Back in the early 90′s, i remember watching Gazzeta football italia on Channel 4 with James Richardson. One of the things I remember about the show was that each week he would sit outside a cafe and review the weeks football papers. I always remember that one of the papers they used to review was the Gazzeta delo sport, a dedicated sport newspaper that we could do with here.
Anyway to the point of the post. Currently in Italy there is a debate over if Juventus are still paying the price for there part in the corruption scandal. Juventus feel that a lot of decisions have gone against them and this came to an interesting point at the weekend. Juventus lost a league game 2-1 against Reggina. The winning goal came from this penalty (This looks like Dangerous play to me and would be an Indirect Free Kick – Debate.)
Now the thing that is causing the debate over the weekends action is that the Referee who gave the penalty was implicated (and I must add cleared) in the corruption investigation and so its being suggested that he was making a point that he was not favouring Juventus.
Whats interesting is that a few weeks ago Gazzeta dela Sport (see there was a point to the opening bit) went through every league game and changed the results dependant on if key controversial decisions had gone different ways. So if a goal was ruled out for offside it was given, a penalty had not or had been given they get an extra goal etc. Interestingly at the end of this Juventus were top of the league and not 3rd 13 points of top spot. I thought this was an interesting perspective and while not 100% accurate as the course and flow of the game would change Id be interested to know if this was applied how it would reflect the premiership. Completely finger in the air I would say Everton may have had more controversial decisions against them, but I may be wrong, whats your thoughts?