maverick180 5:41 Sun Oct 8
Peter Banks
|
|
It’s not possible this bloke is consistently this bad
He 100% takes money to fix matches
We as a club should call him out on it after this match
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
Westside
7:48 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
That doesn't make sense, you thick cunt.
Wow. My very first stalker. Just go away and stalk somebody else.
|
Far Cough
7:42 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
That doesn't make sense, you thick cunt.
|
Westside
7:29 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Here is Westside the site troll correcting everybody or he thinks he is.
Yes, I made a mistake about cricket games. The difference is far cunt, you are a mistake.
|
Far Cough
7:22 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Here is Westside the site troll correcting everybody or he thinks he is.
Was it 18 games each in the cricket county championship this season?
|
marty feldman
7:22 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
There's plenty good refferes about. Problem is hardly any are English. The ref against Freiburg was the best I've seen in a hell of a long time .
|
Westside
7:12 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Obviously the bad decisions will be discussed. I am suggesting that good refereeing (it does happen) be shown on a programme and those providing good performances are independently and objectively marked and ranked accordingly. Bad refs get bad, objectively derived marks.
Each Premier League match is evaluated by a former senior referee who scrutinises every decision using the match footage and event data to measure the officials’ technical performance. Former players and managers (Match Delegates) assess the accuracy and consistency of decision-making and their management of the match. (per the PGMOL website).
|
ATHammer
6:42 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Kaiser Zoso 3:58 Tue Oct 10
No, ref watch is precisely what I do not mean. As you say it is a waste of time. A good ref is generally not noticed, he simply manages the game for the benefit of the participants and at a higher level, spectators. A bad ref, e.g. Banks; Taylor; before them Dean going back to Thomas want to draw attention to themselves administering, sometimes controversially, sometimes ineptly, the laws of the game. Obviously the bad decisions will be discussed. I am suggesting that good refereeing (it does happen) be shown on a programme and those providing good performances are independently and objectively marked and ranked accordingly. Bad refs get bad, objectively derived marks. It happens in other sports (NFL) where it is promoted by the relevant authorities and can involve demotion for incompetence and progression for those who prove to be good. The premier league and the FA
are unwilling to tackle the problem so the only way forward is for the paymasters (Sky) to promote better practice for the benefit of their product. The likes of Banks and Taylor will, ultimately, fall away as the spotlight they enjoy from controversy is balanced by objectively demonstrating them to be crap by being bottom of a table of their peers. Accentuating positives will also serve as more encouragement for young refs to do well, we need refs, and weed out would be demagogues. There are debates over officiating in all sports, it would be boring if there weren't, but, generally most sports seem to progress with the quality of the officials and their communication, whereas top flight football in the UK continues to go backwards.
|
Westside
6:11 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Gallagher always seems to try and find reasons to support the referees' or VAR's decisions. Rarely comes down on the side of either or both being wrong.
For Guimaraes second, non yellow card, foul, Gallagher didn't say he should have got a second yellow, but said "lucky not to get one."
I've often heard refs say there is no such thing as a "harsh," decision. It's either right or wrong. Gallagher should have the balls to say this, rather than hide behind phrases like "lucky not to get a second yellow."
The ex footballers on the programme, often disagree with Gallagher.
|
Kaiser Zoso
5:15 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
' is that because he knows the rules and most of the professionals don’t?’
No, Filth — they are laws anyway, not rules. It’s not who understands the laws better and consequently the referee has made a correct call, it’s more a question of going through the most contentious decisions where the referee has made a blatantly incorrect judgement and Gallagher shrugs it off, saying something glib like ‘that was the referee's interpretation’ — so he made the correct decision.
So for example, Bowen jumping over the Chelsea goalkeeper last season, and Cornet scoring, that incident would be discussed as to whether or not Bowen fouled the keeper. That is hardly anything to do with ex officials knowing the laws better than anyone else, is it?
|
Fifth Column
4:15 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Kaiser
When you say reluctant to concede anything is that because he knows the rules and most of the professionals don't? Like Paul Merson acting like a child and shouting at Mike Dean on that (or similar progamme)? I can't stand Mike Dean but Merson didn't have a clue what he was on about.
I'm not taking the piss. I just wondered what you meant by "not conceding anything" as I haven't watched it. Might do now you've talked about it now though.
|
Kaiser Zoso
3:58 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
It’s a pointless watch — Gallagher sticks by his mates and is reluctant to concede anything.
The only thing it does reveal is why the PGMOL are such a shit show, with cunts like him around with completely blinkered attitudes
|
Westside
2:51 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
ATHammer
I was thinking a similar thing with aTV show on Monday nights with a credible (if there is one) ex ref and ex player going through the contentious issues in games.
You mean like "Ref watch," on Sky Sports News, on a Monday morning? When The host, Dermot Gallagher and a couple of ex footballers, do exactly that?
|
CanningTownWA
11:26 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
ATHammer
I was thinking a similar thing with aTV show on Monday nights with a credible (if there is one) ex ref and ex player going through the contentious issues in games. This would highlight poor referee decisions and hopefully improve things and also make sure their blatant bias is being shown and not brushed under the carpet.
|
Gary Strodders shank
11:20 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
Petition actually dates back to 2021 when he was the VAR ref who awarded us a penalty.against Liverpool.
|
Gary Strodders shank
11:14 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
I see someone has started a petition on the change site to get him suspended.
Only 18 signatures thus far.
|
Coffee
9:17 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
nychammer 3:06 Tue Oct 10
There's a lot you can criticise the referee for, but membership of an Iranian sleeper cell in the USA might be pushing things.
|
Sir Alf
8:54 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
He is simply “not fit for purpose”. Soon as the PGMOL or Premiership recognize it the better. Those 2 fouls by this Bruno geezer deserved bookings whatever minute they occurred. Clearly mistimed them and both causing a significant clump to the payers legs. Worse still was that they also both were preventing a counter attack.
Put Banks and fans out their misery by binning him imo
|
nychammer
3:08 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
oops wrong thead
|
nychammer
3:06 Tue Oct 10
Re: Peter Banks
|
imagine how many sleeper cells could have walked in over the US southern border. The Iranians have acknowledged it as an easy way in.
Everyone needs to be vigilant
|
El Scorchio
9:45 Mon Oct 9
Re: Peter Banks
|
Yup potentially, although it's then for the players to understand where he's drawn his line and control themselves accordingly. No excuse for Gruimneroginerog to make an identical challenge shortly after the one he was booked for and really expect anything different to happen. That's just piss poor from him and bloody fortunate the ref was a bottle job.
|
| 
