PDA

View Full Version : The SFA(Scottish football in general)



Kevvy1875
23-08-2010, 10:47 PM
In view of the game and the poor desicions from the ref and how this happens season after season to every non OF SPL team I would be interested to see what results a poll on the subject suggests? Yesterday was nothing short of pure biasism on the ref's part and the worrying thing is he probably dosn't even realise is himself, it's just a natural reaction for him. We have suffered some shocking desicions from this mob over the years as have dare I say it the Yams(they are not totaly paranoid) and anyone else who ever got close to challenging the OF.

As it stands I cannot ferking stand the institution that runs out game. They are out of touch big time and favour the OF so blatantly that we must all be complete mugs for accepting it.

If I am brutaly honest it puts me right off Scottish football and the fact it is *****ing rotten to the core. I really hate football just now and almost everything about it from the crazy wages to the ticket prices to the blatant cheating that goea on every week. Things are especialy bad in the SPL though. The fact that the SFA/SPL tolerate's what goes on is what really sickens me. I can't even be arsed supporting the national team now because of the sickening institution behind it and the fact they put up with the OF no shows like they are special cases.

I feel like there is no pride left in the Scottish game. Its really *****ing depressing I know but if it wasn't for the fact I like to get along to see Hibs from the social point of view then I really wouldn't bother. No wonder teams cannot raise their attendance's.

Rant over....think im just trying to say that Im really dissapointed and cannot see a bright future for Scottish football while this stuff goes on.

p.s Have attached a poll for anyone who is intersted to try and gauge the general feeling.

Big Frank
23-08-2010, 10:56 PM
To the core.

Dunbar Hibee
24-08-2010, 12:16 AM
Corrupt to the core.

snooky
24-08-2010, 12:17 AM
In view of the game and the poor desicions from the ref and how this happens season after season to every non OF SPL team I would be interested to see what results a poll on the subject suggests? Yesterday was nothing short of pure biasism on the ref's part and the worrying thing is he probably dosn't even realise is himself, it's just a natural reaction for him. We have suffered some shocking desicions from this mob over the years as have dare I say it the Yams(they are not totaly paranoid) and anyone else who ever got close to challenging the OF.

As it stands I cannot ferking stand the institution that runs out game. They are out of touch big time and favour the OF so blatantly that we must all be complete mugs for accepting it.

If I am brutaly honest it puts me right off Scottish football and the fact it is *****ing rotten to the core. I really hate football just now and almost everything about it from the crazy wages to the ticket prices to the blatant cheating that goea on every week. Things are especialy bad in the SPL though. The fact that the SFA/SPL tolerate's what goes on is what really sickens me. I can't even be arsed supporting the national team now because of the sickening institution behind it and the fact they put up with the OF no shows like they are special cases.

I feel like there is no pride left in the Scottish game. Its really *****ing depressing I know but if it wasn't for the fact I like to get along to see Hibs from the social point of view then I really wouldn't bother. No wonder teams cannot raise their attendance's.

Rant over....think im just trying to say that Im really dissapointed and cannot see a bright future for Scottish football while this stuff goes on.

p.s Have attached a poll for anyone who is intersted to try and gauge the general feeling.

x 2 :agree:

manx hibee
24-08-2010, 01:22 PM
x 2 :agree:
x3 :top marks:agree:

GreenCastle
24-08-2010, 01:33 PM
Been saying this for several years - it also has to do with the Old Firm and their dominance.

The Old Firm have been a victim of their own success - as the league hasn't been won by anyone except them since Aberdeen 1984 - 1985.

Other leagues around the world have to be careful also as they are getting like this every day.

The best league (ticket price costs / attendances / teams who can win the league) is the German League.

The strange thing is the SFA have a great reputation coaching wise and have produced several very good coaches / managers over the years.

New Corrie
24-08-2010, 01:52 PM
to the core, and always have been. The SFA is just Radio Scotland with embarrassing blazers. They are basically the same thing, nepotism, corruption, old pals acts etc etc. The SFA employ failed businessmen and washed up weegies. Radio Scotland is just a drop in centre for sacked manager/coaches who can't string a sentence together. It's mortification on a huge scale.

Sadly the Hibs of this world bring it on themselves by allowing it to happen, if the cubs outwith the OF got together and stood up for themselves it would soon stop.

The late Tom Hart was the man for standing up to these fuds.

I was at Sunderland v Birmingham City last week and it was no surprise to see so many Scottish people on the train heading down, we're fortuitous that we can be watching Premiership football only a couple of hours down the road. A trend that I would imagine will continue until some sort of credibility is restored in Scotland....don't hold your breath.

bighairyfaeleith
24-08-2010, 02:03 PM
Destroying the scottish game

Until the SFA opens up, and makes the game truly accountable then things will never change. we should be leading the way and introducing things like goal mouth technology, using video footage after the game to decide upon punishments etc.

how about actually looking at summer football rather than just dismissing it each year.

How about imposing some caps on what clubs can spend on wages and transfers, lets even the playing field.

These are just a few ideas out of hundreds that the SFA could use to revolutionize our game, but what will they do instead, SFA

basehibby
24-08-2010, 03:31 PM
I find it hard to believe that none of them are corrupt given some of the (non)decisions and (in)actions that emanate from Park Gdns. To the core though??? I'm not so sure - weak - pathetically weak and grovelling on their knees to kiss the feet of the OF would more fit the bill for me.

They love to make all the right noises afterall which suggests that some good will DOES exist within the organisation, but they're complete lack of stomach to back up their words with action exposes the organisation for the sham it actually is....

SFA policy - clubs will be punished for the biggoted singing of their support bringing the Scottish Game into disrepute..
SFA in action - well honestly the Celgers and Rantic try awfy hard so they do (honest) so we'll just ignore the thousands of their followers who continue to pollute the atmosphere of away grounds throughout the country with their biggoted poison on a weekly basis.

SFA policy - simulation will be eliminated from the Scottish game with decisive action.
SFA in action - aw we'll just let Laugherty and McGregor off cos we don't want to upset Uncle Wattie (grovel...snivel...etc)

The sum of the above is a load of good intentions totally undermined by weakness/corruption within the organisation - making the SFA a joke organisation who are destroying our game with their kak handed administration and dodgy handshake mentality.

jgl07
24-08-2010, 03:38 PM
It all sounds like the ravings of a demented conspiracy theorist.

Grouping together such diverse organizations as the SPL, the SFA, the SFL into a single conspiratorial entity is daft.

Yes they all have their faults. Some are outdated amateurish outfits. Others are weak bodies unable or unwilling to stand up to the OF but they are not a single establishment hell bent on keeping Hibs in their place.

And I thought that the Celtic fans were paranoid!

Big Frank
24-08-2010, 03:57 PM
It all sounds like the ravings of a demented conspiracy theorist.

Grouping together such diverse organizations as the SPL, the SFA, the SFL into a single conspiratorial entity is daft.

Yes they all have their faults. Some are outdated amateurish outfits. Others are weak bodies unable or unwilling to stand up to the OF but they are not a single establishment hell bent on keeping Hibs in their place.

And I thought that the Celtic fans were paranoid!


yeh, you're right jgl07, there has been total parity in the 30years I've been watching scottish fitba'. Everyone is paranoid:rolleyes:

Geo_1875
24-08-2010, 04:00 PM
The problem with SPL/SFA/SFL is the same one that exists in the Scottish media. While there are people who will claim an affiliation with their "local" team, be it Airdrie, St Mirren, Ayr United or Partick Thistle, they MUST have a stronger affiliation with one half of the OF if they want to progress in their chosen career.

Mixu62
25-08-2010, 01:05 AM
I voted corrupt to the core, but I mean in a self-preserving way. They will never address the problems facing the game in Scotland as long as they get freebies, jobs and junkets out of it.

deeks01
25-08-2010, 03:40 AM
In view of the game and the poor desicions from the ref and how this happens season after season to every non OF SPL team I would be interested to see what results a poll on the subject suggests? Yesterday was nothing short of pure biasism on the ref's part and the worrying thing is he probably dosn't even realise is himself, it's just a natural reaction for him. We have suffered some shocking desicions from this mob over the years as have dare I say it the Yams(they are not totaly paranoid) and anyone else who ever got close to challenging the OF.

As it stands I cannot ferking stand the institution that runs out game. They are out of touch big time and favour the OF so blatantly that we must all be complete mugs for accepting it.

If I am brutaly honest it puts me right off Scottish football and the fact it is *****ing rotten to the core. I really hate football just now and almost everything about it from the crazy wages to the ticket prices to the blatant cheating that goea on every week. Things are especialy bad in the SPL though. The fact that the SFA/SPL tolerate's what goes on is what really sickens me. I can't even be arsed supporting the national team now because of the sickening institution behind it and the fact they put up with the OF no shows like they are special cases.

I feel like there is no pride left in the Scottish game. Its really *****ing depressing I know but if it wasn't for the fact I like to get along to see Hibs from the social point of view then I really wouldn't bother. No wonder teams cannot raise their attendance's.

Rant over....think im just trying to say that Im really dissapointed and cannot see a bright future for Scottish football while this stuff goes on.

p.s Have attached a poll for anyone who is intersted to try and gauge the general feeling.

agree with every word , that bit in bold especially rings true.

Dashing Bob S
25-08-2010, 08:30 AM
to the core, and always have been. The SFA is just Radio Scotland with embarrassing blazers. They are basically the same thing, nepotism, corruption, old pals acts etc etc. The SFA employ failed businessmen and washed up weegies. Radio Scotland is just a drop in centre for sacked manager/coaches who can't string a sentence together. It's mortification on a huge scale.

Sadly the Hibs of this world bring it on themselves by allowing it to happen, if the cubs outwith the OF got together and stood up for themselves it would soon stop.

The late Tom Hart was the man for standing up to these fuds.

I was at Sunderland v Birmingham City last week and it was no surprise to see so many Scottish people on the train heading down, we're fortuitous that we can be watching Premiership football only a couple of hours down the road. A trend that I would imagine will continue until some sort of credibility is restored in Scotland....don't hold your breath.

:top marks Great post, CG.

euro Hibby
25-08-2010, 08:48 AM
no win situation - if 51 % + fans are Old firm the SFA will pander to these mourons as its political and keeps the status quo which means less risk with highest return.

johnbc70
25-08-2010, 08:52 AM
Great post and your examples of SFA words and then actions proves they actually end up doing.......well SFA about anything.

I asked on another post just who are the SFA accountable to, is it UEFA?

Twa Cairpets
25-08-2010, 09:55 AM
Going a lot against the grain here, but yelping and squealing about the injustices the OF heaps against Hibs in particular and other non OF teams in general is just utter nonsense. Whenever we see a decision that we don't like it's "corruption! cheating! Masons! Tims!" and we never give anything but a grudging nod towards 50-50s that go our way, and they do. It is known as confirmation bias and basically means that you register the things that back up your preconceived biases and ignore those that contradict them.

Also, there is a difference between bias and having a bad game as a referee. The worst refereeing performance i have ever seen was Freland v Falkirk a few years back and that was because he was having a deeply, deeply *****e day at the office. Referees in the modern game are quite simply not biased - they can't afford to be as it is stops them getting big games or internationals.

And Brines was absolutely right with both the red cards, and from instruction from FIIFA right with the Riordan yellow. There is simply no sanction available in the laws or constitution to further punish Macgregor further, no matter how much of a cheating scab he is.

I'm not saying the SFA are paragons of virtue - far from it. They clearly get things very wrong (e.g the timing of the Ross County semi v Celtic last year - that was utterly stupid and done on the basis of commercial advantage and not for fan benefit), and that needs to be addressed by making the management of the SFA better and clearr in its communication and thought processes.

Sadly, as fans of a team outwith the OF, our opportunities of success are limited by our reosurces. They are massively more capable of having, on average, better players than us and will therefore win more games and trophies. This is not the fault of the SFA, its the fault of the moronic hordes of trophy-seeking glory hunting bigoted keech that follow them from all over Scotland rathe rthan going to ER, Dens, Inverness or wherever. whats the SFA meant to do - ban fans from Edinburgh attending Rangers games?

euro Hibby
25-08-2010, 10:55 AM
Its unhealthy and improbable that two teams could dominate for so long a Championship without a little help from elsewhere. That said, what happens in Scottish football pretty much is the same elsewhere with domination by 3-4 teams in the larger leagues and 2-3 teams in smaller leagues. A bit like business when 1 or two companies have 60 % of the market and the rest is shared. Power makes you more competative in any aspect of life , you have better knowledge, better negotiation, better product etc.......and off course more favours from referees !

blackpoolhibs
25-08-2010, 11:02 AM
Going a lot against the grain here, but yelping and squealing about the injustices the OF heaps against Hibs in particular and other non OF teams in general is just utter nonsense. Whenever we see a decision that we don't like it's "corruption! cheating! Masons! Tims!" and we never give anything but a grudging nod towards 50-50s that go our way, and they do. It is known as confirmation bias and basically means that you register the things that back up your preconceived biases and ignore those that contradict them.

Also, there is a difference between bias and having a bad game as a referee. The worst refereeing performance i have ever seen was Freland v Falkirk a few years back and that was because he was having a deeply, deeply *****e day at the office. Referees in the modern game are quite simply not biased - they can't afford to be as it is stops them getting big games or internationals.

And Brines was absolutely right with both the red cards, and from instruction from FIIFA right with the Riordan yellow. There is simply no sanction available in the laws or constitution to further punish Macgregor further, no matter how much of a cheating scab he is.

I'm not saying the SFA are paragons of virtue - far from it. They clearly get things very wrong (e.g the timing of the Ross County semi v Celtic last year - that was utterly stupid and done on the basis of commercial advantage and not for fan benefit), and that needs to be addressed by making the management of the SFA better and clearr in its communication and thought processes.

Sadly, as fans of a team outwith the OF, our opportunities of success are limited by our reosurces. They are massively more capable of having, on average, better players than us and will therefore win more games and trophies. This is not the fault of the SFA, its the fault of the moronic hordes of trophy-seeking glory hunting bigoted keech that follow them from all over Scotland rathe rthan going to ER, Dens, Inverness or wherever. whats the SFA meant to do - ban fans from Edinburgh attending Rangers games?

Refs do not hide the fact, and don't mind actually telling us, that they referee old firm games differently to any other game in Scotland. That for me is conclusive proof. Why should the rest of us play to a different set of rules to them? :confused:

Twa Cairpets
25-08-2010, 11:42 AM
Refs do not hide the fact, and don't mind actually telling us, that they referee old firm games differently to any other game in Scotland. That for me is conclusive proof. Why should the rest of us play to a different set of rules to them? :confused:

That is not evidence of bias - its almost the exact opposite, surely.

There is a difference in the level of intensity in an OF game compared to, say, Motherwell v Hamilton. In the latter as a ref you may choose to play advantage in a situation where a heavy tackle has gone in early in the game. In an OF game you may decide to forsake the advantage rule in order to try to keep a lid on heavy tackles.

There are two elements to consider in a game when you referee. One is the application of the laws of the game, which I do not believe changes whether it is OF or anyone else. The second is the style of refereeing adopted, which does change from game to game because the nature of any given match will be different.

Even at much lower levels (where I referee), you will adopt a much more involved approach with some teams where you know/pick up that they respond to being talked to. In others, if you're surrounded by heid-bangers, you by default become more authoriatarian in how you manage the game. You'll try to manage a cup final between two teams differently from a league match between the same two teams because you will be aware that, for example, the level of tension and nerves is different.

I view this is as being a good thing and thinking about the game to make it better for all participants, rather than being an automaton following a purely black-and-white road.

basehibby
25-08-2010, 11:50 AM
Going a lot against the grain here, but yelping and squealing about the injustices the OF heaps against Hibs in particular and other non OF teams in general is just utter nonsense. Whenever we see a decision that we don't like it's "corruption! cheating! Masons! Tims!" and we never give anything but a grudging nod towards 50-50s that go our way, and they do. It is known as confirmation bias and basically means that you register the things that back up your preconceived biases and ignore those that contradict them.

Also, there is a difference between bias and having a bad game as a referee. The worst refereeing performance i have ever seen was Freland v Falkirk a few years back and that was because he was having a deeply, deeply *****e day at the office. Referees in the modern game are quite simply not biased - they can't afford to be as it is stops them getting big games or internationals.

And Brines was absolutely right with both the red cards, and from instruction from FIIFA right with the Riordan yellow. There is simply no sanction available in the laws or constitution to further punish Macgregor further, no matter how much of a cheating scab he is.

I'm not saying the SFA are paragons of virtue - far from it. They clearly get things very wrong (e.g the timing of the Ross County semi v Celtic last year - that was utterly stupid and done on the basis of commercial advantage and not for fan benefit), and that needs to be addressed by making the management of the SFA better and clearr in its communication and thought processes.

Sadly, as fans of a team outwith the OF, our opportunities of success are limited by our reosurces. They are massively more capable of having, on average, better players than us and will therefore win more games and trophies. This is not the fault of the SFA, its the fault of the moronic hordes of trophy-seeking glory hunting bigoted keech that follow them from all over Scotland rathe rthan going to ER, Dens, Inverness or wherever. whats the SFA meant to do - ban fans from Edinburgh attending Rangers games?

Much as your post is well argued and broadly makes a lot of sense, (teams that play better football will get more decisions on average because they earn them) I heartilly disagree with the bit in bold - there's no way that McBride did anything to deserve a red - the ref lost the plot in that instance - if two reds were deserved at all they should have been directed at Lafferty and WEIR who actually WAS guilty of violent conduct in barging in and grabing McBride by the throat.
IF McBride was deserving of a red card for kicking the ball against an opponent during play then we would see players sent off all the time while taking free kicks, trying to win throw ins or corners or just having a shot at goal!
Whether the ref was consciously cheating or not is by the by - he was clearly biased towards der hun - whether because he was intimidated by reputations or just being nice to his pals is immaterial - the outcome was the same debacle which proved the turning point of the game.

PS - you were saying there is no sanction available to punish McGregor - precedents have already been set by FIFA no less in punishing Rivaldo of Brazil retrospectively on the power of TV evidence (not to mention international public outrage) after he disgraced himself in near identical fashion at the WC in 2002.

bighairyfaeleith
25-08-2010, 11:50 AM
That is not evidence of bias - its almost the exact opposite, surely.

There is a difference in the level of intensity in an OF game compared to, say, Motherwell v Hamilton. In the latter as a ref you may choose to play advantage in a situation where a heavy tackle has gone in early in the game. In an OF game you may decide to forsake the advantage rule in order to try to keep a lid on heavy tackles.

There are two elements to consider in a game when you referee. One is the application of the laws of the game, which I do not believe changes whether it is OF or anyone else. The second is the style of refereeing adopted, which does change from game to game because the nature of any given match will be different.

Even at much lower levels (where I referee), you will adopt a much more involved approach with some teams where you know/pick up that they respond to being talked to. In others, if you're surrounded by heid-bangers, you by default become more authoriatarian in how you manage the game. You'll try to manage a cup final between two teams differently from a league match between the same two teams because you will be aware that, for example, the level of tension and nerves is different.

I view this is as being a good thing and thinking about the game to make it better for all participants, rather than being an automaton following a purely black-and-white road.

I agree refs are not biased, however that only leaves one option for why they continually miss or misjudge bad fouls and blatant cheating by the old firm. The only reason I can see is that they cannot handle the pressure of big games. Assuming they are actually good enough to be there in the first place.

Continually I see old firm players actions being ignored and only punished when it is absolutely necessary, where as players from out with the old firm are punished without a second thought.

What we need is a level playing field and that doesn't exist at the moment. BH touched on it, refs have admitted that the old firm fans especially at home do have an impact on decisions!!

basehibby
25-08-2010, 12:12 PM
I agree refs are not biased, however that only leaves one option for why they continually miss or misjudge bad fouls and blatant cheating by the old firm. The only reason I can see is that they cannot handle the pressure of big games. Assuming they are actually good enough to be there in the first place.

Continually I see old firm players actions being ignored and only punished when it is absolutely necessary, where as players from out with the old firm are punished without a second thought.

What we need is a level playing field and that doesn't exist at the moment. BH touched on it, refs have admitted that the old firm fans especially at home do have an impact on decisions!!

One thing I've noticed is that refs ARE very much swayed by reputations - and by that I mean that if someone has a reputation as a respected individual within the game they actually get away with a hell of a lot more than they have any right to.
I remember noticing this tendency when Butch Wilkins was puffing about the pitch for Hibs. Great player though he once had been, his legs had clearly gone and as a result he was horrendously late with virtually every challenge and I couldn't help wondering how on earth he managed to stay on the pitch most games.
The OF tend to have much more of these reknowned "characters" of the game in their ranks simply because they can afford their wages, and maybe this explains some of the phsychology behind the undue leniency often shown to them - Davie Weir is a case in point here - how many other players in the SPL could go around shaking opponents by the throat without so much as a nasty word in their direction, never mind a red card?!?

Certainly it DOES result in a form of unfair bias shown towards the OF - players of other teams who actually have less resources with which to cope, end up getting suspended quicker and more frequently because refs are less dazzled by their reputations and will happilly wave cards about in their faces with gay abaondon with little or no fear of the consequences.

Moody Mulder
25-08-2010, 12:21 PM
hibs fans on here claiming that our refs are not biased towards the old firm ....... whit?

Twa Cairpets
25-08-2010, 12:43 PM
hibs fans on here claiming that our refs are not biased towards the old firm ....... whit?

I've howled at them as much as the rest of us bud, but in the cold light of day, and with some rational thought, I just absolutely do not believe it to be the case in the modern era.

basehibby
25-08-2010, 12:50 PM
I've howled at them as much as the rest of us bud, but in the cold light of day, and with some rational thought, I just absolutely do not believe it to be the case in the modern era.


How do you explain the perplexity of many ex-OF players who have come out and admitted that for some reason unknown to them they got away with much more playing for the Rantic and Celgers than they did with any other team they played for?

blackpoolhibs
25-08-2010, 12:53 PM
That is not evidence of bias - its almost the exact opposite, surely.

There is a difference in the level of intensity in an OF game compared to, say, Motherwell v Hamilton. In the latter as a ref you may choose to play advantage in a situation where a heavy tackle has gone in early in the game. In an OF game you may decide to forsake the advantage rule in order to try to keep a lid on heavy tackles.

There are two elements to consider in a game when you referee. One is the application of the laws of the game, which I do not believe changes whether it is OF or anyone else. The second is the style of refereeing adopted, which does change from game to game because the nature of any given match will be different.

Even at much lower levels (where I referee), you will adopt a much more involved approach with some teams where you know/pick up that they respond to being talked to. In others, if you're surrounded by heid-bangers, you by default become more authoriatarian in how you manage the game. You'll try to manage a cup final between two teams differently from a league match between the same two teams because you will be aware that, for example, the level of tension and nerves is different.

I view this is as being a good thing and thinking about the game to make it better for all participants, rather than being an automaton following a purely black-and-white road.

They are more lenient towards them than they are to us. They take into account the occasion they tell us. Why? Why are they allowed more bad challenges than the rest of us before getting booked. Until we play with the same set of rules, there will always be this accusation.

Twa Cairpets
25-08-2010, 12:53 PM
Much as your post is well argued and broadly makes a lot of sense, (teams that play better football will get more decisions on average because they earn them) I heartilly disagree with the bit in bold - there's no way that McBride did anything to deserve a red - the ref lost the plot in that instance - if two reds were deserved at all they should have been directed at Lafferty and WEIR who actually WAS guilty of violent conduct in barging in and grabing McBride by the throat. IF McBride was deserving of a red card for kicking the ball against an opponent during play then we would see players sent off all the time while taking free kicks, trying to win throw ins or corners or just having a shot at goal!


If the referee takes the opinion that the game was stopped when McBride blootered the ball at Lafferty, then it is violent conduct, and he was right to go. I've watched it a few times, and I sadly can't come to any other conclusion other than that Brines was right. He was also right to send Lafferty off, and if Weir had been seen at the time, I suspect he would have gone too. Trust me, when all hell is breaking loose and players are everywhere its a sod trying to work out whats what. He might have bottled it - I dont know, but there would then have been an argument for Stokes getting a card of some colour too.

Its different to an incident in game, where players get hit all the time as part of play, rather than as a deliberate attempt to hurt a player when play is dead. The only exception to this I can think of is at a throw in if a player throws the ball very hard at an opponents face - thats violent conduct too.

Twa Cairpets
25-08-2010, 01:01 PM
How do you explain the perplexity of many ex-OF players who have come out and admitted that for some reason unknown to them they got away with much more playing for the Rantic and Celgers than they did with any other team they played for?

No idea. Havent heard that myself, and if you note I've stressed the modern era where TV analyses every decision and refs view what they do as a career.


They are more lenient towards them than they are to us. They take into account the occasion they tell us. Why? Why are they allowed more bad challenges than the rest of us before getting booked. Until we play with the same set of rules, there will always be this accusation.
As per the earlier post, they take account of the occasion because that is the right thing to do. It does not affect the application of the laws of the game, but may affect how the referee manages them. It does not mean that what is a foul for one team is not a foul for another one. As for the "they are allowed more bad challenges...", I have no idea if this is true or not, but I do not believe it to be so. The OF are more likely to be on the end of more fouls because they have the ball more often, thats for sure. If there is any stats that prove me wrong I'll happilly change my mind, but I do believe it's down to confirmation bias. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias) rather than referee bias.