This Wenger charge for calling into question the integrity of the referees

[Luis Anaconda]

Yes, something like that. I recall his comments actually being rather even-handed, under the circumstances.

He actually admitted it was a penalty though which rather undermined any complaints

[SWv2]

I'm not sure I would necessarily count a ref "disliking" a team as corruption.

I think as balanced, reasoned adults we can all agree the issue if one of incompetence and human error as opposed to conspiracy or dislike.

As I read an Arsenal blogger suggest yesterday - "Are the Laws of the Game too subjective to be effective?"

[Sir C]

I think as balanced, reasoned adults we can all agree the issue if one of imcompetence and human error as opposed to conspiracy or dislike.

As I read an Arsenal blogger suggest yesterday - "Are the Laws of the Game too subjective to be effective?"

It is usually. With Riley and Dean it is corruption.

[SWv2]

It is usually. With Riley and Dean it is corruption.

Blimey. Do we know who is paying them?

[Ash]

I think as balanced, reasoned adults we can all agree the issue if one of incompetence and human error as opposed to conspiracy or dislike.

One word, my friend.

Calciopoli.

[Sir C]

Blimey. Do we know who is paying them?

Payment, intimidation or personal preference; the reason is immaterial. I've seen many refereeing mistakes. I've even seen incompetent referees. If you can't see the differnce between those and Dean and Riley, you're simply not looking.

[Luis Anaconda]

One word, my friend.

Calciopoli.

Ah - I miss their pizzas

[SWv2]

One word, my friend.

Calciopoli.

I am unsure how dodgy affairs in Italy over a decade ago coincide with the incompetence of Mike Dean which is the primary issue here.

[redgunamo]

Out of curiosity, has a manager ever been charged for saying "you don't get the decisions at the big grounds"?

Because I think I must have heard that said 3 million times, and it is rather explicitly questioning the integrity, or certainly no less so than Wenger's comments.

Different matter entirely, imo. The favouring of the underdog is to be inherent in any real understanding and appreciation of a game invented, popularised by the English.

Foreigners, like Wenger, simply don't, cannot and probably will never get this. That's why they never invent any decent games that anyone's interested in.

[Burney]

I think as balanced, reasoned adults we can all agree the issue if one of incompetence and human error as opposed to conspiracy or dislike.

As I read an Arsenal blogger suggest yesterday - "Are the Laws of the Game too subjective to be effective?"

I've said this for a long time. Given that it's the world's biggest game, its laws are a fücking joke and leave far too much to the referee's opinion.

Of course, there is the argument that this ambiguity is part of what makes it so popular, but even so.