goes to the screen it's his mother in a spit roast with @Rick and @LFCMadLad. 

@Dr. Gonzo consoles Coote with a foot massage whilst @MUFC takes notes with a pencil.

 

[MUFC]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Can I do cocaine with Coote before/after he's done?

Anything goes, cum on Klopps wifes feet if you wish.

[Dave]

5 hours ago, Rick said:

He didn’t officiate a game for us in any capacity between 2020-2023, which would suggest this being correct. PGMOL are bent as fuck, but we knew that anyways. 

Surely if they were bent he would have officiated games in that period?

[Dr. Gonzo]

15 minutes ago, Dave said:

Surely if they were bent he would have officiated games in that period?

But if they weren't bent, they wouldn't have covered it up. So they're not bent enough to have known it would have been a problem... but bent enough to have an issue with openness and transparency. Think if these reports are true, it does once again call PMGOL's integrity and transparency into question.

It also makes me think whatever PMGOL's current "investigation" is currently doing is more for show, because if the reports are true... they clearly didn't learn about it this week - and what they did in silence is probably what they were planning on doing after they concluded this "investigation."

So I think the FA's investigation into the matter is probably more important than whatever Howard Webb's PMGOL are doing.

[Dave]

21 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

But if they weren't bent, they wouldn't have covered it up

I get why they didn't, and I don't think it makes them bent.

Being a referee is a horrendous job at all levels. If they released an unexpected statement that would have effectively thrown Coote to the hyenas back in 2020 they would have lost the trust of all members. Its human nature not to like people that intentionally try to undermine you, and that is no doubt multiplied when they're doing it when millions of people are watching. They were alerted to the situation and made a logical decision that he shouldn't be involved in matches concerning Jurgen Klopp for a lengthy time period.

[Dr. Gonzo]

4 minutes ago, Dave said:

I get why they didn't, and I don't think it makes them bent.

Being a referee is a horrendous job at all levels. If they released an unexpected statement that would have effectively thrown Coote to the hyenas back in 2020 they would have lost the trust of all members. Its human nature not to like people that intentionally try to undermine you, and that is no doubt multiplied when they're doing it when millions of people are watching. They were alerted to the situation and made a logical decision that he shouldn't be involved in matches concerning Jurgen Klopp for a lengthy time period.

It certainly makes their current "investigation" look like bullshit. The time to have investigated this was when they found out about it, not 4 years after the fact. So once again, they come off as totally lacking in integrity.

If this story is true, I don't see how it'd be any more of an unexpected statement than anyone would have expected to find that video floating around social media sites. PMGOL only made any sort of statement and suspended Coote because it went viral. The message they're sending to the other referees isn't "don't behave like Coote" it's "don't get exposed like Coote."

I'm not sure I can understand the perspective where that doesn't make them look bent. It was a cover up. What were they covering up? Coote's video. So now they've effectively thrown Coote to the hyenas... the only difference is it's 4 years later and they'd already known about it.

I want to understand the perspective that it doesn't make them bent, so can you explain it to me in a way that I can understand? How does silently trying to handle the situation with no transparency 4 years ago and them now suddenly publicly acting as though they'd just been made aware of it make them not look bent?

Tbh I can't see how this further undermines PGMOL credibility going forward. The only positive thing we can say about PGMOL in 2024 regarding this alleged coverup is: Howard Webb did not have his current position in 2020. Which I suppose is a bit ironic considering his occupation prior to becoming a referee and that institution's own history with cover-ups. But maybe it's time people like me look beyond the Chief Refereeing Officer of PGMOL at who to blame for the piss poor standards set for officials. If the problem in institutions like this starts at the top and works their way down, Martin Glenn, as chair of PGMOL should be sat in front of some SkySports cameras and made to answer some questions if he's not going to resign.

[Dave]

10 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It certainly makes their current "investigation" look like bullshit. The time to have investigated this was when they found out about it, not 4 years after the fact. So once again, they come off as totally lacking in integrity.

If this story is true, I don't see how it'd be any more of an unexpected statement than anyone would have expected to find that video floating around social media sites. PMGOL only made any sort of statement and suspended Coote because it went viral. The message they're sending to the other referees isn't "don't behave like Coote" it's "don't get exposed like Coote."

I'm not sure I can understand the perspective where that doesn't make them look bent. It was a cover up. What were they covering up? Coote's video. So now they've effectively thrown Coote to the hyenas... the only difference is it's 4 years later and they'd already known about it.

I want to understand the perspective that it doesn't make them bent, so can you explain it to me in a way that I can understand? How does silently trying to handle the situation with no transparency 4 years ago and them now suddenly publicly acting as though they'd just been made aware of it make them not look bent?

Tbh I can't see how this further undermines PGMOL credibility going forward. The only positive thing we can say about PGMOL in 2024 regarding this alleged coverup is: Howard Webb did not have his current position in 2020. Which I suppose is a bit ironic considering his occupation prior to becoming a referee and that institution's own history with cover-ups. But maybe it's time people like me look beyond the Chief Refereeing Officer of PGMOL at who to blame for the piss poor standards set for officials. If the problem in institutions like this starts at the top and works their way down, Martin Glenn, as chair of PGMOL should be sat in front of some SkySports cameras and made to answer some questions if he's not going to resign.

The term "investigation" is loose. I'd argue if they reviewed the footage in 2020 and spoken to David Coote who was able to provide an account, that would still be regarded as in investigation. Now with the public interest of the video going viral over four years later, it is proportionate to find out more about the background and context of videos. You can argue either way if by not doing a more thorough investigation when they were first made aware of the video there's a lack of integrity, and I imagine that was influenced by people in the profession talking amongst each other about the behaviour of managers and players towards them and using what I'll politely define as 'strong terminology'. I'd argue its human nature to dislike somebody that's trying to belittle you in front of millions but some will suggest it's a cultural problem.

Being bent would suggest that the organisation are corrupt. Which, lets be fair, is a really serious allegation and im quite surprised fans are willing to throw that around. Reviewing a situation and dealing with the matter in house doesn't automatically make someone bent. For example, if two colleagues have a disagreement and agree to sort it out in the car park I wouldnt accuse the company of being bent if they didn't call the police. If both men are happy to shake hands after, move on and it doesn't affect there work going forwards then its not really necessary. In this situation they thought the appropriate course of action was to remove Coote from interacting with Klopp. That doesn't make them bent to me if they thought that was the most appropriate way to react the situation at the time.

Personally I'm a little surprised they didn't give Coote a 'resign or be removed' ultimatum at the time. I know they're desperate for good officials that can handle the pressure of refereeing at the top level to come through because The Mason Club at the minute are somewhat abysmal. But it seems like the biggest 'what if' wasn't asked, and that 'what if' is 'what if this video gets leaked?'. Its the reference to his nationality that sits uncomfortable with me. Coote could have easily found another role in football with his reputation somewhat in tact (ie Clattenburg at Forest, ref in Saudi etc) and if the video was to be leaked the PGMOL are distanced from it.

[Stan]

18 hours ago, Rick said:

He didn’t officiate a game for us in any capacity between 2020-2023, which would suggest this being correct. PGMOL are bent as fuck, but we knew that anyways. 

He was VAR in the Community Shield against Arsenal in August 2020.

 

 

[LFCMike]

12 minutes ago, Stan said:

He was VAR in the Community Shield against Arsenal in August 2020.

 

 

He was also VAR in the Merseyside derby in October 2020. Then mysteriously pulled as VAR for Liverpool v Leicester in November that year. Wasn't involved as VAR again until 2023 like Rick says and it was March 2024 before he reffed a Liverpool game again.

[Rick]

I fully understand it’s a serious allegation to call them ‘bent’. I fully stand by that allegation. How could you not? Look at PGMOL trying to hide this for 4 years, look at prem refs being paid by prem club owners massive amounts of money to go and freelance in other countries. This isn’t to mention some of the truly unexplainable decisions made in games. There’s way too much pointing towards something dodgy going on. 

[RandoEFC+]

Do people seriously think that there aren't players, managers and clubs that other referees can't stand or have had run-ins with?

Coote has to go for this because that's the nature of their profession but in reality, the only real issue here is that he's got far enough off his tits to admit out loud which people piss him off.

I see my own profession reflected in this. If someone got me pissed or high enough and started asking me which kids I teach piss me off and which ones I hate, they'd probably get all sorts out of me. Yet I go into work, put it to one side and try my best to teach them as well as I do with any other kids. It's really not that difficult.

Therefore, I find it perfectly reasonable to believe that referees have all sorts of biases and preferences that they put to one side in order to do their job properly. Most people do tend to have some standards when it comes to their professionalism and integrity.

The guy was off his face in the video by the way. Before commenting, everyone should probably think up what's the stupidest thing they've ever said when they've been in that sort of state and decide whether that should be used as the primary piece of evidence to judge your character and/or your career had it been filmed and posted on the Internet.

[Dr. Gonzo]

6 hours ago, Dave said:

The term "investigation" is loose. I'd argue if they reviewed the footage in 2020 and spoken to David Coote who was able to provide an account, that would still be regarded as in investigation. Now with the public interest of the video going viral over four years later, it is proportionate to find out more about the background and context of videos. You can argue either way if by not doing a more thorough investigation when they were first made aware of the video there's a lack of integrity, and I imagine that was influenced by people in the profession talking amongst each other about the behaviour of managers and players towards them and using what I'll politely define as 'strong terminology'. I'd argue its human nature to dislike somebody that's trying to belittle you in front of millions but some will suggest it's a cultural problem.

Being bent would suggest that the organisation are corrupt. Which, lets be fair, is a really serious allegation and im quite surprised fans are willing to throw that around. Reviewing a situation and dealing with the matter in house doesn't automatically make someone bent. For example, if two colleagues have a disagreement and agree to sort it out in the car park I wouldnt accuse the company of being bent if they didn't call the police. If both men are happy to shake hands after, move on and it doesn't affect there work going forwards then its not really necessary. In this situation they thought the appropriate course of action was to remove Coote from interacting with Klopp. That doesn't make them bent to me if they thought that was the most appropriate way to react the situation at the time.

Personally I'm a little surprised they didn't give Coote a 'resign or be removed' ultimatum at the time. I know they're desperate for good officials that can handle the pressure of refereeing at the top level to come through because The Mason Club at the minute are somewhat abysmal. But it seems like the biggest 'what if' wasn't asked, and that 'what if' is 'what if this video gets leaked?'. Its the reference to his nationality that sits uncomfortable with me. Coote could have easily found another role in football with his reputation somewhat in tact (ie Clattenburg at Forest, ref in Saudi etc) and if the video was to be leaked the PGMOL are distanced from it.

Thank you for this explanation. I understand your perspective better. But this alone isn’t the reason I’m calling them bent - it’s the general way they’ve operated over the years. The biggest thing for me that indicates they’re corrupt is the moonlighting in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, which is such a blatant conflict of interest I have no idea how the PGMOL cans stand by it. Everything else that brings criticism of corruption their way, I think is their own fault for the way they’ve conducted themselves.

38 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Do people seriously think that there aren't players, managers and clubs that other referees can't stand or have had run-ins with?

Coote has to go for this because that's the nature of their profession but in reality, the only real issue here is that he's got far enough off his tits to admit out loud which people piss him off.

I see my own profession reflected in this. If someone got me pissed or high enough and started asking me which kids I teach piss me off and which ones I hate, they'd probably get all sorts out of me. Yet I go into work, put it to one side and try my best to teach them as well as I do with any other kids. It's really not that difficult.

Therefore, I find it perfectly reasonable to believe that referees have all sorts of biases and preferences that they put to one side in order to do their job properly. Most people do tend to have some standards when it comes to their professionalism and integrity.

The guy was off his face in the video by the way. Before commenting, everyone should probably think up what's the stupidest thing they've ever said when they've been in that sort of state and decide whether that should be used as the primary piece of evidence to judge your character and/or your career had it been filmed and posted on the Internet.

Sure, I agree with everything you’ve said except the last paragraph.

I’ve got a long history of being off my face and saying stupid things. I’ve done it on here plenty of times in the 20 odd years I’ve been a member of this community FFS.

I’ve never put myself in the position where I’m off my face saying stupid things next to someone who’s obviously recording and sending out the videos though. So I think even at my worst, I can’t relate to having such shockingly poor judgment.

In any case we’ve got a new ref controversy with the audio of Michael Oliver on VAR for the West Ham penalty that got Ten Hairs sacked. It’s very bizarre with Oliver making his mind up and doing his all to get Coote to make the decision he wants.

[Stan]

19 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

In any case we’ve got a new ref controversy with the audio of Michael Oliver on VAR for the West Ham penalty that got Ten Hairs sacked. It’s very bizarre with Oliver making his mind up and doing his all to get Coote to make the decision he wants.

This goes back to their 'mates club' thing.

And the 'good process, lads' comment. And calling each other by nicknames. It unintentionally brings about some informality and I thought they nipped it in the bud, but even now on the VAR review comms that do get released they're still all so pally and overly friendly. 

I read a while back (and more recently due to Chris Birchall training up) that ex-players are going on courses to become referees. Part of me hopes this is a good thing in that they'll actually have experience of playing the game and therefore make more informed decisions. The other part of me thinks that a) the rules are so ambiguous and vague and grey in some areas that it won't make a difference and b) they'll soon fall in to the 'mates club' and therefore also won't make a difference.

I don't think there's corruption involved as alluded to above - as said it's a huge thing to allege, let alone put into practice. If they're corrupt, who are they corrupt against? Countless times a season there's decisions that go for and against every single club. No matter how hard done we feel as fans, there's probably several examples we can point to where a decision has gone the way of the club you support, but other fans can point to decisions that have gone against. 

They're not corrupt, they're just poorly managed by the people in charge. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Stan said:

This goes back to their 'mates club' thing.

And the 'good process, lads' comment. And calling each other by nicknames. It unintentionally brings about some informality and I thought they nipped it in the bud, but even now on the VAR review comms that do get released they're still all so pally and overly friendly. 

I read a while back (and more recently due to Chris Birchall training up) that ex-players are going on courses to become referees. Part of me hopes this is a good thing in that they'll actually have experience of playing the game and therefore make more informed decisions. The other part of me thinks that a) the rules are so ambiguous and vague and grey in some areas that it won't make a difference and b) they'll soon fall in to the 'mates club' and therefore also won't make a difference.

I don't think there's corruption involved as alluded to above - as said it's a huge thing to allege, let alone put into practice. If they're corrupt, who are they corrupt against? Countless times a season there's decisions that go for and against every single club. No matter how hard done we feel as fans, there's probably several examples we can point to where a decision has gone the way of the club you support, but other fans can point to decisions that have gone against. 

They're not corrupt, they're just poorly managed by the people in charge. 

I think VAR shouldn't be done by premier league referees tbh. In the "good process, lads" video/audio... the replay operator had a better understanding of the laws of the game, how to interpret them, and how to use the VAR technology - the problem there was he was the only one without authority to make a judgment in the room. I think it was @RandoEFC who asked months ago "why does it have to be refs, why can't it be sweaty nerds who've studied the laws of the game intently reviewing the video footage?" I think that's a valid question. Being a referee in the most watched football league in the world is not an easy job - but the VAR officials really don't have the same kind of matchday pressures as these referees.

They don't have to chase after players for 90 players for 90 minutes, they don't have to take abuse from a full stadium of fans, they don't have to deal with the massive egos of these famous players and managers. They just have to be able to spot the clear and obvious errors of the referees who are human and who are going to make errors. When it's not clear and obvious, they can do the same thing as VAR refs and send the official to review the footage and make the decision themselves. Separate the mates club from the VAR officials - and take a lot of pressure from refs/VAR by sticking to the "clear and obvious" shite.

Can Man City fans genuinely say they've been aggrieved by the referees at the same rate as any other club in the league? I can't remember the last time a referee genuinely fucked them over, but I can remember when referees have done them favours in matches that they're not even playing in.

If there ever was a genuine corruption investigation into our referees, I think the logical thing to do would be to look at the referees who are taking side gigs in the UAE and Saudi Arabia - then look at how they've officiated matches involving City and Newcastle, as well as the clubs that can be considered direct competitors to them. A logical place to start these sorts of investigations is looking into where there's an appearance of a conflict of interest first - these side gigs are a blatant conflict of interest honestly.

And if they're just poorly managed by the people in charge, the people in charge need to go and people that can put in standards and policies that actually protect referees from these sorts of accusations should be put in charge. If there's no corruption, just general incompetence, they've done themselves - and more importantly their referees - no favours. It does nothing for the goal of creating an atmosphere where referees at all levels of the game, from the top flight to grassroots football, aren't surrounded by toxicity and abuse.

It also begs the question: what the fuck has happened to Michael Oliver if he's not bent? He's gone from being a decent referee years ago, to "the best of a bad bunch"... to as inept as the rest of the bad bunch. I can't get my head around that Man Utd-West Ham VAR shit. Coote is already a bad enough referee without VAR pressuring him to get the call wrong lol.

[Stan]

20 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I can't remember the last time a referee genuinely fucked them over,

Fabinho's goal where Alexander-Arnold handballed it

[LFCMike]

That was 5 years ago! Point proven I guess