The term sudditanza psicologica is useful here. You may have heard of it?
In the context of Italian football, it is used to describe the attitude of referees who may be in the thrall of powerful clubs like Juventus or Milan, insinuating that they are already, consciously or not, predisposed to favour them. Before Calciopoli--or, let's be more accurate, Moggipoli--Juve fans used to bristle at the suggestion. After the summer of 2006, they spectacularly lost the debate and any moral high ground. They point to our involvement through Meani as if it were commensurate with how Moggi bullied referees for years. It really wasn't. There was certainly a bigger picture, but the crooks in Turin were the ones who inordinately disgraced themselves and Italian football.
Do referees and influential suits get around a table and conspire against all clubs except Juventus? Probably not, especially after the purge of 2006. But referees certainly know what benefits their careers, and championing clubs like Crotone or even Fiorentina doesn't get you promotions and prominence.
As Juventus have risen to primacy in Italy, and as our own power and influence have waned, we receive the short-end of the stick more often than perhaps we used to. Referees in Italy aren't sinister--they are just weak-minded and are coddled far too much. How frequently do they admit they're wrong? How often do they offer detailed explanations for their decisions (something that Montella talked about just yesterday)?
I am still seething about Friday. It was bullshit. But preventing (not completely but to a degree) incidents like that requires a more competitive Serie A and for the Milan giants to reassert themselves.
Haven't heard of the term since I am not particularly versed in the Italian language, but the concept is familiar. Some very valid points and I agree on a lot of them, especially the assertion that referees bow down to big clubs. It happens everywhere, Barca & Real in Spain, Bayern in Germany, etc.
I don't believe however that a more competitive Serie A is the solution alone. It would work for us, but in the interest of fair officiating for all, it wouldn't work since the referee's would still fuck over the smaller teams.
I think a part of the problem is also an actual lack of quality in regards to referee's. Some very poor decisions overall that don't fit within the whole big team v small team frame.
I also heavily advocate introducing more technology and to find a way to review plays in real time and to challenge plays. I'd rather have a match go on a bit longer if we don't have games decided by wrong decisions.
What has he really pulled off? Are we in a better place than last year?
Reducing Montella to numbers would be a grave mistake and wouldn't do his work justice. Assuming that 7th place means the same thing every year would be ignorant. Context matters and the context is very favourable for Montella. He went into the season with small spending power but had this team surprise everyone(remember the outlook people had before the season started, a lot didn't believe that we'd even challenge for EL). We were challenging for CL places before the depth of the squad was shown lacking, something everyone expected to bite us in the ass. We won against Juve and drew with Inter but not with anti-football but by actually playing the game.
Montella had to deal with Montolivo getting injuried early, now with Bonaventura also being out for quite some time. Niang completely fell off the face of the earth, so Montella had no reliable left wing. Amidst all that, there were quite a lot dodgy refereeing decisions against us.
Lets see how he does with a proper team, setup to succeed with his ideas in place instead of the current team. All things considered, Montella looks very impressive both from a footballing perspective but he's also a class act.
