• Hey Guest!
    Enjoy the This Is Anfield Forums but want to remove the adverts? Now you can do so by clicking here.
    Thanks for your support!

Conspiracy? Bias? Dumb luck? Why do LFC get shit decisions?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
700
In this wider debate about conspiracy, bias and unfair treatment, maybe we need to look a bit closer to home, especially when it comes to the media.

The media sustain themselves on driving clicks and turning that into ad revenue. Maybe a sure fire way to get clicks is to chat shit about LFC? Liverpool fans certainly seem very susceptible to rage sharing the latest bollocks that Stan Collymore has come out with, or a transfer rumour about Sadio Mane.
The question then is "Why Liverpool"?
Is the rage engendered by the media negativity or is the click bait a product of Liverpool supporters being susceptible to their trap? Really a chicken and egg question.
I think the media narrative is driven by the Murdoch agenda, of keeping Liverpool in a negative light. They use the 'victims' identity to create a negativity towards the club and the city, and in doing so create that mindset in organisations and in popular culture.
Wolves supporters singing the 'Sign on' song? In a place where unemployment is rife? This is endemic in other clubs supporters, fuelled for a reason, by a very dubious media agenda.
 


Irishanfield

Internet Terrorist
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
4,800
If you bribe a traffic warden to get out of a parking ticket and someone else bribes a traffic cop to get out of a speeding ticket do you think they're both conspiring despite never meeting each other? Or in that circumstance do you concede that they are individual, stand-alone, cases of corruption?

You're trying to twist what Dane has (reasonably) said and his meaning into something he hasn't said or meant. All so you can then take the piss out of him for being a conspiracy theorist. You're practically the only person in here still debating if there is a conspiracy or not. It's coming across as trolling at this stage.
The point is that it is more likely that there would be an organised plot against us than a whole load of individual ones. When you say a number of refs are corrupt, not bias against us that says there is an agenda towards us. Where is any proof (or even some semblance of proof) for these allegations. I'm sorry if you see it as trolling but when you make these kinda allegations you have to expect to get called out on them because despite you believing them others like me do find them a bit Embarrassing. Show me some sort of evidence and re. Dane. I'm sure Dane couldn't give a fuck whether some random Irish lad believes his ideas or not even if he though I was trolling him.

But just to keep the peace, I'll stay out of your happy place thread
 

Rambler

Bootle Boy
Ad-free Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
3,280
In this wider debate about conspiracy, bias and unfair treatment, maybe we need to look a bit closer to home, especially when it comes to the media.

The media sustain themselves on driving clicks and turning that into ad revenue. Maybe a sure fire way to get clicks is to chat shit about LFC? Liverpool fans certainly seem very susceptible to rage sharing the latest bollocks that Stan Collymore has come out with, or a transfer rumour about Sadio Mane.
My advice would be don't read or listen to gutter media and if you do, don't rise to the bait...........Looks like our fans are their own worst enemies.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1063677/Real-Madrid-Barcelona-transfer-Harry-Kane-Tottenham 4 comments.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6823561/Real-Madrid-relaunch-pursuit-Liverpool-star-Sadio-Mane.html 303 comments
 

bazza66

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
866
In this wider debate about conspiracy, bias and unfair treatment, maybe we need to look a bit closer to home, especially when it comes to the media.

The media sustain themselves on driving clicks and turning that into ad revenue. Maybe a sure fire way to get clicks is to chat shit about LFC? Liverpool fans certainly seem very susceptible to rage sharing the latest bollocks that Stan Collymore has come out with, or a transfer rumour about Sadio Mane.
The 'poke it with a stick and see if it reacts' tactic? Definitely agree with you on that. Not 100% on the 'rage' wagon, but...

I'm sure it is because we (as a fan base) mobilised more than any other in English football on two major occasions: Hillsborough, and the Two Cowboys asset strippers.

I won't go into Hillsborough, as all LFC supporters should be aware, but this was a sustained action for decades, not months. There are few, if any, parallels in the game for such an establishment cover-up. Everyone thought we would go away, but we didn't. This caused a lot of "they are just chippy Scousers" narrative (touchy, defensive - not the nice chippy). Heard that a lot since I moved down South. I also learned there's no point arguing against it, as if you do you've just proved their point!

The Cowboys was different. General opinion seemed to be that, once again, we were 'chippy' and overreacting to normal owners. Even
'Arry Redknapp and his tax-dodging dog had an opinion. Some ex LFC pros also came out with pro Cowboy shite. Again, it was the 'victim' mentality of LFC fans according to fans of other clubs, as well as lots of the media. If there's a chance of a protest, or a minute's silence, we were supposed to be all over it. Compare that with the Green and Gold movement of our friends down the M62. That aged well, didn't it.

So yes, we have a more active (militant) fanbase than most, but it would be weird if we didn't after all that. Definitely agree with you, Mascot, that for the click driven tossers that is a bit of a godsend.
 

bazza66

TIA Youth Team
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
866
My advice would be don't read or listen to gutter media and if you do, don't rise to the bait...........Looks like our fans are their own worst enemies.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1063677/Real-Madrid-Barcelona-transfer-Harry-Kane-Tottenham 4 comments.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-6823561/Real-Madrid-relaunch-pursuit-Liverpool-star-Sadio-Mane.html 303 comments
I'm not going to look at it this time, Rambler, but I bet a fair old portion of those comments will include the terms: Klipperty; Loserpool; Analfield; Anfailed; Liverpool is Blue and something like Kloppbottler. They will come from places as diverse as Lagos, near Hemel Hempstead, Salford, Liverpool not Norway.

This demonstrates that it is the name of LFC that attracts the traffic, all kinds of traffic, not just from Reds. Again, another reason for spurious LFC stories.
 



Mascot88

Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders
Admin
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
21,127
The question then is "Why Liverpool"?
Is the rage engendered by the media negativity or is the click bait a product of Liverpool supporters being susceptible to their trap? Really a chicken and egg question.
I think the media narrative is driven by the Murdoch agenda, of keeping Liverpool in a negative light. They use the 'victims' identity to create a negativity towards the club and the city, and in doing so create that mindset in organisations and in popular culture.
Wolves supporters singing the 'Sign on' song? In a place where unemployment is rife? This is endemic in other clubs supporters, fuelled for a reason, by a very dubious media agenda.
I think you are creating a causal link there.

I have not at anytime since the late eighties seen any significant press pushing the self-pity city angle, murdoch press or other. They wouldn’t fucking dare. Whenever a columnist puts their head above the parapet (like Boris Johnson did in the Spectator) they are generally pilloried and slapped down. Occasional articles which do step out of line are usually met with derision and scorn, and not just from Scousers.

I think it would then be very hard to draw a link from the media to why fans taunt Liverpool fans with songs about poverty. I think it’s likely a mix of the legacy of the eighties, ignorance (especially when fans from places like Sunderland join in), and the simple fact that it does seem to wind us up.

I’ve said before that all it takes is one dickhead in a crowd to give that crowd permission to behave appallingly, and Liverpool fans can be just as bad as anyone else. I’ve heard Liverpool fans singing appalling things.

The poverty angle has been particularly rife in the M62 Derby, and that’s a historic legacy going back to the building of the Manchester Ship Canal, which effectively undercut Liverpool’s port industry, and contributed to a rise in poverty in the area, and jobs were lost to Manchester. I just think, football fans not being a generally enlightened group, have leapt on it as well. Just like they sing the Gerrard skipping song, despite it having fuck all to do with them.

I can’t see how we can seriously suggest that fans turning up and calling us murderers or bin dippers is the fault of the media in 2019. The only articles I’ve seen on the issue are ones pointing out how brainless this toxic rivalry is.

The example given above by @Rambler above is really a really clear example of why the media tend to focus on Liverpool, in transfer gossip, provocative comment pieces etc. Why invent shit about another team, when a Liverpool rumour will generate 300% more reaction?
 

Quicksand

Looking for Clues...
Joined
Nov 16, 2016
Messages
700
Why invent shit about another team, when a Liverpool rumour will generate 300% more reaction?
I think that is answered by the question though. The real question is why will the media get the reaction? Liverpool supporters are no more paranoid or insular than any other group?
Maybe its a legacy issue, spawned from the negativity generated by media since the rag was banned, and since the Murdoch machine found they had an agenda. It hasnt happened by accident, surely we agree on that much?
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,525
The point is that it is more likely that there would be an organised plot against us than a whole load of individual ones. When you say a number of refs are corrupt, not bias against us that says there is an agenda towards us. Where is any proof (or even some semblance of proof) for these allegations. I'm sorry if you see it as trolling but when you make these kinda allegations you have to expect to get called out on them because despite you believing them others like me do find them a bit Embarrassing. Show me some sort of evidence and re. Dane. I'm sure Dane couldn't give a fuck whether some random Irish lad believes his ideas or not even if he though I was trolling him.

But just to keep the peace, I'll stay out of your happy place thread
I'm dumbfounded.

First you've decided that a wide conspiracy involving multiple authority figures is more likely than individual bribes and cases of corruption (despite that regularly happening in sports).

Second because you believe that, you've decided that's what someone else means, despite them saying several times that it isn't.

Third you've decided that (despite the fact you think it's more likely than something that regularly exists) this is so unbelievable that Dane and others should be mocked.

Either very daft or trolling.
 



epsomred

Give yourselves the chance to be heros
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
732
I'm dumbfounded.

First you've decided that a wide conspiracy involving multiple authority figures is more likely than individual bribes and cases of corruption (despite that regularly happening in sports).

Second because you believe that, you've decided that's what someone else means, despite them saying several times that it isn't.

Third you've decided that (despite the fact you think it's more likely than something that regularly exists) this is so unbelievable that Dane and others should be mocked.

Either very daft or trolling.
I know I said I was done with this thread but I have to agree with @Irishanfield. There is no evidence in the public domain to show that any of the current referees are corrupt and neither is there any to show they are being paid to give decisions against LFC. Of course corruption has gone on in other sports and other countries and I hear dark rumours about a current premier league goalkeeper with a massive gambling problem but these are just rumours.

If it did go on [email protected] suggests 4 questions arise ;

Who is paying these refs to give decisions against us ?
Why are they doing it and how do the payers benefit ?
Which refs are taking the bribes and are you prepared to risk an expensive libel case by naming them in a public forum ?
What evidence do you have ?

I am pretty sure the people making these claims don’t have verifiable answers to any of these questions but I am happy for @Dane etc to prove me wrong.

On a wider note I think the reason these allegations piss me off are threefold ; firstly they fuel the “victims/self pity city” shit that we routinely get from other fans at away games, secondly they undermine my love of the game and the club. If it is all fixed and corrupt then I have dedicated 40 years of my life and £100,000s in tickets, flights, hotels etc on a massive fraud. Finally top refs are not paid very much (typically £50k a year at best) and will have dedicated their whole life to the game often starting out in the Sunday leagues. Anyone who has played Sunday league in this country knows what shit these guys have had to put up with but without these people putting in this effort there wouldn’t be any form of grass roots football at all.

So if you can answer my 4 questions to prove your allegations that English refs are corrupt and routinely paid to give decisions against one of the biggest clubs in the world then I suggest you a) post it all on here so you can prove me and a lot of other people wrong and b) go to the media and sell your story for a lot of cash.

If you are just making it all up then I suggest you leave the rest of us alone to believe in the purity of the English leagues, be grateful for the efforts of the refs who are the bedrock of the game, cherish the values our club and to enjoy what could be an amazing title win.
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,577
Another wild assumption sprouts roots.

You dodged my response to the last ridiculous post where you tagged me, try not to dodge this one.

So why dont you answer my question instead........ Where did I make any mention of bribes?

@epsomred I'll wait.
 
Last edited:

epsomred

Give yourselves the chance to be heros
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
732
Another wild assumption sprouts roots.

You dodged my response to the last ridiculous post where you tagged me, try not to dodge this one.

So why dont you answer my question instead........ Where did I make any mention of bribes?

@epsomred I'll wait.
Regarding corruption, it's very possible that a few of our referees go beyond incompetence and fall into the corrupt bracket.
 



Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,577
Well done, more assumptions.
Corrupt does not necessarily mean money changes hands. I've highlighted some text to help you understand a bit better.
corrupt
[kəˈrʌpt]

ADJECTIVE
  1. having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.
    "unscrupulous logging companies assisted by corrupt officials"
    synonyms:
    dishonest · dishonourable · unscrupulous · unprincipled · amoral ·
    [more]
I've stated elsewhere that it's not a stretch of the imagination that some referees might be influenced by the mass media craving for City to accomplish the quadruple. Several decisions against us and for City strengthen that stretch of imagination.

But you carry on jumping to conclusions if it makes you feel better in your point scoring quest.
 

epsomred

Give yourselves the chance to be heros
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
732
I am guessing your not a libel lawyer because that definition is really not helping your case. “To act dishonestly in return for money or persona gain” means you think they are being bribed. It does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that you think they are giving in to media pressure. That is a much less serious allegation and obviously much harder to prove.

I don’t mind if like many posters, you think refs cave in rather than make contentious decisions in the full glare of the media spotlight because they are only humans and that’s understandable, I do get annoyed if you impute their integrity by calling them “corrupt” then try to wriggle out of the commonly understood meaning of what you said.

It’s nothing personal by the way, I just think that refs get a shit time from too many posters who make wild allegations about their honesty and integrity without any evidence. if we didn’t have honest refs we wouldn’t have the game that both you and I love so much.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,693
I am guessing your not a libel lawyer because that definition is really not helping your case. “To act dishonestly in return for money or persona gain” means you think they are being bribed. It does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that you think they are giving in to media pressure. That is a much less serious allegation and obviously much harder to prove.

I don’t mind if like many posters, you think refs cave in rather than make contentious decisions in the full glare of the media spotlight because they are only humans and that’s understandable, I do get annoyed if you impute their integrity by calling them “corrupt” then try to wriggle out of the commonly understood meaning of what you said.

It’s nothing personal by the way, I just think that refs get a shit time from too many posters who make wild allegations about their honesty and integrity without any evidence. if we didn’t have honest refs we wouldn’t have the game that both you and I love so much.
You're certainly not a libel lawyer or any kind of lawyer.

Corrupt covers a vast array of unethical, unlawful, illegal behaviour. Yes, it can include the taking of bribes but it doesn't have to by any means. At it's most base it's simply inequitable behaviour motivated by personal interest.
 

Dane

NEXT!
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
6,577
I am guessing your not a libel lawyer because that definition is really not helping your case. “To act dishonestly in return for money or persona gain” means you think they are being bribed. It does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that you think they are giving in to media pressure. That is a much less serious allegation and obviously much harder to prove.

I don’t mind if like many posters, you think refs cave in rather than make contentious decisions in the full glare of the media spotlight because they are only humans and that’s understandable, I do get annoyed if you impute their integrity by calling them “corrupt” then try to wriggle out of the commonly understood meaning of what you said.

It’s nothing personal by the way, I just think that refs get a shit time from too many posters who make wild allegations about their honesty and integrity without any evidence. if we didn’t have honest refs we wouldn’t have the game that both you and I love so much.
I'm not trying to wriggle out of anything.
I'll concede that perception of my use of the word corrupt could see my meaning misunderstood.

@Kopstar has pointed out in far more clarity how the word corrupt can be used and intended.

But it's blatantly obvious from the theme of all of my posts that I dont think there's a major conspiracy, orchestrated by the authorities, or have a group of referees "got together" to form a conspiracy. Nor have I suggested they are taking bribes.

I dont really care how annoyed you get if referees integrity is called into question in the face of ridiculously administered decisions.
I believe it's entirely possible some of these refs are bent, and you dont.
It's nothing personal either by the way.
 

epsomred

Give yourselves the chance to be heros
Ad-free Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
732
No in law it does not have the wide definition @Kopstar is trying to give it. “Corrupt” is very clearly defined in the Bribery act 2011 and it means you are alleging somebody behaves unlawfully or improperly for personal gain. There has to be some sort of exchange involved between the parties. You can’t call somebody “corrupt” then mount a defence of saying you meant they were incompetent or unethical. They are substantively different allegations and you would probably lose a libel case if you tried to rely on those interpretations as a defence. Be careful not to name names too many times on public forums or you could be in a whole world of trouble.

Anyway let’s agree to differ. This is a football forum, we are fellow fans and we are top of the league so why are we arguing legal semantics ? .

Finally I would like to apologise for my snide post to you and @Quicksand just after the Fulham game. It was uncalled for and inappropriate. We should be celebrating at times like that not petty point scoring off fellow fans.
 



Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
11,525
I know I said I was done with this thread but I have to agree with @Irishanfield. There is no evidence in the public domain to show that any of the current referees are corrupt and neither is there any to show they are being paid to give decisions against LFC. Of course corruption has gone on in other sports and other countries and I hear dark rumours about a current premier league goalkeeper with a massive gambling problem but these are just rumours.

If it did go on [email protected] suggests 4 questions arise ;

Who is paying these refs to give decisions against us ?
Why are they doing it and how do the payers benefit ?
Which refs are taking the bribes and are you prepared to risk an expensive libel case by naming them in a public forum ?
What evidence do you have ?

I am pretty sure the people making these claims don’t have verifiable answers to any of these questions but I am happy for @Dane etc to prove me wrong.

On a wider note I think the reason these allegations piss me off are threefold ; firstly they fuel the “victims/self pity city” shit that we routinely get from other fans at away games, secondly they undermine my love of the game and the club. If it is all fixed and corrupt then I have dedicated 40 years of my life and £100,000s in tickets, flights, hotels etc on a massive fraud. Finally top refs are not paid very much (typically £50k a year at best) and will have dedicated their whole life to the game often starting out in the Sunday leagues. Anyone who has played Sunday league in this country knows what shit these guys have had to put up with but without these people putting in this effort there wouldn’t be any form of grass roots football at all.

So if you can answer my 4 questions to prove your allegations that English refs are corrupt and routinely paid to give decisions against one of the biggest clubs in the world then I suggest you a) post it all on here so you can prove me and a lot of other people wrong and b) go to the media and sell your story for a lot of cash.

If you are just making it all up then I suggest you leave the rest of us alone to believe in the purity of the English leagues, be grateful for the efforts of the refs who are the bedrock of the game, cherish the values our club and to enjoy what could be an amazing title win.
For My part I was only ever talking about the possibility/probability that in a sport so wide and with so many officials that there is corruption. If you don't want to believe this is a possibility that's up to you. But I think that would be very naive. I'm not saying the only corruption in the sport would be effecting us and us alone. But likewise there could be cases of corruption that affect us directly. They don't have to be a referee accepting a brown paper bag full of money. They can be accountants being paid extra to open up accounts for dogs, keepers spot fixing or clubs paying legal entities to advise how to navigate round loop holes on ffp, youth recruitment or 3rd party ownership rules.
 

Kopstar

★★★★★★
Ad-free Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
13,693
No in law it does not have the wide definition @Kopstar is trying to give it. “Corrupt” is very clearly defined in the Bribery act 2011 and it means you are alleging somebody behaves unlawfully or improperly for personal gain. There has to be some sort of exchange involved between the parties. You can’t call somebody “corrupt” then mount a defence of saying you meant they were incompetent or unethical. They are substantively different allegations and you would probably lose a libel case if you tried to rely on those interpretations as a defence. Be careful not to name names too many times on public forums or you could be in a whole world of trouble.

Anyway let’s agree to differ. This is a football forum, we are fellow fans and we are top of the league so why are we arguing legal semantics ? .

Finally I would like to apologise for my snide post to you and @Quicksand just after the Fulham game. It was uncalled for and inappropriate. We should be celebrating at times like that not petty point scoring off fellow fans.
:eh?: "Corrupt" isn't defined at all in the Bribery Act 2010.

Besides, the word is being used as it is commonly understood in normal usage.

There doesn't have to be an exchange between the parties.

I'm out.
 



PeachesEnRegalia

No Offense, @Maria....
Joined
Jul 10, 2017
Messages
1,509
I'll still always call it Londonderry. Even though it's longer to say. And doesn't really make any sense from a historical perspective, it'd still get me dirty looks in West Belfast, and that's what's most important here. Mixing it up a little, you know?
 

shachart

"You're supposed to help people that need a bit."
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
2,011
Funny thing is, I am certsin that City fans feel exactly the same. They will bring up all the goals we scored from offside positions this year, Sane's disallowed goal from last season, and nobody from Oasis was knighted unlike the Beatles.

Rubbish
 

Commando

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
1,909
Funny thing is, I am certsin that City fans feel exactly the same. They will bring up all the goals we scored from offside positions this year, Sane's disallowed goal from last season, and nobody from Oasis was knighted unlike the Beatles.

Rubbish

That line makes it worth scrolling through the last thirteen pages. :well done: lol
 



Status
Not open for further replies.