Bribes and cheating

I believe the money paid to the Irish FA (FAI) was because, FAI made such a noise about the blatant handball and their case was strong enough that the FIA were prepared mount a protest via legal action.

Because the play-off was so late in the qualification timetable and the clock was ticking towards the South Africa World Cup, FIFA agreed to "loan" the payment to the FIA towards their new Aviva stadium which would be repaid if Ireland qualified for the 2014 Brazil World Cup. Ireland didnÂ’t qualify so the "loan" was converted to a grant.

Yes, you can argue itÂ’s a method of payment in good old FIFA style to comply with what FIFA need.

With all the money that is involved in football, it is incredulous to think that match-fixing, bribes etc are non-existent.

Sure, players in lower leagues can be tempted to throw matches because of the huge monetary incentives. Some argue that when players are already millionaires. But consider the enormous amount of money that is involved through gambling, syndicates are bound to get into the act.

The infamous 1994 tragedy comes to mind. The Columbian player who was shot dead because he scored an own goal; ordered by a Columbian druglord who bet big on Columbia getting through.

While I do watch and enjoy the game, and put this out of the mind, it is naïve to think that it cannot happen.

You might not be able to bribe the players, but you can certain bribe the referee, the linesman etc. And when bribes donÂ’t work, threats certainly can.

So, there you go...

The refereeing of Everton in that game at Villarreal is inexplicable.

Is the FIA a thing or do you mean FAI? Sorry, itÂ’s just that Paul corrected you and then used FIA himself?

And when was Ferguson sent off?

Was Duncan sent off in this match?.I thought it was a case of a perfectly legitimate goal being disallowed, but maybe IÂ’m wrong.

We were robbed that day in Villarreal without doubt, but we also got away with one when Bolton scored a goal that crossed the line years earlier but was never given. Bolton ultimately got relegated that year instead of us. I do feel everything in football evens itself out.

a) Ferguson scored a goal that was disallowed, he wasn’t sent off (how can anyone not know that? – the ref with whistle in mouth blowing up for a foul is forever etched in my memory!). Imo the ref made an honest mistake – live with it or don’t, either way it’s not going to change anything.

b) The payment to the FAI was to avoid going down a long protracted legal case (which would not have gotten Ireland into 2010 the World Cup anyway as it would have taken too long). Right or wrong, you canÂ’t really see this as a bribe. The ref screwed up, the FAI wanted to sue FIFA for the refs mistake, FIFA effectively settled out of court. The end. (The FAI didnÂ’t have to accept the payment but they chose to and move on.)

I thought the goal in the Villarreal game was disallowed because of a foul by Marcus Bent.

Collina

Denis (#7)

Comedy at its best. And, IÂ’ll bet you buy Evian water. Spell backwards mate and youÂ’ll get ma drift!

On what grounds could FIFA have been legally threatened by FIA? Referee incompetence? DoesnÂ’t make sense to me. I am not one for conspiracy theory but a payoff to conceal foul play of some sort seems possible or indeed more likely the way this has been reported this week.

NB, apologies for my mistake – I was using one finger typing at 6 in the morning after listening to the news on the radio when waking up and I am the wrong side of 50 – it will happen to you one day too. ;)

Has a precedent been set? Will FIFA pay out on future hand balls? For his blatant deliberate cheating was Thiery Henry disciplined by FIFA?

Has he ever acknowledged that he did cheat? What happened to the referee? To what use was the ٦M put?

Colina destroyed his reputation after that game. I canÂ’t believe it was Villarreal (who are even poorer than us) who paid him. I believe it was pressure from Platini and his Uefa mob who didnÂ’t want FIVE English teams in the CL.
As for the Irish thingy, Delaney should hang his head in shame accepting a pittance from Herr Blatter and his gnomes. Henry needs sacking from Sky as he was the instigator of all of this.

I was at Villarreal with loads of other Evertonians, great couple of days... shame about the result. I was calling Colina a cheat with the rest of them but deep down I knew the damage was done at Goodison, losing the home leg 2-1.

Was ref Tom Ovrebo also part of the conspiracy? Ever hear his name mentioned? Not really. WeÂ’ve been ripped off by refs for decades, but we also have to look at ourselves as a team sometimes .A team with Kilbane, Bent, Davies, Pistone, Li Tie etc was being carried by Arteta and Cahill and simply were not good enough over two legs (Beattie was a lone striker at home!)... we lost BOTH games. Villarreal went on to the semi-finals, we got battered 5-1 in Bucharest. Hate to say it but we didnÂ’t deserve to win either game.

DoesnÂ’t really come down to who deserved to win - in a fair game many a side wins but maybe didnÂ’t deserve to. Ireland were never going to progress far but they were given ٣million and there was no record made of the payment in Ireland.

I remember them making complete prats of themselves in the media after this match but ٣ million to stop moaning seems excessive to me, unless they were getting close to revealing a systematic effort to ensure France qualified which would of course undermine the entire game worldwide.

Similarities with Evertons match are apparent, at least from our point of view.

http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2015/6/4/8729201/fifa-corruption-ireland-france-2010-world-cup-john-delaney

Thomas, so you are advocating cheating? At the end pf the day however you dress it up thatÂ’s what it was.

Our goal that was disallowed was exactly the same as Sol Campbells in 1998 England v the Argies.

You canÂ’t come on here and try to explain everything away with useless reasons.

Like the song says "If you know youÂ’re history" I know mine, you my friend sound like youÂ’re repeating what youÂ’ve been told down the pub!

There was no similarity between FergusonÂ’s and CampbellÂ’s disallowed goals. Campbell was penalised (unjustly I agree) for climbing over the defender to get to the ball. FergusonÂ’s goal was not disallowed for any infringement by the scorer but for some imagined pushing off the ball by Bent.

I agree though -- no conspiracy, just an awful decision by an awful ref.

Pa Carty @6

If you are going to use that as an argument letÂ’s look at that incident properly. Yes, the ball crossed the line. However, look at the incident again, Southall was fouled, and I mean a real foul, not just being breathed on by a forward, but the referee didnÂ’t blow which led directly to the "goal", which, fortunately the ref didnÂ’t give. Justice . People say that these things even themselves out and, over a couple of seasons, I suppose they do. But not getting a penalty when youÂ’re,say, 4-0 up and not getting a penalty when Carragher dragged Lescott down for a nailed on penalty and the chance of getting or beating the RS are slightly different.

Exactly right Ray @20. Nathan Blake clearly jumped into Southall for that Bolton Â’goalÂ’ deeming what happened afterwards irrelevant, as it was a foul on the Â’keeper. It infuriates me that this never gets mentioned when the (anti-Everton) media bring it up. The fact I remember it was Nathan Blake shows how etched in my mind the foul was. Justice prevailed in that instance.

Surely CampbellÂ’s goal was disallowed because shearer "elbowed" the Argentinian goalie before it went in?

The perceived FAI case against FIFA was more to do with a last minute change in the World Cup rules than the hand ball according to FAI President last night. The play offs for the World Cup were to be an open draw basis.. FIFA, looking at the line up, decided it would be better to seed the draw to keep the top countries apart. This was the main plank of the Irish complaint. However, in the letter to the FAI from FIFA, it references the Henry incident.

What is really funny nay tragic here, is that there is quite a large group of twitters, who felt the hand ball should have been challenged after the match was over. We can only presume that this cohort belong to the masses of red clad supporters in Ireland who are unfamiliar with refereeing decisions going against them.

Sadly, as described above, we blues are very familiar with the likes of the Henry non-decision. Even the late Giroud header at Goodison where he had a handful of DistinÂ’s shirt as he jumped for the ball, preventing Distin from gettjng off the ground. A technique perfected by Crouch against Trinidad in a WC final game with a grip of the defenderÂ’s dreadlocks.

Reminds me of Phil NevilleÂ’s early days in blue, when he was picking up yellow cards by the bagful, presumably for challenges which were deemed ok when clad in red. Its certainly unlikely that he changed his tackling technique.

Listening to TalkSport yesterday, Blatter was Laughing at Ireland on stage which riled up the FAI further.

Of course the payment can be described as an out of court settlement. An actual court case would have put much focus on FIFA and lack of technology in the game which at that time they were fully against.

As for money changing hands, I still want a valid reason for Wembley getting two CL finals in a row!

I suppose what I am commenting on is that a payment mechanism from people at the top of the game to member organisation and/or their representatives is in place that was not recorded openly at either end of the deal - at the very least such a system is open to abuse.
In this case we can question why any payment was necessary and who could sanction such a deal. These types of payments seem to be routinely made and lacked any transparency. Could that lead to cheating? Yes. Should this be first on the list to stop in a new FIFA? Yes most definitely. Did it affect any of our games? We would indeed be naive to think otherwise at the moment.

I also canÂ’t make any sense of why any payment was made at all in relation to the handball..which is why IÂ’d like to know all and every detail of this Â’dealÂ’

A shit decision was made certainly, but thereÂ’s been a trillion of them and no matter how much moaning, whining and crying a team (or itÂ’s supporters) has done after, I canÂ’t remember ever hearing of a suit-case full of cash and an accompanying "Yeah sorry about that, just shut the fuck up up and take this"

For what?

And it canÂ’t be complicated, there are only two possible options with a bad refereeing decision.

1) He got it wrong because heÂ’s a human who made a mistake

2) It wasnÂ’t a mistake.

Not many other options are there?

Now as I say, I canÂ’t remember one instance ever (ever, ever, ever) of a team being compensated because a ref made a mistake, so... um... so... erm... what the FUCK is going on!?

Eugene, Read FrankÂ’s post at #23 above. It was to do with seedings rather than the Henry incident.

I fully understand bad decisions. I accept they happen. Humans make mistakes. Surely a bit of controversy is part of the gameÂ’s appeal?

But the Collina one goes beyond that. IÂ’ve watched and rewatched it and thereÂ’s simply nothing to see. You couldnÂ’t give that decision unless you were actively looking to give it.

I compare it to the Hutchison derby. That was a bent decision. But at least I can see why it was bent. I get why he chose to disregard the rules even if I disagree hugely with it.

With Collina thereÂ’s no such explanation that can be given. I feel like a bit of a crank saying it, but I genuinely think that was UEFA pressure or, worse dodgy money. That would make us victims of one of the greatest footballing conspiracies of all time. But given that all massive organisations have issues, youÂ’d have to think that someone will be the biggest victim. Might as well be us.

Ordinarily I would say that the Collina incident was just one of those unfortunate things but there were a couple of elements that make it, at best, suspicious.

First, there were to be five English teams in the competition. It was well know that UEFA werenÂ’t keen on that, having givien Liverpool (itÂ’s always Liverpool) special dispensation.

Secondly, Pierluigi Collina did not simply retire after that match. He retired before that match and came out of retirement for one game, at UEFAÂ’s request.

The ability to influence and bribe the referee or linesman is the reason football is the only major televised sport that doesnÂ’t allow use of video replays to challenge refereeÂ’s decisions. Even though itÂ’s the sport with most money and most able to afford it. Strange eh?

One of the reasons why English clubs wonÂ’t do so well in Europe, the amount of cheating done by European opposition, who will go down clutching their faces for little or no apparent reasons to waste time, win a free kick, penalty or get an opponent booked or sent off.

This had nothing to do with a handball...

Someone correctly mentioned above that seeding had been introduced for the play-off draw a couple of weeks before the draw itself. The FAI case (albeit during the bitterly disappointing afterglow of said Â’handballÂ’) which was being prepared for the European Court of Sports Arbitration was about the legalities of changing the rules during a qualifying tournament.

FIFA took this legal claim seriously enough to offer a Â’forgive and forgetÂ’ payment to the FAI in order to make them reconsider their intention to go to the European Court with their case.

The FAI agreed, naturally, even they knew that it mightn’t get them anywhere, whereas a €5 M FIFA payment represented a good result from the whole affair. This was reported at the time in the Irish sports media, minus the exact terms, but we knew about the €5M...

I can only presume that when John Delaney asked Big Sepp for the cheque, Sepp must have tut-tutted at the prospect, saying something about needing another arrangement or surely everybody else would want one too... Sepp then said "apply for a loan – the terms will be very favourable..." The €5M loan was then granted, lodged in the bank, and duly written off by FIFA...

If anything, the only problem I have about this non-story, is that the FAI and John Delaney have emerged from the whole thing looking quite good...

On a positive note, it looks to me like the EU/US are going after RussiaÂ’s World Cup, and are hell-bent on taking it from Putin...

Baz - "If anything, the only problem I have about this non-story, is that the FAI and John Delaney have emerged from the whole thing looking quite good..."

You think?

For me looking good would have been a statement from Delaney, the second the rule change was mentioned. Something along the lines ’It is our job to represent and protect Irish football – players, supporters and sponsors. FIFA have made it clear they intend to change their own rules after a competition has begun. We will be taking legal action"

Instead they said "Oh thatÂ’s not fair!" but were shut up with a bag of cash. DoesnÂ’t make them guilty of anything criminal, but can they honestly say it was the best decision for their players, supporters and sponsors?

Imo, no.

The Italian supporters outside the Berlin stadium prior to the CL Final were pretty certain that Â’cheatingÂ’ and Â’fixingÂ’ goes on in their domestic game. It has always happened since the game went professional. Why people assume that Football is as clean as a whistle is a form of denial that the media actively seeks to ferment because the game would lose most of itÂ’s appeal if it was proved beyond doubt that certain teams have influence in games against those who donÂ’t.

Add in the conflicting interests of various Bookmakers, Sponsors and TV companies and you have a perfect arena for corruption and control. The game is skewed towards popular and rich clubs and probably always has been, but the difference in the modern era are the extraordinary amounts of cash that flow through various businesses and agencies which in turn leads to so many people having a monetary stake in the game of football which means that speaking out against corruption or fixing is not in their best interests.

Thus the show goes on for as long as the cash flows in the right direction and the public at large continue to shrug their shoulders and pay for the season tickets and subscriptions to TV and magazines etc why would any sporting body attempt to address a problem that is largely ignored by the general public? I donÂ’t blame the match officials because they are only doing what they are paid to do.

If a Referee gives a decision against one of the popular / well sponsored / rich elite clubs he will have to run the gauntlet of the media who will show every angle of the incident to ensure that every reader / viewer understands that the official got it wrong, if on the other hand the referee makes a decision that favours those clubs little will be mentioned of that incident apart from a suggestion that match officials are only human after all. Human nature means that the referee will always by default favour those clubs who have the power and the money, not exactly cheating perhaps, but it certainly has little merit in a truly sporting sense.