Premier league corruption

[derbyrameater]

On the bbc world service in the early hours was a segment on exposing several clubs sponsors as scams .

then this morning on tv a couple who have lost hundreds of thousands because a sponsor of dirty leeds was an investment business which they believed would be trustworthy (silly buggers).

the company had been banned by the financial services if I heard correctly,

Cant’t find a trace of it now.

most were the so called big 6

Wolves isn’t on the list

 

[Alex Rae The Substitute]

I imagine a few club lawyers sent some strongly worded emails to the Beeb

 

[Axle]

Was that the one Seville were sponsored by? The Milton Group from Georgia?

I read the whole piece and it was a good piece of investigative journalism. Can’t imagine the BBC would let a year of investigation go without getting it cleared by their lawyers.

For their part Sevillia had said ‘they had no contact with Milton Group after the sponsorship ended’

Edit: this is the piece l read. No mention of PL teams though:

On the hunt for the businessmen behind a billion-dollar scam

A global scam network is preying on investors. We identified the businessmen who appear to be behind it.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[derbyrameater]

Go to 9-06 am

World Service - Listen Live - BBC Sounds

Listen live to BBC World Service on BBC Sounds

www.bbc.co.uk

seems the media are trying to ignore this now?

 

[Madmalc]

Let's think about it a little..
I think it's called due diligence.
All PL clubs exercise due diligence before signing a new player, they will also do that before signing up a new sponsor.
Do PL clubs have a record of always signing great players..

 

[derbyrameater]

Let's think about it a little..
I think it's called due diligence.
All PL clubs exercise due diligence before signing a new player, they will also do that before signing up a new sponsor.
Do PL clubs have a record of always signing great players..

Then why hasn’t every club got dodgy sponsors rather than the top 6 ?

 

[Madmalc]

Then why hasn’t every club got dodgy sponsors rather than the top 6 ?

You could also ask why is Microsoft the target for hackers?
Scammers want money, who has it?
The bigger the fan base the more they're likely to steal.

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Then why hasn’t every club got dodgy sponsors rather than the top 6 ?

You mention Leeds in your OP. They are not part of the Top 6? Maybe the Bottom 3!

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

Then why hasn’t every club got dodgy sponsors rather than the top 6 ?

Who says they havent?
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty,no one makes a mistake until they do lol

 

[derbyrameater]

You mention Leeds in your OP. They are not part of the Top 6? Maybe the Bottom 3!

I did say ‘most’.

 

[derbyrameater]

Who says they havent?
Everyone is innocent until proven guilty,no one makes a mistake until they do lol

The bbc investigated the Premier League as far as I can tell.

the fact this is now being ignored by the msm says something to me.

Amazing those crying corruption don seem to be commenting?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I think these stories have been bubbling about for some time, and have been reported. Sometimes the clubs appear to have been scammed, sometimes it looks like the club are complicit. Anything but transparent.

SPECIAL REPORT: Fulham dump partners after MoS investigation

SPECIAL REPORT BY NICK HARRIS: Fulham last night dramatically terminated one of their newest commercial partnerships following an investigation by the Mail on Sunday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Arsenal fall victim to embarrassing sponsorship scam

The issue came to light after the company denied having signed any deal with Arsenal.

www.sportskeeda.com

Leaked emails reveal Manchester City received payments from Abu Dhabi

Manchester City allegedly liaised with a government agency in the Gulf State over payments and are under Premier League investigation for potential rule-breaking including paying fees for underage players

www.theguardian.com

Man City scandal is not about fair play – it’s about fraud

The Premier League’s bombshell case against Manchester City goes beyond rules of Financial Fair Play and is really about allegations of dishonesty

www.independent.co.uk

 

[derbyrameater]

I think these stories have been bubbling about for some time, and have been reported. Sometimes the clubs appear to have been scammed, sometimes it looks like the club are complicit. Anything but transparent.

SPECIAL REPORT: Fulham dump partners after MoS investigation

SPECIAL REPORT BY NICK HARRIS: Fulham last night dramatically terminated one of their newest commercial partnerships following an investigation by the Mail on Sunday.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Arsenal fall victim to embarrassing sponsorship scam

The issue came to light after the company denied having signed any deal with Arsenal.

www.sportskeeda.com

Leaked emails reveal Manchester City received payments from Abu Dhabi

Manchester City allegedly liaised with a government agency in the Gulf State over payments and are under Premier League investigation for potential rule-breaking including paying fees for underage players

www.theguardian.com

Man City scandal is not about fair play – it’s about fraud

The Premier League’s bombshell case against Manchester City goes beyond rules of Financial Fair Play and is really about allegations of dishonesty

www.independent.co.uk

Thanks

 

[AndyY]

Remember that I don’t think any of us could find much out about W88 and havent they gone on to sponsor Crystal Palace and Villa?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Thanks

That’s not to say there isn’t new dodgy sponsors to be exposed. I think what is noticeable, is that it appears relatively little is reported through the likes of Sky Sports. A case of not wishing to bite the hand that feeds perhaps?

 

[Flump]

The bbc investigated the Premier League as far as I can tell.

the fact this is now being ignored by the msm says something to me.

Aren't the BBC part of the MSM?

Or is that just what they want you to think?!?!?

 

[derbyrameater]

Aren't the BBC part of the MSM?

Or is that just what they want you to think?!?!?

The bbc World Service is a different beast to the rest of the bbc, government funded.

 

[Banks's Mild]

As awful as this all is, and I do feel sorry for anyone that gets scammed, why would you think something was trustworthy just because it's name is on the front of a football shirt or advertised in any other way for that matter. Anything you do which involves investment or purchasing something should be looked into thoroughly first and if any doubts leave well alone and particularly if something seems too good to be true. But people do seem to be fairly gullible or just plain greedy unfortunately, although I appreciate some scams are very clever and elaborate.
As for the clubs allowing this to happen it is just another thing that shows all they care about is how much money they can get in regardless of the morals or validity of where it comes from.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

No shock they look after their own 7 glamour clubs at the cost of the others. How we finished 7th twice must of really upset them we now face the consequences with their decisions

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

No shock they look after their own 7 glamour clubs at the cost of the others. How we finished 7th twice must of really upset them we now face the consequences with their decisions

I keep asking on here but never get an answer - who are the mysterious 'them' or 'they' that people keep on here keep going on about?

 

[Madmalc]

I keep asking on here but never get an answer - who are the mysterious 'them' or 'they' that people keep on here keep going on about?

I guess you've never heard of the Mysterons..

 

[Mr Chad]

I guess you've never heard of the Mysterons..

Wasn't that 2 of the characters created by Hale and Pace ?

 

[Madmalc]

Wasn't that 2 of the characters created by Hale and Pace ?

No it was Captain Scarlets adversaries.

 

[Mr Chad]

No it was Captain Scarlets adversaries.

Whooosh.

 

[Contrarian]

I guess you've never heard of the Mysterons..

Arsenal get a lot more decisions their way since being managed by Captain Black. I think you are on to something.

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

The Premier League have voted against the introduction of automated offside decisions akin to the system used during the Qatar World Cup.

Now why would they do that?

 

[Wolf316]

Please please please let this happen.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1675097534518181890

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Please please please let this happen.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1675097534518181890

That would be a ridiculous rule

All we need is a full speed, 20 seconds review of offsides. If it ain’t clear, goal

 

[JadeWolf]

Please please please let this happen.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1675097534518181890

Not sure on that. If anything you’ll have the same problem as now just the other way, a player will look a yard offside but because the heel of his boot is in line with a defender he’s onside.

And if they did bring it in, we all know which team will be the first to suffer from the new rule!

 

[Wolf316]

That would be a ridiculous rule

All we need is a full speed, 20 seconds review of offsides. If it ain’t clear, goal

That would be way to open for corruption.

 

[The Wolf In The North]

Not sure on that. If anything you’ll have the same problem as now just the other way, a player will look a yard offside but because the heel of his boot is in line with a defender he’s onside.

And if they did bring it in, we all know which team will be the first to suffer from the new rule!

Agreed. It won't change the controversial decisions or arbitrary lines on the pitch, just shifts it one yard ahead, and so misses the whole point of why people hate it. If something isn't obvious to the naked eye, and you have to prove/disprove with multiple angles and computer imagery, then just leave it the hell alone and call it onside based on the current rule as everyone understands it. Give the benefit to the attacking team, and only rule out if you can say immediately/within one review "yeah, that's off".

 

[Wolf316]

Agreed. It won't change the controversial decisions or arbitrary lines on the pitch, just shifts it one yard ahead, and so misses the whole point of why people hate it. If something isn't obvious to the naked eye, and you have to prove/disprove with multiple angles and computer imagery, then just leave it the hell alone and call it onside based on the current rule as everyone understands it. Give the benefit to the attacking team, and only rule out if you can say immediately/within one review "yeah, that's off".

None of those things are going to happen though are they? Like it or not it’s here to stay and at least with this way the advantage is with the attacking team and should see less goals ruled out.

 

[Rauls Headband]

Also what’s the definition of ‘whole body’? Does that include the heel, or they referring to the torso as the body?

Still doesn’t change the fact that you’ll have millimetres being measured in lines across fractions of a second by cameras many yards from the action with decisions being made that still seem to favour the ’sky 6’. Or there will still be no definite angle. Or there will be a missing camera. Or some obscure rule will be brought up etc.

Football is the game that we love because it’s fast paced and emotional. All the emotion is being sucked out the game with no real net benefit. We still have controversial decisions being made. Clear and obvious my behind.

 

[moseleyite]

Yeah, as others have said, it doesn't matter what the offside rule is, it's exactly the same judgement... the relative position of the heels, shoulders, toes and backsides of several people often moving quickly in opposing directions at the precise moment that a ball, potentially several dozen yards away and therefore out of the eyeline of the person making the decision, is kicked.

The rule, by its very nature, is almost impossible to judge accurately and, in fact, I would guess that most fans aren't even bothered with it being enforced to the nth degree... that's not the sort of decision that fans (in my circle anyway) wanted correcting by VAR, it was the absolute bloody clangers that will naturally happen in a fast moving game. This rule change (if it gets beyond the testing stage) will be subject to exactly the same level of incompetence and/or corruption (depending on your own personal paranoia levels this afternoon) as the rule when it was behind/level the defender.

That said, I applaud the intention. I like to see the benefit of the doubt given to attackers in marginal situation.

 

[Contrarian]

Not sure on that. If anything you’ll have the same problem as now just the other way, a player will look a yard offside but because the heel of his boot is in line with a defender he’s onside.

And if they did bring it in, we all know which team will be the first to suffer from the new rule!

That is true. Though I think erring on the side of the attacker makes for an all round better game. And it is often tricky to really predict how changes will pan out. This is potentially a major one, too.

For example, we've seen an increase in attackers trying to win penalties by blasting the ball at defenders trying for handball, as well as incessant diving. And a general decrease in open play goals. I think this is mainly because of rule changes such as the toenail offside basically punishing attempts at exciting forward play , while rewarding more dubious activities.

It would be good if it stops the trend of the game becoming "penaltyball". Far too many games being decided by penalties in recent years.

Of course, we will be the first team to concede a goal that is initially disallowed, then allowed because VAR shows the Man Utd player has a toenail onside, rather than offside.

If they do bring it in, could we get a goal start v Liverpool for Neto's goal from 3 seasons ago?

 

[JadeWolf]

That is true. Though I think erring on the side of the attacker makes for an all round better game. And it is often tricky to really predict how changes will pan out. This is potentially a major one, too.

For example, we've seen an increase in attackers trying to win penalties by blasting the ball at defenders trying for handball, as well as incessant diving. And a general decrease in open play goals. I think this is mainly because of rule changes such as the toenail offside basically punishing attempts at exciting forward play , while rewarding more dubious activities.

It would be good if it stops the trend of the game becoming "penaltyball". Far too many games being decided by penalties in recent years.

Of course, we will be the first team to concede a goal that is initially disallowed, then allowed because VAR shows the Man Utd player has a toenail onside, rather than offside.

If they do bring it in, could we get a goal start v Liverpool for Neto's goal from 3 seasons ago?

I don’t disagree with you but I just think, is football really about whether someone’s toe is onside or offside? Yes we don’t want games and potentially league titles decided by poor decisions but equally we don’t want games being paused for three minutes while some spanner in a studio draws lines on a screen. Personally I’d scrap VAR altogether. But that’s just me.

 

[Jefe]

The problem isn't which part of the body is ruled offside, it's the obsessive timesink micromanagement of each incident.

 

[Contrarian]

I don’t disagree with you but I just think, is football really about whether someone’s toe is onside or offside? Yes we don’t want games and potentially league titles decided by poor decisions but equally we don’t want games being paused for three minutes while some spanner in a studio draws lines on a screen. Personally I’d scrap VAR altogether. But that’s just me.

I totally agree. I think VAR is useless in football, but those in charge won't backtrack now. Many of the recent rules tinkerings have been to make the game fit with VAR. And that's the problem - rather than roll back VAR, they will keep adding new rules to shoe horn the game into something that fits VAR better. I just think with offside, I'd rather it be as it was (and over the years, given the speed of the game, it was amazing how often the officials decisions were proved correct). But if not, then erring on the side of the attacker. And as I said, so much has been invested in VAR by those huge egos and salaries at the top, they won't back down now. So I see it as damage limitation, unfortunately.

There were a few games last season, where there were so many stoppages and each set piece was taking so long for both teams to line up, it was looking already like the game is trending towards American football, or rugby. Just a minute or two burst of action in between interminable stoppages. It's horrible and has happened gradually, so perhaps we don't notice so much?

When did it become normal for sides to take 2+ minutes to set up free kicks and corners? For the game to stop for minutes every time a player gets on field treatment for virtually every knock, however small? I'm in rant mode now, should enjoy the break instead.

 

[lostwolf]

None of those things are going to happen though are they? Like it or not it’s here to stay and at least with this way the advantage is with the attacking team and should see less goals ruled out.

Actually I reckon it's entirely conceivable that VAR could be scrapped within a few years: popular opinion is against it, it doesn't particularly benefit the status quo (though some argue otherwise) so there's not that going in it's 'favour', and getting rid wouldn't mean any radical change, just a bit of a climbdown from the authorities. Just **** it off, it ruins the spectacle. The VAR experiment failed, time to accept it.

 

[lostwolf]

I don’t disagree with you but I just think, is football really about whether someone’s toe is onside or offside? Yes we don’t want games and potentially league titles decided by poor decisions but equally we don’t want games being paused for three minutes while some spanner in a studio draws lines on a screen. Personally I’d scrap VAR altogether. But that’s just me.

It's not just you Jade, it's the majority of people who go to games. There was a fantasy that there could be a technological solution to the 'problem' of refereeing subjectivity and human fallibility, but VAR has been proven fallible itself and, more importantly for those of us who love the game, it came at too great a cost because it spoils the fun!