Mauricio Pochettino

  • There is only one thing weirder than posting on internet forums... lurking on internet forums!
    Registration only takes a minute and removes most of the adverts. You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

So why has what Dean said not been disclosed then? That’s what I don’t understand, Dean has come out and said everything that Poch has said but hasn’t told us what he said that made Poch come back towards him after he was walking off.

It seems like they are purposefully not telling the entire story here.

Unless of course Dean said nothing whatsoever and if that was the case I would have expected Dean to say in his report “I said nothing to provoke him” or “It was unprovoked”
What is the point of knowing? Really? What does it change? What would it change?

Poch STILL gets fined and banned for approaching the ref. (FWIW I think a ban is harsh considering Klopp, and others, are often in the faces of Refs or 4th officials or running onto the pitch (Oh, Poch has also run onto the pitch twice once at the battle of the bridge, the other time against Woolwich) without a ban.

I honestly do not understand the rage surrounding this, Poch got what you would expect.
 

Register to remove

The problem with your reasoning is that youre expecting Dean to act like a mensch.

There's about as much chance of that happening as there is of Kenny Sansom not necking a few bottles of cheap wine in the park tonight

lol!

Honestly though jokes aside I just want the officials to act like professionals, I feel like they are far too protected and that’s why they act like they are above criticism.

I think paying sports fans should have the right to know what they say in situations like that.
 
What is the point of knowing? Really? What does it change? What would it change?

Poch STILL gets fined and banned for approaching the ref. (FWIW I think a ban is harsh considering Klopp, and others, are often in the faces of Refs or 4th officials or running onto the pitch (Oh, Poch has also run onto the pitch twice once at the battle of the bridge, the other time against Woolwich) without a ban.

I honestly do not understand the rage surrounding this, Poch got what you would expect.
It changes everything, if what he is rumoured to have said is true then it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is biased and shouldn’t be allowed to be a professional referee.

And that should be exposed, irrespective of Poch and what he did, I want bullshit like that exposed and out in the open because I really do believe this league has a problem with poor officiating or even corruption that needs unearthing.
 
It changes everything, if what he is rumoured to have said is true then it proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is biased and shouldn’t be allowed to be a professional referee.

And that should be exposed, irrespective of Poch and what he did, I want bullshit like that exposed and out in the open because I really do believe this league has a problem with poor officiating or even corruption that needs unearthing.
Nothing I've seen that has been rumoured to have been said ("that's your season gone" seems to be the biggest rumour) proves he is "biased" though. Arrogant, yes. Pratt, yes. Biased, no.

The fact it's recorded and available to listen to means precisely this, it's there so it can be used. If Spurs really thought there was proof of bias do you seriously think we wouldn't have pushed this further?
 
Nothing I've seen that has been rumoured to have been said ("that's your season gone" seems to be the biggest rumour) proves he is "biased" though. Arrogant, yes. Pratt, yes. Biased, no.

The fact it's recorded and available to listen to means precisely this, it's there so it can be used. If Spurs really thought there was proof of bias do you seriously think we wouldn't have pushed this further?
So do you think a professional referee who is supposed to be completely impartial and officiate in a manner that doesn’t involve emotion or bias should be referring to a team having their season ended after a game to the manager of that team in a game he has just officiated on?

How is that not confirmation of bias? An unbiased individual and a professional would not say something like that at all.

Calling him arrogant (whilst it’s true) doesn’t excuse that sort of behaviour.

And bias in this league has existed for years from officials, you only have to look at “Fergie time” and even him saying himself he used to pressure officials for decisions to know that’s the truth.

It will continue in until it is investigated or they are held accountable for their actions and mistakes and forced to explain them the way a manager or player is.

I get the feeling some people don’t want this to happen because it will shatter the illusion of fairness in this league and ruin football for them so they would rather turn a blind eye and live in ignorance.
 
So do you think a professional referee who is supposed to be completely impartial and officiate in a manner that doesn’t involve emotion or bias should be referring to a team having their season ended after a game to the manager of that team in a game he has just officiated on?

How is that not confirmation of bias? An unbiased individual and a professional would not say something like that at all.

Calling him arrogant (whilst it’s true) doesn’t excuse that sort of behaviour.

And bias in this league has existed for years from officials, you only have to look at “Fergie time” and even him saying himself he used to pressure officials for decisions to know that’s the truth.

It will continue in until it is investigated or they are held accountable for their actions and mistakes and forced to explain them the way a manager or player is.

I get the feeling some people don’t want this to happen because it will shatter the illusion of fairness in this league and ruin football for them so they would rather turn a blind eye and live in ignorance.
But the dialogue is recorded, if Spurs have an issue with what was said they can challenge it. It's a simple as that mate. Do you think Spurs are in on the bias game then? Is that why they haven't challenged it, in case they get rumbled so it's best to keep shtum?

It is recorded for precisely for these issues, it's why it was brought in, to remove doubt.
 

Register to remove

If Dean said anything untoward to Poch needs investigating. His job is to ref the game leave and cause NO drama. Problem is he likes attention I have no doubt he was pleased with himself the way Poch reacted as it means his name will be in the news
 
But the dialogue is recorded, if Spurs have an issue with what was said they can challenge it. It's a simple as that mate. Do you think Spurs are in on the bias game then? Is that why they haven't challenged it, in case they get rumbled so it's best to keep shtum?

It is recorded for precisely for these issues, it's why it was brought in, to remove doubt.
What I am saying is mate, if Dean said something to Poch other than what he said in his statement then we should be made aware of it.

I am not sure why we wouldn’t challenge it but I do believe could be a number of reasons.

1.The rumour isn’t true and Dean actually said nothing of the sort and Poch was just reacting to a defeat in a bad way. (if that’s the case then Poch should clarify what was said by Dean so people are clear on it so we know the official isn’t biased and Poch was indeed fully in the wrong.)

Poch clearly doesn’t feel this way because he made his unhappiness with the ban quite apparent.

2. We don’t want to say anything because we are afraid other officials will then turn on us and give us unfavourable decisions. (Again, if this is the case it’s even more reason to expose it.)

3. The body has told Poch/club if he plays nice he will only get a two game ban and less severe punishment.

My overall point is, in situations like this, we have the right to know what was said by both parties as supporters, rather than just one party who is speaking for themselves and quite clearly not saying the full story (you can see from the video alone that more was said than Dean is mentioning and he is clearly playing the victim.)

Officials in this league never have to answer for the shit they do, they never have to answer for all the blatantly obvious crap they have pulled over the years (like I said, Fergie time for example) and they are never held accountable for mistakes they make which can quite literally have huge implications (I know VAR will fix this to a certain degree but I still think transparency is needed.)

People say referees have a difficult job and I appreciate that but it doesn’t mean they should be bulletproof and it doesn’t mean they should be protected the way they are because that bubble of protection is an open invitation for abuse of power as far as I am concerned.
 
What I am saying is mate, if Dean said something to Poch other than what he said in his statement then we should be made aware of it.

I am not sure why we wouldn’t challenge it but I do believe could be a number of reasons.

1.The rumour isn’t true and Dean actually said nothing of the sort and Poch was just reacting to a defeat in a bad way. (if that’s the case then Poch should clarify what was said by Dean so people are clear on it so we know the official isn’t biased and Poch was indeed fully in the wrong.)

Poch clearly doesn’t feel this way because he made his unhappiness with the ban quite apparent.

2. We don’t want to say anything because we are afraid other officials will then turn on us and give us unfavourable decisions. (Again, if this is the case it’s even more reason to expose it.)

3. The body has told Poch/club if he plays nice he will only get a two game ban and less severe punishment.

My overall point is, in situations like this, we have the right to know what was said by both parties as supporters, rather than just one party who is speaking for themselves and quite clearly not saying the full story (you can see from the video alone that more was said than Dean is mentioning and he is clearly playing the victim.)

Officials in this league never have to answer for the shit they do, they never have to answer for all the blatantly obvious crap they have pulled over the years (like I said, Fergie time for example) and they are never held accountable for mistakes they make which can quite literally have huge implications (I know VAR will fix this to a certain degree but I still think transparency is needed.)

People say referees have a difficult job and I appreciate that but it doesn’t mean they should be bulletproof and it doesn’t mean they should be protected the way they are because that bubble of protection is an open invitation for abuse of power as far as I am concerned.
Mate, they CAN be called to account because they are recorded, it is why they are recorded.

It's 100% clear he said something to Poch, that's absolutely clear by the way he reacted. Given the fact that we haven't challenged this (knowing that the dialogue is recorded), it's more than possible that he over-reacted, isn't that fair assumption? I put it to you that this is more realistic than any notion of a biased ref, which in all honesty is ludicrous assumption to make. Maybe WE/POCH doesn't want what was said to be made public because it might show his reaction to be embarrassing??

It's not up to the fans to know what was or wasn't said, it's between the Club and the officials. All the procedures are in place to prove or disprove something, its fucking piss of piece to determine this.
 
Whether or not it changes shit, I’m intrigued to know what the bald cheating cunt said.
Whether it shows Poch in a poor light, or whether he made wholly inappropriate comments, if nothing else it’s a worthwhile talking point.
The cunt has put his side across.
We are left with a very unbalanced situation if that’s how it is left.
 
Mate, they CAN be called to account because they are recorded, it is why they are recorded.

It's 100% clear he said something to Poch, that's absolutely clear by the way he reacted. Given the fact that we haven't challenged this (knowing that the dialogue is recorded), it's more than possible that he over-reacted, isn't that fair assumption? I put it to you that this is more realistic than any notion of a biased ref, which in all honesty is ludicrous assumption to make. Maybe WE/POCH doesn't want what was said to be made public because it might show his reaction to be embarrassing??

It's not up to the fans to know what was or wasn't said, it's between the Club and the officials. All the procedures are in place to prove or disprove something, its fucking piss of piece to determine this.
So because they are recorded it means they are being called to account behind the scenes? Do you trust the FA to do that in every single instance?

Transparency is needed as far as I am concerned.

Yes, it is a possibility that Poch overreacted but I would rather see the evidence, this is the issue, we only have one side of the story and only the FA knows what was said on that recording, do you trust them and have full faith in them? Do you think they would expose a referee if he said something like has been suggested? Or do you think they would bury it knowing it might bring every official into question by letting people know what was said?

How is suggesting referees are biased a ludicrous assumption where there is mountains of evidence of it over the years? Undeniable evidence as well might I add, I find it a more ludicrous proposition that people think corruption and bias cannot exist within a business worth billions, that to me is ludicrous and the fact that people think officials in this country are professional when they are some of the worst officials I have ever witnessed and Mike Dean is proof of it.

I didn’t say it was up to the fans to make a decision about what happens, what I am saying is, I would like both sides of the story and complete transparency when it comes to matters such as this because it calls into question the integrity of the sport.

I don’t understand why people are so opposed to hearing what was said by Dean or holding officials more accountable for their actions?

Like I said before, I think it’s because some people fear the truth about it and would rather ignore the possibility of this league having biased or even worse, corrupt officials.
 
So because they are recorded it means they are being called to account behind the scenes? Do you trust the FA to do that in every single instance?

Transparency is needed as far as I am concerned.

Yes, it is a possibility that Poch overreacted but I would rather see the evidence, this is the issue, we only have one side of the story and only the FA knows what was said on that recording, do you trust them and have full faith in them? Do you think they would expose a referee if he said something like has been suggested? Or do you think they would bury it knowing it might bring every official into question by letting people know what was said?

How is suggesting referees are biased a ludicrous assumption where there is mountains of evidence of it over the years? Undeniable evidence as well might I add, I find it a more ludicrous proposition that people think corruption and bias cannot exist within a business worth billions, that to me is ludicrous and the fact that people think officials in this country are professional when they are some of the worst officials I have ever witnessed and Mike Dean is proof of it.

I didn’t say it was up to the fans to make a decision about what happens, what I am saying is, I would like both sides of the story and complete transparency when it comes to matters such as this because it calls into question the integrity of the sport.

I don’t understand why people are so opposed to hearing what was said by Dean or holding officials more accountable for their actions?

Like I said before, I think it’s because some people fear the truth about it and would rather ignore the possibility of this league having biased or even worse, corrupt officials.
But Spurs and/or Poch can contest it. Does the fact that they haven’t suggest that a) they are as biased as you claim the FA are in this? That they themselves are part of this corrupt circus. Or b) feel that Poch possibly overreacted and best leave it where it is.
Seeing that we have not bothered to contest it, something that we are completely entitled to do and to use the recording as actual proof of bias that you claim, the real issue is surely why haven’t we done this?

None of what you say has put the games in disrepute based on what was whiteness and what the response has been. The only query I feel remains is the ban for his first offensive, its hard to see parity compared to some serial offenders. But reading that Poch had to be escorted away by security staff in the tunnel, there is a possibility that the sanction is bang on the money.
 
But Spurs and/or Poch can contest it. Does the fact that they haven’t suggest that a) they are as biased as you claim the FA are in this? That they themselves are part of this corrupt circus. Or b) feel that Poch possibly overreacted and best leave it where it is.
Seeing that we have not bothered to contest it, something that we are completely entitled to do and to use the recording as actual proof of bias that you claim, the real issue is surely why haven’t we done this?

None of what you say has put the games in disrepute based on what was whiteness and what the response has been. The only query I feel remains is the ban for his first offensive, its hard to see parity compared to some serial offenders. But reading that Poch had to be escorted away by security staff in the tunnel, there is a possibility that the sanction is bang on the money.
Most likely scenario is that we needed the FA to do us a solid on transitioning to the new stadium so we took it on the chin for their support. We all can see Poch saying "say that again, say it for the cameras" that's all the proof I need for him being out of order. Poch might have even signed a non-disclosure agreement so we'll never find out...
 
Most likely scenario is that we needed the FA to do us a solid on transitioning to the new stadium so we took it on the chin for their support. We all can see Poch saying "say that again, say it for the cameras" that's all the proof I need for him being out of order. Poch might have even signed a non-disclosure agreement so we'll never find out...
Or with his limited English he thought, he said something else, or interpreted what he said as something different and when explained back to him what was said he might feel that his reaction wasn't appropriate???? So he/club hasn't done anything about having it challenged and have accepted the charges and have made a very public apology instead. Because making a full and unreserved public apology is the behaviour of a wronged man, especially when the door is well and truly open for him to contest and challenge it.
 

Register to remove

Or with his limited English he thought, he said something else, or interpreted what he said as something different and when explained back to him what was said he might feel that his reaction wasn't appropriate???? So he/club hasn't done anything about having it challenged and have accepted the charges and have made a very public apology instead. Because making a full and unreserved public apology is the behaviour of a wronged man, especially when the door is well and truly open for him to contest and challenge it.
But that doesn't suit my conspiracy agenda :pocheyes:
 
Top Bottom