England v Norway

Exiled_Addick said:

Gabriel Clarke betraying the typical English media attitude around England. There’s more column inches and talk radio hours in picking apart failures than celebrating success so they’re all just waiting with their pre-sharpened knives just hoping is not-so-glorious defeat again. Pricks. 

As Billy Brag once asked, “Which side are you on?”

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

Weegie Addick said:

There’s maybe a clue in Infantino sitting next to the Norwegian prince. Like he also sat among all the Mexican dignitaries.

Laughable. 

Can you explain why he has done this? And the Trump call?
I suspect you can't.

Anything??

@MrWalker I'm not stuck to this forum to rapidly respond to your conspiracy nonsense, so apologies if I didn't answer quickly enough.

But no, nothing. I don't believe the outcome of matches in this world cup are being influenced as a result of corruption. 

You are welcome to your opinion.

But can you explain the Trump call and Infantilo sittng with Norways Crown Prince?

The allocation of officials in the 1/4 finals.

All innocent you think?

Exiled_Addick said:

At least it’s not out in the Quarters again. Semis was probably par for this England at this World Cup and considering their knockout opponents.

Anything from here will be a bonus but England will need to play better in the semis to be afforded sympathy from the public if they get knocked out. 

I didn’t mind either reaction from Tuchel or Bellingham in the post match interviews. Tuchel is right to praise the resilience but also demand more because he wants to win and knows England can be better and will have to be to win. Likewise, regardless of any lack of control or fluency for periods of the game, winning football matches at this level is hard and the players put plenty into it in and Bellingham is within his rights to stick up for the players.

End of the day, we must not lose sight of what a dramatically different position it is for us that we are a bit dissatisfied that England didn’t secure a World Cup semi final spot in more convincing fashion, compared to our, not too distant, history of crashing out of tournaments, at the quarter finals or earlier, in disappointing fashion. 

At least semi finalists in 4 out of the 5 major tournaments since the “Iceland Incident” at Euro 2016. Still short of an ultimate prize but that’s not a record to be sniffed at. Keep buying a ticket and you probably win the raffle eventually. 

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

Weegie Addick said:

There’s maybe a clue in Infantino sitting next to the Norwegian prince. Like he also sat among all the Mexican dignitaries.

Laughable. 

Can you explain why he has done this? And the Trump call?
I suspect you can't.

Anything??

@MrWalker I'm not stuck to this forum to rapidly respond to your conspiracy nonsense, so apologies if I didn't answer quickly enough.

But no, nothing. I don't believe the outcome of matches in this world cup are being influenced as a result of corruption. 

You are welcome to your opinion.

But can you explain the Trump call and Infantilo sittng with Norways Crown Prince?

The allocation of officials in the 1/4 finals.

All innocent you think?

Infantino is the head of FIFA. He has the best seat in the house. The son of the King of Norway was there, so he got to sit next to the head of FIFA. If the son of our King had been there, guess where he would have sat?

The seating plan of the VIP area had no influence on refereeing decisions during the game.  

In terms of the Quarter final officials,  FIFA Refereeing Chief Pierluigi Collina strongly defended the integrity of the selection process, firmly dismissing any allegations of institutional bias or structural influence. Didier Deschamps stated that they were playing Morocco, not the referee.

I'd be surprised if Collina was also a part of this big conspiracy. 

The Trump phone call - yes that's bollocks, and I'm inclined to agree that the decision was politically influenced and enabled availability - but nothing in that process influenced on-field decision making.

The point being made was that the decisions in this game were against England and were evidence of corruption. But the main thrust of the conspiracy theory against FIFA is that decisions are there to keep the big nations in. England are a bigger nation and a bigger money earner for FIFA than Norway - so why would the officials be corrupt against England.

Conspiracy theorists can't have it both ways, or can you?

BBC sports editor Dan Roan confronted Mohammad al Kamali, the chair of Fifa's disciplinary committee, as he arrived for England's quarter-final against Norway on Saturday. He asked:

• Can we ask about the Balogun suspension and whether or not you were asked by the Fifa president to suspend that ban?

• Can you tell us anything about that at all?

• Can you tell us anything about that at all or why Jarell Quansah was given a two-match suspension?

• Can you make any comment about the way it's been portrayed or reported on?

• Anything at all you can say, sir?

However, Al Kamali would not answer any of the questions.

Fifa released an 871-word statement following the Balogun decision to stress it was made after "considering all of the specific circumstances surrounding the incident and evidence available" - but without detailing what had been taken into account.

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

Weegie Addick said:

There’s maybe a clue in Infantino sitting next to the Norwegian prince. Like he also sat among all the Mexican dignitaries.

Laughable. 

Can you explain why he has done this? And the Trump call?
I suspect you can't.

Anything??

@MrWalker I'm not stuck to this forum to rapidly respond to your conspiracy nonsense, so apologies if I didn't answer quickly enough.

But no, nothing. I don't believe the outcome of matches in this world cup are being influenced as a result of corruption. 

You are welcome to your opinion.

But can you explain the Trump call and Infantilo sittng with Norways Crown Prince?

The allocation of officials in the 1/4 finals.

All innocent you think?

Infantino is the head of FIFA. He has the best seat in the house. The son of the King of Norway was there, so he got to sit next to the head of FIFA. If the son of our King had been there, guess where he would have sat?

nowhere near the head of FIFA. Obviously. Because otherwise it would look like shit

The seating plan of the VIP area had no influence on refereeing decisions during the game.

hahaha  

In terms of the Quarter final officials,  FIFA Refereeing Chief Pierluigi Collina strongly defended the integrity of the selection process, firmly dismissing any allegations of institutional bias or structural influence. Didier Deschamps stated that they were playing Morocco, not the referee.

So a ‘has been’ ref defends a corrupt decision. Who would have thought it?

I'd be surprised if Collina was also a part of this big conspiracy. 

Get ready to be surprised

The Trump phone call - yes that's bollocks, and I'm inclined to agree that the decision was politically influenced and enabled availability - but nothing in that process influenced on-field decision making.
Haha ha. Good for you. La La land  beckons. Enjoy the journey of discovery.

DamoNorthStand said:

Anyone who thinks FIFA is a straight and honest federation has either been asleep for the last few decades, or has share in a company who manufactures brown envelopes.

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

Weegie Addick said:

There’s maybe a clue in Infantino sitting next to the Norwegian prince. Like he also sat among all the Mexican dignitaries.

Laughable. 

Can you explain why he has done this? And the Trump call?
I suspect you can't.

Anything??

@MrWalker I'm not stuck to this forum to rapidly respond to your conspiracy nonsense, so apologies if I didn't answer quickly enough.

But no, nothing. I don't believe the outcome of matches in this world cup are being influenced as a result of corruption. 

You are welcome to your opinion.

But can you explain the Trump call and Infantilo sittng with Norways Crown Prince?

The allocation of officials in the 1/4 finals.

All innocent you think?

Infantino is the head of FIFA. He has the best seat in the house. The son of the King of Norway was there, so he got to sit next to the head of FIFA. If the son of our King had been there, guess where he would have sat?

The seating plan of the VIP area had no influence on refereeing decisions during the game.  

In terms of the Quarter final officials,  FIFA Refereeing Chief Pierluigi Collina strongly defended the integrity of the selection process, firmly dismissing any allegations of institutional bias or structural influence. Didier Deschamps stated that they were playing Morocco, not the referee.

I'd be surprised if Collina was also a part of this big conspiracy. 

The Trump phone call - yes that's bollocks, and I'm inclined to agree that the decision was politically influenced and enabled availability - but nothing in that process influenced on-field decision making.

The point being made was that the decisions in this game were against England and were evidence of corruption. But the main thrust of the conspiracy theory against FIFA is that decisions are there to keep the big nations in. England are a bigger nation and a bigger money earner for FIFA than Norway - so why would the officials be corrupt against England.

Conspiracy theorists can't have it both ways, or can you?

BBC sports editor Dan Roan confronted Mohammad al Kamali, the chair of Fifa's disciplinary committee, as he arrived for England's quarter-final against Norway on Saturday. He asked:

• Can we ask about the Balogun suspension and whether or not you were asked by the Fifa president to suspend that ban?

• Can you tell us anything about that at all?

• Can you tell us anything about that at all or why Jarell Quansah was given a two-match suspension?

• Can you make any comment about the way it's been portrayed or reported on?

• Anything at all you can say, sir?

However, Al Kamali would not answer any of the questions.

Fifa released an 871-word statement following the Balogun decision to stress it was made after "considering all of the specific circumstances surrounding the incident and evidence available" - but without detailing what had been taken into account.

So a FIFA representative not answering a reporters questions is evidence??

As above, I believe that there was political influence in the US red card decision.

But you haven't responded to the questons.

Did today's seating plan, the Argie refs for the France game, or the reinstatement of the US player, influence the decisions of the refs in any of the associated games, which was the thrust of the discussion.

Anything? 

Yes.
how about you start?

SporadicAddick said:

MrWalker said:

SporadicAddick said:

DamoNorthStand said:

Anyone who thinks FIFA is a straight and honest federation has either been asleep for the last few decades, or has share in a company who manufactures brown envelopes.

I don't for one second think that, but to suggest (as is the point of THIS discussion) that Infantino sitting next to a Norwegian prince was a sign that the ref was corrupt against England, and the reason the penalty was overturned, is nonsense on stilts for many reasons.

I dislike FIFA as much as any on here, but the conspiracy comments during today's game, relating to decisions made during the game, were laughable.

Said no one. Ever.

Please go back to pages 17 to 19 of this thread to see multiple posters state that the overturning of the penalty was "corrupt", and the chair of CAST suggesting it was because Infantino was sitting next to The Crown Prince of Norway...

Exiled_Addick said:

Any chance of a separate thread to discuss potential corruption at the World Cup, rather than hijacking a match thread?

@aliwibble?

SporadicAddick said:

Exiled_Addick said:

Any chance of a separate thread to discuss potential corruption at the World Cup, rather than hijacking a match thread?

@aliwibble?

In fairness it's a match thread for a match that's finished - I'm not sure it will stay at the top for long, and I don't think there's much debate left...