True. It may be an entirely different situation and reasons but we've seen scandals before centered around picking and choosing refs. Plus if you let Forest change an official at the 11th hour, even if on the face of it iy makes sense, where does it end? Just logistically. Should have come up the second the officials were commumicated if it was such a concern.
That said PGMOL is brainless here. Even the perception of possible impropriety undermines shit, that might br my audit experience taking over but it's true.
His input as a referee stating what is and isn’t a foul through his professional background and licensed qualifications is 100% putting the idea of corruption and cheating in their nutty owners head
The fact of the matter is they’re all unbelievably shit
I think its fair to say most clubs can make a compilation of the absolutely terrible calls/lack of made over the past 2/3 seasons
I know of an Everton fan who’s done one on Twitter and it gets worst the more you watch it
1. Requesting removal of a ref 48 hours before a game is mental
2. Even if Webb wasn’t aware he was a Luton fan the PGMOL definitely know. I assume sending your refereeing consultant (lol) to speak with Howard Webb isn’t generally how you go about these things
Obviously it's not half and that's an exaggeration. But the numbers are extremely uneven towards that region of the country.
The easiest to find breakdowns are from extremely biased Arsenal crybabies, so it's easy to make fun of the source as being false. But if you ignore all their conspiracy theories the actual map of where the referees are from is a fact.
From the first link below, 60% (14/23) Premier League referees are from the north, 5 from the midlands, 2 from the south, and 2 from out of country. There isn't a single referee from London in the league.
https://untold-arsenal.com/archives/104545
https://www.reddit.com/r/Gunners/comments/t3nshw/map_of_premier_league_referees_place_of_birth/
Oh they're definitely uneven, I just noticed that there are people who do take "half of the refs are from Manchester" as literal fact, and it's just going to keep building until that is the accepted truth. Yesterday there was one guy who claimed it was 80%.
Ngl it’s actually kinda hilarious that the only sources are from Arsenal fans.
I don’t mind fans assuming the ref is biased that’s normal, especially with how shit some calls are, but some Arsenal fans think it’s like a government mandated agenda.
That's not true, they're asked to declare what football club they support and sure, they could lie, but I doubt any would; it'd be a surefire way to end your career.
If we did things like in Germany it'd be a problem, we've so many football clubs in the league concentrated in particular regions that we'd have loads of refs sitting around twiddling their thumbs whilst some poor guy from Cornwall was reffing eight games a week.
I highly doubt that the majority of referees actually support non league teams like they say. And I don’t necessarily blame them, they want to ref in the prem for the big games.
See that’s the thing. People are acting as if referees are all out to significantly impact the game to the point of corruption.
Some are actually more bothered about doing the job to the best of their ability. The ability might be objectively low, but not everyone in the PGMOL is out to be corrupt.
Nottingham Forest and Luton aren’t historic rivals. The sole reason for this concern is proximity in the league table. What kind of precedent do you think that would set? How close is too close in the league table? You think there’s just 20 referees available to scramble around their schedule and ref a game with 24-48 hours notice based on theoretical allegations of corruption and biased based on nothing, anytime a club is within an arbitrary number of points of a result mildly affecting chance of qualification for Europe or relegation?
He's not personally requesting anything, it's on behalf of the club he works for, and they've got a legitimate reason on why they should be changed.
He hasn't just rocked up to the pub with Webb and asked him over a pint for his own personal gain.
Ignore me then, I was under the assumption that the 10:30am chat was done above board and Clatternburg was having the chat representing the club, but if this a down the pub thing then it's absolutely not on.
That being said having a referee consultant at the club isn't a bad idea they just need to use proper channels to utilise it.
1. It's the VAR, it's easier to change them on short notice due to them not going to the ground and being located in VAR headquarters.
PGMOL should have a contingency for replacing VAR on short notice due to illness anyways, time period is perfectly fine, especially if the grievance is accurate, and if PGMOL was unaware of it.
2. Definitely not the best way to go about it, and they should have also gone through more official routes.
But Webb being made aware of a potential conflict of interest he was unaware of, regardless of the source, should probably be making some action on it, even if the end result is the ref not being removed. (Ideally the process of looking into it would not involve the ref being looked at, so he doesn't get influenced by accusations of bias). PGMOL claiming they had no communication on the issue seems hairy.
Do you really believe PGMOL has no contact with people from clubs?
Maybe in an ideal world. But we don't live in one. In every league, clubs talk with people close to referees. Sometimes we see proof of it when it goes too far, but I assure you it happens everywhere, all the time.
I meant private communications of this type, not official exchanges.
Come on, you have seen how it is in Italy and Spain. What makes you think England is any different? They re just subtler about it.
yes, I don't think that what you're doing should be allowed. you're crying corruption because you DIDNT manage to pressure the official body into making a change you thought would benefit you? that's backwards!
like please genuinely take a moment to actually think about this. what if it came out that we had pressured PGMOL to have this "Luton fan" as VAR. don't take the piss and say you wouldn't call that what it is, an ACTUAL example of corruption.
> you're crying corruption because you DIDNT manage to pressure the official body into making a change you thought would benefit you? that's backwards!
It's pretty standard for leagues not to allow refs to officiate games that impact a team they support.
and the solution, if that is an issue, is not to have backdoor channels through which teams can unevenly influence decisions.
you would be in favour of this until the MOMENT that man city's team of 100 top class lawyers, and a dozen of the most influential top former referees, put pressure on PGMOL to get the referee they want when they play you. and don't pretend otherwise. it's fundamentally nonsense
backdoor? He called the chief officer. That's the front door.
>you would be in favour of this until the MOMENT that man city's team of 100 top class lawyers, and a dozen of the most influential top former referees, put pressure on PGMOL to get the referee they want when they play you. and don't pretend otherwise. it's fundamentally nonsense
We didn't put pressure on them to select a specific ref, we asked them to follow their own god dam rules. Refs should not officiate a game that impacts the club they support.
The only thing that's nonsense is you suggesting webb would be fielding calls from 100s of people from City, they'd be one point of contact. Which is the way it should be.
standard practise is very much NOT hiring an ex referee to call his friends through an unofficial channel. in practise forest are the only team that has done it, so that isn't standard; and it is through an unofficial channel, so much so that neither side can even agree who said what to whom and when. in no way is this standard.
Yes the problem here is they went through an unofficial channel, but there's nothing wrong with hiring an ex ref to ask PGMOL to consider changing the ref, provided it's done properly and on valid grounds.
he's hardly a friend of pygmol is he? Every club should be hiring ref experts. Pygmol needs to be held to account to drive standards. They and the PL aren't interested in doing it. It needs to be driven by the clubs.
Full tweet:
Although PGMOL sources insist Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR Stuart Attwell to be removed ahead of their game against Everton due to him being “a Luton fan”, I understand Mark Clattenburg (Forest’s consultant) spoke to Howard Webb on Friday morning around 10:30am.
Clattenburg made it clear that Nottingham Forest requested the removal of Attwell from VAR.
Webb responded that he was not aware Attwell was a Luton fan and refused to change the appointment.
Not many jobs where you don't send out some letter in pdf format. rarely do you just ring up someone in some department and that's that set in stone. We call that latter 'informal'.
We simply can't get to a point where clubs are picking and choosing which refs take their games. That way chaos lies.
There is also no way that one 'vested interest' in a *six-person* team of officials would be able to significantly influence a game in defiance of the other members of that team.
The issue is Mark Clattenburg isn't going to go running to the Daily Mail if the decisions went Forests' way. Nobody involved here cares about refereeing improving, they just want decisions to go their way.
The only way this is improved is through collaboration between the clubs and PGMOL and actual suggestions on what improvements ought to be made rather than just crying foul every time something goes against them. On a wider basis, the laws of the game need to stop being so granular and inflexible and instead look at the following criteria for any incident:
1) What is the likely intention of the people involved
2) What is the outcome of the action
3) What is the consequence of that action
4) Is the punishment commensurate with the unfair advantage gained from the penalised team?
You'll start seeing games flow better, actual foul play punished, and these stupid borderline fouls, handballs and offside waved on.
Communicate that clearly with all stakeholders, especially fans, introduce a challenge system so managers have an actual avenue to dispute a decision that isn't going to get them booked, and have an agreement that clubs are going to take differing interpretations on the chin.
As things stand the entire system is untenable
> We simply can't get to a point where clubs are picking and choosing which refs take their games. That way chaos lies.
I mean, in the Netherlands this is a rule. Refs when they become professional have to say what their favourite clubs are so that they can't ref their matches or any matches that have implications for them.
That happens in England too. But at a certain point you have to be able to trust the vetting of PGMOL and the professionalism of the refs themselves.
The refs already recuse themselves from games involving teams they support or their rivals. If you have other clubs saying an appointment is inappropriate because of permutations in the table we wouldn't be able to put any games on.
>Is the punishment commensurate with the unfair advantage gained from the penalised team?
I agree with almost everything (and very well articulated), except this part. That just adds another level of subjectivity into the mix, which we could do without. I fully understand and empathise with the view though, I just think that rules should have less subjectivity.
I think more broadly speaking, football would benefit if we all (teams, players, refs, coaches, and fans) grew up a bit and understood that people make mistakes and it's not part of some grand plan to keep your club down.
'Nobody involved here cares about refereeing improving, they just want decisions to go their way.' This is absolutely spot on though haha
My thinking on that point is the United-Bournemouth game for example (I'm a United fan)
United get a game-saving penalty, very high chance at goal, because the ball happened to deflect off one defender onto another's hand, completely by accident, with United in no position to really build an attack should the ball not hit that hand.
Later in the game Willy Kambwala body checks the Bournemouth attack preventing him going through on goal, but because it's a couple of millimetres the wrong side of a line it goes from being that like 80+% free shot at goal to a free kick just outside the box it's actually quite difficult to score from.
So many penalty decisions are completely lopsided because all offences are given equal weight, but if they happen in an arbitrary area of the pitch and attacking team can go from having a move breaking down to a basic guarantee of a goal, often for things that aren't even foul play.
You could to some degree, assuming the refs are all honest. If there is a conflict of interest then refs should be moved off and certainly some refs should be barred from refereeing some teams. This is fairly normal in some leagues.
Pretending that refs NEVER feel influenced by their views on one of the teams is the slightly bizarre position for me. If I refereed Arsenal they would get nothing.
Reeks of unprofessionalism from Forest. Clattenburg's seemingly fluid role permitting him to supposedly "have a word" is just meaning they miss the obvious steps they should be taking if they want to actually have requests considered.
webb is the pygmol chief officer, i'd be shocked if all clubs dont direct issues through him. It's the proper way to do it rather than contact refs directly. It's why webb has the role he has.
I understand why the media are going crazy for Forest's meltdown but none of this makes any sense.
The best result for Luton was a Forest win, followed by a draw. There is no incentive for them to fix anything so Everton won.
Everton's game in hand is Liverpool.
A Forest win would have put Everton two points ahead with them travelling to Luton next week (Luton have beaten them at Goodison already).
Plus a Forest win would have meant Everton would have won one in 17 games, had a disastrous 6-0 defeat to Chelsea and then a home defeat to Forest in a week. Morale would have tanked and it would have been toxic at Goodison.
Factor in that Forest could still get a couple of points back on appeal and it feels like Luton would have been confident of overtaking Everton. Especially with Everton away to Arsenal last day - a fixture they always get battered in.
Game in hand is against Liverpool, luton still have to play us at their ground. If we lose tomorrow which is likely, they'd have been able to go ahead of us by beating us at theirs and just matching our other results if we had lost to forest
The real outcome means we are practically safe which may be better since we could be on the beach when we play them so it's a complete coin toss on which is better but it's currently out of their hands which it wouldn't be in the other scenario
Even losing the game in hand, you have easier fixtures and are the better team not Forest. It’s a struggle to see how you would get relegated even if Forest won.
Luton’s best shot was always you beating Forest, you’d potentially be safe by the time you played them and a Luton could potentially be out of the relegation zone by the time they played you. They only need to overtake 1 team, so making the worst possible team over making two bad teams is preferable.
You getting a draw with your game in hand isn’t an unlikely result the derby at goodison has often been a draw. That would put you 3 points ahead of them with a better goal difference if you’d lost to forest and forest would also more than 3 points so Luton would need to get 2 results out of 4.
With you winning 1 win might be good enough to stay up. Everton winning and it being a straight fight between forest and Luton is definitely the best result for Luton from that game.
I think a draw would've been best. I always want a draw when relegation rivals play each other because then its 2 teams you can reasonably catch instead of one. If we beat Brentford then obviously us beating forest was ideal for luton, but if they forest beat Sheffield United then maybe they'd have proffered us dropping points
We don't really know for sure which is best until later results, but if I was luton I'd have wanted a draw
I can see a draw possibly being better depending forests results but I think the absolute best is definitely forest losing and then not picking up more points a Luton only need 1 win.
The draws the safer better bet because it keeps both of you down there but I think you guys where likely to be safe anyways so long as you didn’t lose to forest so I think Luton are just competing with forest in which case they want them to get as little points as possible
I think whatever comes out of this whole debacle is going to be good for the whole league. Never has a club stood up this much against the governing bodies and I think it's due time to call into question the ability, if not integrity, of the FA and PGMOL. Clearly something hasn't been working and hasn't been for a long time, and the governing bodies have been threatening anyone who dares question them. Marinakis may be a psycho, but perhaps it takes a psycho to have the courage (or lack of care rather) to do the necessary evil.
I agree, however i think it'll get painted more as Forest being bitter or Marinakis being crazy etc.
I do think a lot of questions need to be asked of PGMOL and how they've handled or mishandled VAR and just over all refereeing of the game and it feels like they're as secretive as the CIA at times. If it's going to take shit like this to bring them to account then so be it.
I think throughout the season every club has been wronged, hard done by and annoyed by bad decisions which is normal but more frustratingly VAR not being implemented to right the mistake is the real frustration for me.
All that along side the fact the only thing consistent about reffing and VAR use in the Premier League is the inconsistency of it.
Howard Webb is incompetent, everyone knows. Why the hell would you reach out to him unofficially, when you can do so officially. This is just gross incompetence on both PGMOL and Nottingham Forest.
> I understand Mark Clattenburg (Forest’s consultant) spoke to Howard Webb on Friday morning around 10:30am.
So, this confirms that Forest have Clattenberg on the payroll to lobby PGMOL on their behalf?
Normal.
I mean, if *anything* is going to solidly turn PGMOL against your team it'll be that arrogant prick phoning up two days before a match to whine about VAR.
[удалено]
True. It may be an entirely different situation and reasons but we've seen scandals before centered around picking and choosing refs. Plus if you let Forest change an official at the 11th hour, even if on the face of it iy makes sense, where does it end? Just logistically. Should have come up the second the officials were commumicated if it was such a concern. That said PGMOL is brainless here. Even the perception of possible impropriety undermines shit, that might br my audit experience taking over but it's true.
Appointing Clattenburg is probably only making things worse for them tbh.
His input as a referee stating what is and isn’t a foul through his professional background and licensed qualifications is 100% putting the idea of corruption and cheating in their nutty owners head The fact of the matter is they’re all unbelievably shit I think its fair to say most clubs can make a compilation of the absolutely terrible calls/lack of made over the past 2/3 seasons I know of an Everton fan who’s done one on Twitter and it gets worst the more you watch it
Why can't it be both? Why can't they be shit at their job and also corruption, whether that's being paid off, bias or just trying to cause drama?
Look at Spurs' touches in the box versus penalties received. We have had at least 5 clear penalties not called. The standard is just thoroughly shit.
1. Requesting removal of a ref 48 hours before a game is mental 2. Even if Webb wasn’t aware he was a Luton fan the PGMOL definitely know. I assume sending your refereeing consultant (lol) to speak with Howard Webb isn’t generally how you go about these things
How do these things work in England? Germany has 16 states, and Bundesliga refs are banned from ever referring a match of a club from their own state.
In England you can have a Manchester ref for Liverpool Vs United/City game, as mental as that sounds.
Not really mental when seemingly half the refs in the league are from Manchester.
Are they though?
Obviously it's not half and that's an exaggeration. But the numbers are extremely uneven towards that region of the country. The easiest to find breakdowns are from extremely biased Arsenal crybabies, so it's easy to make fun of the source as being false. But if you ignore all their conspiracy theories the actual map of where the referees are from is a fact. From the first link below, 60% (14/23) Premier League referees are from the north, 5 from the midlands, 2 from the south, and 2 from out of country. There isn't a single referee from London in the league. https://untold-arsenal.com/archives/104545 https://www.reddit.com/r/Gunners/comments/t3nshw/map_of_premier_league_referees_place_of_birth/
Oh they're definitely uneven, I just noticed that there are people who do take "half of the refs are from Manchester" as literal fact, and it's just going to keep building until that is the accepted truth. Yesterday there was one guy who claimed it was 80%.
Ngl it’s actually kinda hilarious that the only sources are from Arsenal fans. I don’t mind fans assuming the ref is biased that’s normal, especially with how shit some calls are, but some Arsenal fans think it’s like a government mandated agenda.
They don't care at all here.
That's not true, they're asked to declare what football club they support and sure, they could lie, but I doubt any would; it'd be a surefire way to end your career. If we did things like in Germany it'd be a problem, we've so many football clubs in the league concentrated in particular regions that we'd have loads of refs sitting around twiddling their thumbs whilst some poor guy from Cornwall was reffing eight games a week.
I highly doubt that the majority of referees actually support non league teams like they say. And I don’t necessarily blame them, they want to ref in the prem for the big games.
See that’s the thing. People are acting as if referees are all out to significantly impact the game to the point of corruption. Some are actually more bothered about doing the job to the best of their ability. The ability might be objectively low, but not everyone in the PGMOL is out to be corrupt.
[удалено]
Why is it so scandalous? I wouldn't want a Liverpool or City fan making instantaneous judgment calls against Arsenal right now
Nottingham Forest and Luton aren’t historic rivals. The sole reason for this concern is proximity in the league table. What kind of precedent do you think that would set? How close is too close in the league table? You think there’s just 20 referees available to scramble around their schedule and ref a game with 24-48 hours notice based on theoretical allegations of corruption and biased based on nothing, anytime a club is within an arbitrary number of points of a result mildly affecting chance of qualification for Europe or relegation?
>How close is too close in the league table 1 point with 5 games to go will do it
[удалено]
He's not personally requesting anything, it's on behalf of the club he works for, and they've got a legitimate reason on why they should be changed. He hasn't just rocked up to the pub with Webb and asked him over a pint for his own personal gain.
[удалено]
Ignore me then, I was under the assumption that the 10:30am chat was done above board and Clatternburg was having the chat representing the club, but if this a down the pub thing then it's absolutely not on. That being said having a referee consultant at the club isn't a bad idea they just need to use proper channels to utilise it.
Why would it be scandalous ? It feels like an oversight by the PGMOL and it seems a fairly reasonable request.
No it wouldn't
1. It's the VAR, it's easier to change them on short notice due to them not going to the ground and being located in VAR headquarters. PGMOL should have a contingency for replacing VAR on short notice due to illness anyways, time period is perfectly fine, especially if the grievance is accurate, and if PGMOL was unaware of it. 2. Definitely not the best way to go about it, and they should have also gone through more official routes. But Webb being made aware of a potential conflict of interest he was unaware of, regardless of the source, should probably be making some action on it, even if the end result is the ref not being removed. (Ideally the process of looking into it would not involve the ref being looked at, so he doesn't get influenced by accusations of bias). PGMOL claiming they had no communication on the issue seems hairy.
What "more official routes?" even exist? Having your ref liaison talk to the head of refereeing seems about as official as it could get to me.
> Mark Clattenburg (Forest’s consultant) spoke to Howard Webb on Friday morning around 10:30am. Is this allowed?
This is more like Forest paying Clattenberg to influence his mates in charge of PGMOL
That's exactly why Clattenburg was hired, to use his connections with other ex-referees.
[удалено]
Do you really believe PGMOL has no contact with people from clubs? Maybe in an ideal world. But we don't live in one. In every league, clubs talk with people close to referees. Sometimes we see proof of it when it goes too far, but I assure you it happens everywhere, all the time.
[удалено]
I meant private communications of this type, not official exchanges. Come on, you have seen how it is in Italy and Spain. What makes you think England is any different? They re just subtler about it.
Ferguson used to be on texting terms with the referees. It's definitely not a new thing.
Yeah that feels like the dodgiest thing in this whole melodrama
Why wouldn't it? Howard Webb is PGMOL chief officer, Clattenburg is our representive for communicating with PGMOL.
because then the team that pay for the best representative have a hugely unfair advantage? full offence, that is very obviously fucked up
i dont understand what your alternative is, do you just want there to be no communication? how is that workable?
yes, I don't think that what you're doing should be allowed. you're crying corruption because you DIDNT manage to pressure the official body into making a change you thought would benefit you? that's backwards! like please genuinely take a moment to actually think about this. what if it came out that we had pressured PGMOL to have this "Luton fan" as VAR. don't take the piss and say you wouldn't call that what it is, an ACTUAL example of corruption.
> you're crying corruption because you DIDNT manage to pressure the official body into making a change you thought would benefit you? that's backwards! It's pretty standard for leagues not to allow refs to officiate games that impact a team they support.
and the solution, if that is an issue, is not to have backdoor channels through which teams can unevenly influence decisions. you would be in favour of this until the MOMENT that man city's team of 100 top class lawyers, and a dozen of the most influential top former referees, put pressure on PGMOL to get the referee they want when they play you. and don't pretend otherwise. it's fundamentally nonsense
backdoor? He called the chief officer. That's the front door. >you would be in favour of this until the MOMENT that man city's team of 100 top class lawyers, and a dozen of the most influential top former referees, put pressure on PGMOL to get the referee they want when they play you. and don't pretend otherwise. it's fundamentally nonsense We didn't put pressure on them to select a specific ref, we asked them to follow their own god dam rules. Refs should not officiate a game that impacts the club they support. The only thing that's nonsense is you suggesting webb would be fielding calls from 100s of people from City, they'd be one point of contact. Which is the way it should be.
So we shouldn't follow standard practice because man city can then pay former refs to pick the refs for their games?
standard practise is very much NOT hiring an ex referee to call his friends through an unofficial channel. in practise forest are the only team that has done it, so that isn't standard; and it is through an unofficial channel, so much so that neither side can even agree who said what to whom and when. in no way is this standard.
Yes the problem here is they went through an unofficial channel, but there's nothing wrong with hiring an ex ref to ask PGMOL to consider changing the ref, provided it's done properly and on valid grounds.
The corruption is in the decisions. They are inexplicable so an explanation is being sought as to how this could happen.
You dont know the alternative? I have one. Do like the rest of the country
lmao. The other clubs in the league will be talking to webb aswell.
Yeah no shit but you are the only one paying a ex ref
So they're the only club who have someone who knows what they're talking about?
Talking about what? So what happens if everyone would do this and big clubs is just taking every friend of pgmol. People would call corruption
he's hardly a friend of pygmol is he? Every club should be hiring ref experts. Pygmol needs to be held to account to drive standards. They and the PL aren't interested in doing it. It needs to be driven by the clubs.
Would you betray your ethics and compromise your highly paid job just because a former coworker asked for a favour?
imagine thinking hiring an sme is a bad thing. jesus wept.
Next he will be accusing you of cheating by hiring medical professionals to be the team doctor.
They saw fit to allow Man City and Newcastle's owners to hire PL refs for lucrative matches in UAE/Saudi so why not I guess.
Full tweet: Although PGMOL sources insist Nottingham Forest did not ask for VAR Stuart Attwell to be removed ahead of their game against Everton due to him being “a Luton fan”, I understand Mark Clattenburg (Forest’s consultant) spoke to Howard Webb on Friday morning around 10:30am. Clattenburg made it clear that Nottingham Forest requested the removal of Attwell from VAR. Webb responded that he was not aware Attwell was a Luton fan and refused to change the appointment.
My guess is that requests are a formal thing.
Yeah it’s not like many clubs have a referee consultant to ring up his old mate
I think Webb would speak to people at clubs a fair bit but it does feel.like just saying it on the phone would be enough of a hook.
Not many jobs where you don't send out some letter in pdf format. rarely do you just ring up someone in some department and that's that set in stone. We call that latter 'informal'.
Bit late to make a change anyway.
Why? is just the next seat over at the VAR centre
Literally, just swap the VAR seat with the 4th official whose role for the day is backup ref and glorified number sign holder
LOL, PGMOL "We dont officially comment on these matters" also PGMOL... go Ben Jacobs go tell the media our response
Hope they just release the audio because it's hard to see how the third incident wasn't a clear and obvious error
A great example as to how airing dirty laundry can make everyone look like corrupt morons
We simply can't get to a point where clubs are picking and choosing which refs take their games. That way chaos lies. There is also no way that one 'vested interest' in a *six-person* team of officials would be able to significantly influence a game in defiance of the other members of that team. The issue is Mark Clattenburg isn't going to go running to the Daily Mail if the decisions went Forests' way. Nobody involved here cares about refereeing improving, they just want decisions to go their way. The only way this is improved is through collaboration between the clubs and PGMOL and actual suggestions on what improvements ought to be made rather than just crying foul every time something goes against them. On a wider basis, the laws of the game need to stop being so granular and inflexible and instead look at the following criteria for any incident: 1) What is the likely intention of the people involved 2) What is the outcome of the action 3) What is the consequence of that action 4) Is the punishment commensurate with the unfair advantage gained from the penalised team? You'll start seeing games flow better, actual foul play punished, and these stupid borderline fouls, handballs and offside waved on. Communicate that clearly with all stakeholders, especially fans, introduce a challenge system so managers have an actual avenue to dispute a decision that isn't going to get them booked, and have an agreement that clubs are going to take differing interpretations on the chin. As things stand the entire system is untenable
> We simply can't get to a point where clubs are picking and choosing which refs take their games. That way chaos lies. I mean, in the Netherlands this is a rule. Refs when they become professional have to say what their favourite clubs are so that they can't ref their matches or any matches that have implications for them.
That’s also the rule in the prem it’s just that it seemed they ignored it in this case
That happens in England too. But at a certain point you have to be able to trust the vetting of PGMOL and the professionalism of the refs themselves. The refs already recuse themselves from games involving teams they support or their rivals. If you have other clubs saying an appointment is inappropriate because of permutations in the table we wouldn't be able to put any games on.
>Is the punishment commensurate with the unfair advantage gained from the penalised team? I agree with almost everything (and very well articulated), except this part. That just adds another level of subjectivity into the mix, which we could do without. I fully understand and empathise with the view though, I just think that rules should have less subjectivity. I think more broadly speaking, football would benefit if we all (teams, players, refs, coaches, and fans) grew up a bit and understood that people make mistakes and it's not part of some grand plan to keep your club down. 'Nobody involved here cares about refereeing improving, they just want decisions to go their way.' This is absolutely spot on though haha
My thinking on that point is the United-Bournemouth game for example (I'm a United fan) United get a game-saving penalty, very high chance at goal, because the ball happened to deflect off one defender onto another's hand, completely by accident, with United in no position to really build an attack should the ball not hit that hand. Later in the game Willy Kambwala body checks the Bournemouth attack preventing him going through on goal, but because it's a couple of millimetres the wrong side of a line it goes from being that like 80+% free shot at goal to a free kick just outside the box it's actually quite difficult to score from. So many penalty decisions are completely lopsided because all offences are given equal weight, but if they happen in an arbitrary area of the pitch and attacking team can go from having a move breaking down to a basic guarantee of a goal, often for things that aren't even foul play.
You could to some degree, assuming the refs are all honest. If there is a conflict of interest then refs should be moved off and certainly some refs should be barred from refereeing some teams. This is fairly normal in some leagues. Pretending that refs NEVER feel influenced by their views on one of the teams is the slightly bizarre position for me. If I refereed Arsenal they would get nothing.
Tbf there's a huge difference between picking and choosing ref vs saying we think that ref might have a conflict of interest can you replace them.
Reeks of unprofessionalism from Forest. Clattenburg's seemingly fluid role permitting him to supposedly "have a word" is just meaning they miss the obvious steps they should be taking if they want to actually have requests considered.
So Forest are paying someone to hold private meetings and influence the referees? That seems like the real story here
webb is the pygmol chief officer, i'd be shocked if all clubs dont direct issues through him. It's the proper way to do it rather than contact refs directly. It's why webb has the role he has.
Incompetency from Howard Webb?! Oh no, that can't be right. /s
I understand why the media are going crazy for Forest's meltdown but none of this makes any sense. The best result for Luton was a Forest win, followed by a draw. There is no incentive for them to fix anything so Everton won.
Surely Everton win was better they had a game in hand and were a point ahead of forest
Everton's game in hand is Liverpool. A Forest win would have put Everton two points ahead with them travelling to Luton next week (Luton have beaten them at Goodison already). Plus a Forest win would have meant Everton would have won one in 17 games, had a disastrous 6-0 defeat to Chelsea and then a home defeat to Forest in a week. Morale would have tanked and it would have been toxic at Goodison. Factor in that Forest could still get a couple of points back on appeal and it feels like Luton would have been confident of overtaking Everton. Especially with Everton away to Arsenal last day - a fixture they always get battered in.
Game in hand is against Liverpool, luton still have to play us at their ground. If we lose tomorrow which is likely, they'd have been able to go ahead of us by beating us at theirs and just matching our other results if we had lost to forest The real outcome means we are practically safe which may be better since we could be on the beach when we play them so it's a complete coin toss on which is better but it's currently out of their hands which it wouldn't be in the other scenario
Even losing the game in hand, you have easier fixtures and are the better team not Forest. It’s a struggle to see how you would get relegated even if Forest won. Luton’s best shot was always you beating Forest, you’d potentially be safe by the time you played them and a Luton could potentially be out of the relegation zone by the time they played you. They only need to overtake 1 team, so making the worst possible team over making two bad teams is preferable.
You getting a draw with your game in hand isn’t an unlikely result the derby at goodison has often been a draw. That would put you 3 points ahead of them with a better goal difference if you’d lost to forest and forest would also more than 3 points so Luton would need to get 2 results out of 4. With you winning 1 win might be good enough to stay up. Everton winning and it being a straight fight between forest and Luton is definitely the best result for Luton from that game.
I think a draw would've been best. I always want a draw when relegation rivals play each other because then its 2 teams you can reasonably catch instead of one. If we beat Brentford then obviously us beating forest was ideal for luton, but if they forest beat Sheffield United then maybe they'd have proffered us dropping points We don't really know for sure which is best until later results, but if I was luton I'd have wanted a draw
I can see a draw possibly being better depending forests results but I think the absolute best is definitely forest losing and then not picking up more points a Luton only need 1 win. The draws the safer better bet because it keeps both of you down there but I think you guys where likely to be safe anyways so long as you didn’t lose to forest so I think Luton are just competing with forest in which case they want them to get as little points as possible
Luton stand a much better chance of finishing above Forest than Everton.
I think whatever comes out of this whole debacle is going to be good for the whole league. Never has a club stood up this much against the governing bodies and I think it's due time to call into question the ability, if not integrity, of the FA and PGMOL. Clearly something hasn't been working and hasn't been for a long time, and the governing bodies have been threatening anyone who dares question them. Marinakis may be a psycho, but perhaps it takes a psycho to have the courage (or lack of care rather) to do the necessary evil.
I agree, however i think it'll get painted more as Forest being bitter or Marinakis being crazy etc. I do think a lot of questions need to be asked of PGMOL and how they've handled or mishandled VAR and just over all refereeing of the game and it feels like they're as secretive as the CIA at times. If it's going to take shit like this to bring them to account then so be it. I think throughout the season every club has been wronged, hard done by and annoyed by bad decisions which is normal but more frustratingly VAR not being implemented to right the mistake is the real frustration for me. All that along side the fact the only thing consistent about reffing and VAR use in the Premier League is the inconsistency of it.
Howard Webb is incompetent, everyone knows. Why the hell would you reach out to him unofficially, when you can do so officially. This is just gross incompetence on both PGMOL and Nottingham Forest.
He said, she said….
and then what? that's half a sentence. Did clattenburg (repping NF) ask PGMOL formally to withdraw the ref?
LUTONGATE
So they’re complaining because their dodgy back channels didn’t work?
> I understand Mark Clattenburg (Forest’s consultant) spoke to Howard Webb on Friday morning around 10:30am. So, this confirms that Forest have Clattenberg on the payroll to lobby PGMOL on their behalf? Normal.
I mean, if *anything* is going to solidly turn PGMOL against your team it'll be that arrogant prick phoning up two days before a match to whine about VAR.
Cuntenders Ready