Sir Alex Denies Influencing Halsey

The world of refereeing is still in shock at the revelations by former Barclays Premier League referee Mark Halsey of his personal association with Sir Alex Ferguson. Halsey admitted it in his soon-to-be-released book.
The comments by Halsey have led to claims that Ferguson may have had undue influence on referees during his reign at Old Trafford.
The now former Manchester United manager denies any form of collusion between himself and Mark Halsey.
Ferguson claims “most of the managers, particularly in the North-West, supported him (Halsey) – and a lot of the players by the way – when he had the cancer, him and his wife.” “It was a terrible period for the lad and quite rightly the football fraternity got behind him and supported him,” he told MUTV News.

It has also been revealed that Jose Mourinho paid for a five-star holiday in the Algarve for ref Halsey and his family when he was first in charge at Chelsea. How many more will be implicated in this shocking episode?
In 2006, Reading midfielder James Harper complained about referees’ over-familiar nature with certain players.
The use of nicknames particularly provoked his ire, watching on furiously as the likes of ‘Stevie G’ (Stephen Gerard of Liverpool), for example, was let off the hook for serious indiscretions while other less famous players were more seriously dealt with.
In my opinion there have been too many “chummy-chummy” relations between match officials and players/managers. It has got to the stage that referees are calling players by their first name, or worse still, which speaks of familiarity gone mad, calling them by their nicknames.
Supporters are not blind. They can see what’s happening and although perceptions are not always correct, any suggestion that some teams appear to be enjoying “special” privileges sends out the wrong message.
That the PGMOL, the body which trains and appoints referees to the Barclays Premier League, found it necessary to reiterate that referees making direct contact with managers and players is prohibited “for integrity reasons”, should have been unnecessary but we have seen in recent years where over familiarity can breed problems.
Italy’s Calciopoli scandal resulted in the relegation of two of the country’s biggest clubs and widespread sanctions for others.
This scandal centred around a number of telephone interceptions that discovered networks of contact between senior club officials and refereeing organisations. In short, club directors were using their sway in order to secure certain referees to be in charge of games. Sound familiar?
Juventus chief Luciano Moggi still maintains that what occurred wasn’t match-fixing, claiming recently: “The theory that Juve received preferential treatment from the referees has been discredited. Furthermore, it has also been concluded that the results of the matches were not altered.”
However, what the phone calls used as evidence in court categorically proved was a collusion in designating the match officials, an inappropriate influence held by club representatives over the independent match officials and their organisation – something that evokes an unnerving parallel in recent revelations.
Whether Ferguson and Halsey (and now Mourinho) is the tip of the iceberg or a one-off example of behind-the-scenes pragmatism, the authorities have to move quickly to ensure that the distance is maintained and that no referee should have reason to brag of their “good relationship” with any club officials or players in the future.