Probable distribution of the first 8 places. Analysis of ESC decisions and expert reviews

The final standings of the Czech Republic 2020-21 with fair refereeing

I used the algorithm used then when compiling the final standings. The main principle is that when choosing the key moments of the matches, the decisions of the ESC and the regularly published reviews of the SE experts (A.Bobrov) and the Championship (I.Fedotov) are taken as the basis. The analyzes of other refereeing experts concern only individual matches, are published irregularly in different sources and therefore are not taken into account.

From the total number of episodes considered by the ESC and experts from the SE and the Championship, moments were selected for analysis in which the decision of the referee, according to at least one source, directly affected the outcome of the match. These are episodes preceding a goal, penalties, as well as moments with red cards, but only in cases where a player who was not sent off by mistake subsequently scored a goal that decided the outcome of the match.
Episodes that indirectly affected the outcome were not taken into account. For example, if in a meeting between teams A and B, the referee mistakenly canceled the goal of team B when the score was 0-0, and the meeting ended with a score of 2-0, then this mistake was considered to only indirectly affect the outcome of the match, and it was not taken into account in the review.

The table of disputable key episodes used for the analysis with the decisions of the ESC, expert assessments, as well as the resulting assessments of the decisions of the judges is given below.
imgur.com/a/CGFW1FA

It should be noted that the results presented above were obtained under the assumption of 100% conversion of erroneously missed penalties. In fact, as the statistics of the Czech Republic 2020-21 show, about 3 out of 4 penalties are scored in the RPL, that is, the probability of converting a penalty is approximately 75%. If we take this factor into account, we get the following final standings (first eight places)

1. Zenith…………………. 61 (+4)
2. Locomotive…………….57 (-1)
3. CSKA…………………. 56 (-6)
4. Spartacus………………. 56 (+1)
5. Sochi……………………. 54 (-1)
6. Dynamo……………. ….51 (-1)
7. Ruby…………………. 50 (+3)
8. Krasnodar……………..46 (-5)

The difference in points shown by the official and fair tables is indicated in brackets.

Author of the photo: Oleg Bukharev

* The editors of the Bobsoccer.ru portal are not responsible for publications in the Fan Notes section.

Rebrov: “In Saturn, Cameroonian Angbwa was planted with black toilet paper and a dildo”

Wings will play against Dynamo in a retro uniform

Khimki conditionally punished by holding the match on a neutral field, the game with Spartak will be held in Khimki

penal

Marchello

More or less true.
In addition to obvious mistakes – there is also a certain tactic of refereeing. For example, when one of the teams is put on the whistle, minor violations are inconsistently fixed for one and not fixed for the other.
In general, objectively, CSKA has been hindering someone very much since the 2018/2019 season.I have never seen such refereeing before. Many noted this at first, but now it was already bored

Rorshah!

I have my own theory in this regard. Just the fairy tale of autumn 2018 with the team created for a penny did not like some with Marquisio in the composition of us without a chance of that autumn losers.
So they did not endure fair ridicule, and starting in the spring we began to struggle hard, at first they destroyed the mentally VMG, followed by the football players, having received a visual lesson, in our chas, the medals were not played on the field.

Marchello

Frosha

IN.

Trop77

Isn’t it in St. Petersburg?) After all, before the championships, who was shouting about the Moscow conspiracy for 4 years? Or is it different?)

IN.

Why four? Zenith was not a champion for 3 years, two bronze and 5th place. At this time, Moscow clubs became champions of CSKA, Lokomotiv, Spartak, this is not the other, it distributed the championship, now it has come to an end to the distribution and the strongest becomes the first, the next season it will be more difficult, the option of the strongest will join the content with the distribution option, 100 years Spartak and locomotive, let's see, it will be interesting.

Trop77

Well, you see, you yourself are mired in the theory of conspiracies, so why blame others for this, if you yourself are no better?
Zenith has all the championships, and you are talking about others)

IN.

Trop77

So you have to, order or think just so Spartak was lying with you, without even trying? Fedun knows that he will disobey that will be punished.
Everyone understands that Zenit has cabinet championships, there is no secret. You even understand this.

IN.

Trop77

When they give a team from the very top, you won’t do anything here, otherwise there will be a big problem in business. Everyone understands that Zenith is artificially doing the champion, they all understand this, even you. Shame on being such champions.

IN.

Trop77

So understandable, there is nothing to say, you yourself understand that I am right. The Zenit club is controlled by those who in the country have created a general corruption, this is a fact.

Randal

Spartach_s_86_go

Strelna

Vladimir Bystrov: The transition from Spartak to Zenit is my initiative

– There is a myth that Spartak sold Bystrova without his knowledge.

– There was no like that! There was a clause in the contract, according to which I could leave. When I was asked if I want to at Zenit, answered in the affirmative. I never said that I did not want to cross, but they took me and bought me.

– And who asked? Fedun?

– I have never talked about this topic with Fedun. People from Zenit asked. I said: As soon as such an opportunity arises, I will definitely return home. And she arose. There were no secrets. If in the case of the transition from Zenit to Spartak, there was no particular desire, then there was. Returning home is my initiative.

– Karpin counted on you.

– I counted, but I said once again: in my contract there was an appropriate item, and Zenit used it. From mine, I repeat, consent.

– Valery Georgievich was not offended?

– No, we talked well with him and, I hope, understood each other.

– This return was not a mistake?

– I moved home – what can this be called a mistake? Perhaps if I stayed, Spartak had more chances to become a champion that year. But he did not make any special attempts to save me and did. What else is there to talk about? – said Bystrov.
www.sports.ru/football/1036878.

Strelna

Fans accused me of betrayal, they say, I went to the camp of the worst enemy. Well, what should I do? Tie with football? I was sold at Spartak. From there he returned to St. Petersburg himself. Just Spartak fans could make some complaints. Then we won the first circle well, fought for the championship. But I always said that at the first opportunity I would return to Zenit.
– And Valery Karpin claimed that Spartak received a call from a high office.
– I just don't know that. The contract contained an option and a certain amount is indicated. They called, paid, I left. Everything!
www.sovsport.ru/football/articles/2:899170

Spartach_s_86_go

I read all this in due time, believe me. I have no reason not to believe Karpin, because I know who your real owner is and the title sponsor and where, if necessary, you can organize a call.

Inkeri.inkeri

Red White

This is for myself. I do not agree for 3 things. And not a word in the match with Rubin, but if the judge Albigor in our match deleted earlier Rubin would not have won the judge.

F1Del1ty

Do you complain about refereeing? Remember the match with Krasnodar, if it was not muddy refereeing then, Spartak would not have hit the Champions League

Lion 64

Red White

I do not complain, but I give the fact judging by this table that is called fair and the match with the ruby ​​is not taken into account how fair it is then?

Fleris

Tipik

F1Del1ty

I’m stupid about the fact that Spartak this season was stupid to complain about both the plus and minus, in fact, the balance, that is, was not particularly affected. But CSKA really choke, last season the judicial mistakes were deprived of CSKA CSKA, this season CSKA is again in the top according to the mistakes of referees.

Tipik

F1Del1ty

Well, for example, for example, they wrote that in the match with Loko, Vilkov took 1 point from CSKA, and there they did not put the pencil case with a score of 0-0, IMHO in that game was 3 points and the final second place in CSKA and, respectively, the 5th place of Loko

Redline

gave Spartak 0 points

Lokomotiv …………… .57 (-1)
3. CSKA …………………. 56 (-6)
4. Spartak ………………. 56 (+1)

Your table is above the right.
But the disorder.

Bashny

Stavr

Bashny

Spartak scored 57 points in this championship. And his author subtracted one point, although he himself wrote that the judges did not give Spartak anything. And taking into account that Spartak was not allowed to break through the penalty in the match with Loko, then the defeat 1: 2, with the equality of glasses with Loko, would still make Spartak the second due to more goals clogged.

Tipik

Dr.time

The last three seasons that the real table is “honest”, the winner is always the only one! Though read the glasses with pharmacies, at least do not subtract. But all of course bought.

Keng

Inkeri.inkeri

Fleris

CSKA fans are used to the fact that about 20 years their team was judged very well (all these penalties in the last minutes from the bottom of the table with a score of 0: 0).Therefore, now that they began to judge them as everyone, i.e. To squint through time, for them, of course, it turned out like a thunder from a clear sky. Last summer they chuckled at Spartak, from whom they were canceled goals, and now suddenly they themselves turned out to be victims of the conspiracy.
Spartak began to be judged more or less human after Fedun threatened to take off the team from the championship. You can treat this as you like, but it was a strong gesture, I did not expect this from him. So you probably also need to do something in this direction)

Tipik

Inkeri.inkeri

Kind

Archelaos

In search of justice by his own understanding of the author, for example, he somehow “missed the“ moment of the match ”Sochi-“ Spartak ”(1: 0) in the 45th minute. Then Larsson beat on goal, the enemy threw himself under the blow and his hand was thrown aside blocked the blow. The penalty is obvious. But the author does not think so, based on his own reasons.

Penal

Nothing like this. You have to be more careful.
The note has a link to the episode table
imgur.com/a/cgfw1fa
It also includes an episode with the hand of Tsallagov.
From the table it can be seen that according to this episode, ESC supported the decision of Panin not to appoint a penalty: The hand is in a natural position and does not make the body unnaturally more.
In SE (beavers), nothing definite is said at this point.
In the Championship (Fedotov), ​​Panin's decision is considered erroneous.
Below the tables are comments, where in particular it is indicated: If one of the experts has no opinion or is unambiguously formed, then the priority is given to the decision of the ESK.
When compiling the final table, this rule acts in all such cases, and not only in the case of the Tsallagov hand.
Below I give a gif from where everyone can conclude for whether Panin was mistaken or not
radikal.ru/users/sochi-spartak.

Archelaos

I'm just attentive. You have written:

The judges took 7 points from CSKA: 3t Zenit –1, 9t locomotive –1, 16t ruby ​​–1, 18t Ural –2, 28t Ufa –2

In fact, we get the following based on the data of your table.

The match 3 rounds of CSKA with Zenit ESC did not consider his attention to the absence of claims from the clubs at all, Sax did not write about jambs either. But Chemop “wrote that in his opinion the arbitrator was mistaken in favor of Zenit and that’s all, this is enough for you.

Match of the 9th round of CSKA with Lokomotiv. ESK recognizes the arbiter’s actions correct, there was no penalty against Lokomotiv. You again write that since the journalists of SE and the “Champs” are talking about the jamb of the referee, it means that the penalty should be appointed.

That is, you have ESC, then authority, then not authority. Depending on how more convenient you are. You got a good job. When there is a decision of the ESC and the opinions of journalists were divided, the rights of ESC. When there is an ESC decision, but journalists do not agree with it, then journalists are right. I came up with a sore one.

Sweet

Archelaos

So I just walked offhand. I myself am an approach in a joke in general, when the private opinions of a former referee and in general of some journalist can be considered more professional than ESC solutions.

Sweet

You understand the ESK very few taken glasses and errors against CSKA
Not in order!
It is necessary to get out because CSKA kill the judges for 3 years.
Decision -Let's do this. Let's take the opinion of some experts from the site of the SE and the Referee Championship who found more mistakes of judges against CSKA and weave them with the decisions of the ESC
So it turns out the most honest table

penal

The match of the 3rd round of CSKA with Zenit was not considered worthy of attention at all by the ESC due to the lack of claims from the clubs, Sacks also did not write about jambs. But Champ wrote that, in his opinion, the referee made a mistake in favor of Zenit and everything, that's enough for you.
Didn't understand. What's wrong here?
If two of the three available sources have no opinion on the episode, then it is natural to take into account the opinion of the remaining 3rd source.
You could be understood if I used this algorithm selectively. But no – it always works, and not only with respect to the Zenit-CSKA match.
The same goes for your other suspicions.
More on the rest later

Archelaos

“You could be understood if I used this algorithm selectively. But no, it always works, and not only regarding the Zenit-CSKA match.
The same goes for your other suspicions.

Let's look at the algorithm. There are 36 moments in your table in total. Of these, there are only 15 moments that were honored by all three chosen ones, and 21 moments in which at least 1 of the three experts did not notice anything.

Let's look at your table again. Of the same 36 presented mistakes that influenced the result, Bobrov did not cover 17 points in SEX at all. Almost half. You said something about regularly published reviews of SE experts (A. Bobrov) for each round. Therefore, Bobrov does not consider these moments as mistakes.

Further more interesting. The moments that both ESK and Bobrov did not honor with any reaction, as many as 9 (NINE). Among them are matches of the 3rd round “Zenith” – CSKA and 16th round “Rubin” – CSKA, in which, in your opinion, CSKA was deprived. That is, two of the three experts you invited in absentia do not react to the episode, and this is not an argument for you, the opinion of one Fedotov is dominant for you in this case and it is more weighty than the opinions of two. The beauty.

penal

Of the same 36 presented mistakes that influenced the result, Bobrov did not cover 17 points in SEX at all. Almost half
In the comments to the table of episodes, there are, in particular, the words: “sign “?” is set if there is no opinion of the source on the moment being analyzed or clearly not defined».
So, out of the 17 moments you mentioned, in 9 cases Bobrov says neither “yes” nor “no” by the presence or absence of an error, that is, he takes a neutral position. And only in 8 cases his opinion is unknown.
Therefore, Bobrov does not consider these moments as mistakes.
Where does it come from? If Bobrov thought that in some of these 8 moments the judge was right, then he would have written about it. If you look at the table of episodes, then Bobrov did this more than once.

If one engages in conjectures, then most likely Bobrov's silence can be very simply explained in this way.
Bobrov works from the wheels, that is, during the match or immediately after it, he issues relevant notes about key episodes. If there are 4 matches per day, then two of them are going on at the same time or with a slight shift. And, most likely, one of Bobrov's people makes a cut of the moments of one of the parallel matches, which Bobrov uses for review at the end of the game day, if necessary.
If Bobrov does not perform the same feint with other matches of the day, then it turns out that with short breaks he sits at the screen for about 5 hours on a game day. At the same time, he still needs to have time to compose the text of the note. It is obvious that at some point his attention is dulled, and he can return the episode back on his own only by stopping watching the broadcast. Therefore, it turns out that some key moments are skipped, especially those that TV does not focus on and which do not go immediately before a goal or a penalty in time.
As for Fedotov, he watches all the matches himself, and then within a day or more after the last match he prepares a fundamental review of all the matches of the tour. Therefore, he practically does not miss the key moments of the match.
More on the rest later.

Strelna

It is obvious that at some point his attention is dulled, and he can return the episode back on his own only by stopping watching the broadcast. Therefore, it turns out that some key moments are skipped, especially those that TV does not focus on and which do not go immediately before a goal or a penalty in time.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha))))))))))))

Archelaos

All your thoughts about the consideration of controversial episodes by Bobrov can be expressed much more briefly. Bobrov works at random and simply skips a lot of things. Only then he himself has never been an authority in such a slippery topic as an impartial analysis of the mistakes of arbitrators.

penal

I do not think so. Bobrov has been in this topic for over 20 years. With his style of work – the speed of the material is primary, and the quality is secondary, he simply misses those moments that TV does not pay attention to. I analyzed his gaps. Almost always, a minute or more passed from the time of the foul to the goal. Since TV rewinds back from the goal during replays, as a rule, only a few seconds, he simply did not have time to understand what the trick was. In those cases when the violation of the rules and the moment of the goal were close in time and repeated many times, he, generally speaking, was at his best.

Archelaos

If a person whom someone considers an expert, somewhere keeps up with the moments, but somewhere does not have time, then he cannot be considered an expert in any way. And how many years he has been in the subject is not an argument at all. Having experience in a particular area is not the same as having competence in that particular area. A person can work 20 years in a certain field and still remain a fool a fool.Or an addicted expert, this is also possible.

Penal

If a person whom someone considers the expert, somewhere he manages for moments, but does not have time somewhere, then he cannot be considered an expert in any way
I note that the passage of the moment is not as terrible as its incorrect interpretation.
Speaking in a substantive, of the 36 episodes presented in the table, 8 beavers missed that it is not at all critical for me.
In 9 cases, Bobrov did not give episodes a unequivocal assessment. This is not good, but not bad, remembering how our TV shows.
In the remaining 19 cases, he made a mistake, in my opinion, 3 times:
Offside Rybchinsky
Images.vfl.ru/II/161366537/2C.
hand Pablo
Radikal.ru/users/loko-spartak2.
And the hand of Sillaova
Radikal.ru/users/loko-spartak2.
In all three cases, the evaluation of the episode is actual, and in the 1st case the beavers became a victim of erroneous (most likely, due to the marker’s incorrectly assigned Avar). The case of the case (Silianova’s hand) is also very complicated for visual analysis.
Given the latest factors, you can put Bobrov for an analysis of a good assessment.
Since I have gifs of each moment, after watching them, you can give your assessment.

Penal

Further even more interesting. Moments that both ESC and Bobrov together did not receive any reaction, as much as 9 (nine)
No. Sign ? In relation to the SE, it is placed not only in the case when the opinion of Bobrov is unknown, but also in the case when he did not decide on the issue whether the judge was mistaken or not. In other words, Bobrov’s reaction, although it is neutral, but is present. There are three such cases: 14 tour of the Mozes Rykov, 19 Tour Khimki-Loko, 20 Tour of Zenit Rosts. A goal against Rostov.
Among them are matches 3 rounds of Zenit – CSKA and 16 rounds of Rubin – CSKA, in which in your opinion CSKA was deprived. That is, two of the three experts attracted by you do not react to the episode, but this is not an argument, the opinion of one Fedotov for you in this case is dominant and it is more significant than the opinions of two.
Sorry, but if in the ESC Count there is a sign “?”, Then this just says that there was no opinion of the ESC, since there was no ESC decision on the corresponding episode.
The same goes for SE. How can one judge some opinion of Bobrov, if we do not even know whether it existed at all or not!?
I can only repeat that if the opinions of ESC definitely do not exist, and we do not know the opinion of SE, then it is natural to choose the opinion of the champion.

Archelaos

If the opinions of ESC do not exist, since there was no solution on the episode, this means that the clubs themselves did not verify this episode essential for converting to ESC. Consequently, clubs do not consider such an episode for anything that have influenced. It is pointless to consider it in your table.

Penal

In the Regulation on ESC there is a section on the rules of appeal to this commission. So, according to these rules, moments like a foul at Vlashic in the Zenit-Osk match would simply not have accepted for consideration.

Archelaos

So you answered your own complaints. If ESK does not consider certain points to be mistakes that influenced the result, therefore no one has the right to consider some game moments to be mistakes that influenced the result.

Penal

The Regulation on the ESC, which Dyukov signed in June last year, prepared our judicial leadership who lost the confidence of the fans. And ESK is not the Lord, who alone knows what influenced the result and what is not.
Take, for example, a goal with an erroneously assigned penalty area. This error does not affect the result in a clear way? In DS, such an error is considered rude, for which the judge is reduced by the same 0.5 points as for the incorrectly set the penalty. And ESC does not consider such moments.
Or another example. Incorrectly prescribed corner, after which a goal is clogged.
Here are the words of S. Karasev: “In May 2018, I unsuccessfully sued the semifinals of the Europa League. In the meeting “Salzburg” – “Marseille” five minutes before the end of additional time, incorrectly appointed the corner blow towards the hosts, from which the French scored a goal and went to the final. This scar on the heart will never overgrow. Probably due to this mistake, he lost the trust of the judicial commission».
ESC does not accept appeals at such moments.
The same is the 2nd LCD, if the 1st LCD has not been officially shown.
It is likely that the above restrictions were adopted in order to reduce the flow of commands of commands to ESC.

Archelaos

I read this passage of yours:

ESK is not the Lord who alone knows what influenced the result and what not.

Thinking. I opened your table again and found one phrase there below:

If the assessment is actual (for example, the presence or absence of an offside, or the fact of contact of the ball with your hand), then The opinion of experts is not taken into account and the decisive assessment is based on graphic or video analysis."

I watched in your table the mistakes of the match of the 6th round “Lokomotiv” – “Zenith” with an offside and the abolition of the goal in the gate of “Zenith”. ESK, SE and the championship vote for the correctness of this decision, but you make a mistake.

I think I guess who you think the Lord God.

Penal

I think I guess who you think the Lord God.
Why are your guesses?
Offside? Rybchinsky is a classic example of an episode requiring an actual assessment, which can only be given using a graphic analysis
Images.vfl.ru/II/161366537/2C.
All experts focused on wide TV lines, which were drawn using a computer according to where Avar (Gavrilin) ​​put his marker. It seems that, as in the case of Dziuba’s “cut off” foot, Avar put a marker to that place. Most likely, Gavrilin put a marker to the edge of the sleeve of the T -shirt of Rybchinsky, and it was necessary, according to the new rules, to the line of the armpit.
As soon as I spent a thin offside line and compare it with a projection on the lawn of the edge of the line of the armpit of Rybchinsky, as it immediately became clear that he and Karavaev were on the same line.

Archelaos

All experts were guided by wide TV lines, which were drawn using a computer according to where Avar (Gavrilin) ​​put his marker.
.
As soon as I spent a thin offside line and compare it with a projection on the lawn of the edge of the line of the armpit of Rybchinsky, as it immediately became clear

After reading it, a lot of things became clear to me too. Thanks for the conversation.

penal

When there is a decision of the ESC, but the journalists do not agree with it, then the journalists are right. Fuck off I figured it out.
Obviously, the opinion of the ESC is more significant than any external opinion (ie, the opinion of the SE or Champ).
Now I will explain why, nevertheless, it is reasonable to consider that the joint opinion of the SE and Champ is more important than the opinion of the ESC.
For this, it is important to understand that the decision of the Commission against judges are not accepted by a simple, but by a qualified majority in two voices.
From the Regulations on the ESC approved by Dyukov in June 2020: “The decision of the judge is not supported if the number of votes in support of the decision of the judge is less than the number of votes that did not support the decision of the judge by two or more votes. In other cases, the decision is recognized as taken in favor of the judge.
Prior to the arrival of Snodden in March of this year, 7 people had the right to vote in the ESC. Imagine that on some episode, SE and Champ spoke out against the judge, and ESC – for. This, at least, means that the episode is not simple and, most likely, there was no overwhelming majority in favor of the judge in the ESC. Since we are not told how the votes add up, in this case we can assume such layouts: 5-2, 4-3 or 3-4.
To understand the general (ie, taking into account the opinions of SE and Champ) alignment, two factors must be taken into account.
1. It is clear that any ESC expert is more authoritative, and his voice is more weighty than the voice of an SE expert or Champ. But the solidarity voice of the latter can be quite equated to the voice of one ESC expert.
2. There are 2 cases of information merging in the media, when in the scenario 1-6 and 1-7, the only member of the ESC who voted for the judge was Kashshai. You can also remember how Kashshai clumsily laundered Ivanov after the Zenit-Spartak Cup match.
It is clear that here we have a conflict of interest – the head of the DC will support his subordinates at the slightest opportunity. Therefore, the voice of Kashshai in our situation can be ignored.
Considering these two factors, general the alignment from 5-2, 4-3, 3-4 (according to ESC) turns into 4-3, 3-4, 2-5. It is from these figures, which show an obvious bias in the decisions of the ESC, that we must dance. In other words, if the decision of the ESC is in favor of the judge, and the solidarity opinion of the SE and Champ is against, then it is more reasonable to follow the latter

Archelaos

For this, it is important to understand that the decision of the Commission against the judge is not taken by a simple, but by a qualified majority. in two voices.
.
Considering these two factors, the overall spread of 5-2, 4-3, 3-4 (according to ESC) turns into 4-3, 3-4, 2-5."

The only thing that is important to understand here is that you yourself are first talking about a majority of TWO votes, and then you allow the result of voting for the same ESC with a majority of ONE vote.

“Imagine that on some episode, the SE and Champ spoke out against the judge, and the ESC was in favor. This, at least, means that the episode is not simple and, most likely, there was no overwhelming majority in favor of the judge in the ESC”

I have a rich imagination, and I can imagine it.As well as I can imagine the fact that the statements in the SE and the Champ can be made of their personal reasons that have nothing to do with the search for justice. And even more so, I can imagine that the presence of an emphasis on the controversial issues of matches in no way gives us the reason for the decision of the ESC on the same moments by the decision without the vast majority of votes.

If the decision of the ESC is in favor of the judge, and the joint opinion of the SE and the Champis is against, then it is more reasonable to follow the latter.

You brought only two specific results of the ESC vote, someone merged by someone (which also requires verification). For other episodes, you do not have voting results. Nevertheless, you believe that without even knowing the results of the specific votes of ESC in other cases, their opinion is equal to one voice against one voice at the SE and the “championship”. I’m even afraid to ask if you were visited by the idea that if the voting results are 5-2 in favor of the arbiter, then the voices of the two press officers are not adjusted in any way.

Adelweis

Soon the championship due to the results in Europe will be cooked in its own juice, then left -wing decisions will be sharply reduced. Football is only a reflection of what is happening in the country

Poljazz

Another attempt to draw a shadow on the waddle. Lokomotiv would not even take third place with normal refereeing

Cskawinner

After a fight, they don’t wave their fists. It is time for fans to begin to actively conduct protests in the case of horseradish refereeing. We want honest football, and if the Premier League and the RFU cannot give it, replace the leadership.

Frosha

Deleted

They themselves did not shm, so Penal
will drag it.

Strelna

Strelna

Lumenul

Penal, you said everything correctly. The indignation of young SBG is the best indicator of truth. The generation of snowflakes recognizes only its truth, only the one that they compose themselves and believe in it. Aggression for the opposite opinion is natural. They see that in the flight they fill this flight with ordinary unmotivated statements.
Write constantly, my friend Penal! I applaud!

Penal

Lumenul

Inkeri.inkeri

Yes, everything is in order)
We will close our eyes to the objectivity of the compilation of this table, close our eyes and a divided into the 3rd line of CSKA and Spartak, we will close our eyes to everything.
Even with eyes closed, CSKA will not rise above the third place in any case.

ScreenPlayer

Lumenul

Certainly. The army team is friends with the army, and the fans of the major club from the city of Aurora among themselves. So you did not surprise me to surprise me.

Penal

Strelna

Penal, how not ashamed to use the administrative resource on the site and rub the comments of the Zenit fans about delusional statements Given to Zenit 4 points (balance): 3t CSKA +2, In the comments, Zenith fans wrote that there were no barrys foul on Vlashic, there are more than one or two such minor clashes during the match.
In addition, Barrios played the ball. The Zenit goal is clogged after the completion of this episode after the corner. In addition, do you really not understand that you have no respect for you as an expert, because your expertise is very biased.
corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?
Well, if you see that others do not see, why can I not say that you do not see?

Regarding the holy of the Pope – I categorically do not say anything anywhere about refereeing and do not master Honest -Prescription Tables

Penal
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner. lang=en style=height: 28px;You will stamp the errors against CSKA, using shyler methods, cutting the pictures from the place that it is beneficial to you. So the episode of Barrios with Tiknizhan and Vlashich was not cut from the beginning. At first, Tiknizhane at high speed rolled under Barris, who barely got out of his feet and then played into the ball, hitting Vlashich’s leg with his knee. Your club did not count this touch for violation of the rules and did not apply to ESC. ESK and Bobrov also did not notice any foul here.
I.ibb.co/6brn4vp/ezgif-5-61e85.
I.ibb.co/r3zpndm/ezgif-5-376c8.
I repeat once again – what respect for your materials and personally can you talk about you if you use the Admin resource and plug your mouth to opponents with its help? Better write your opuses and turn off the comments right away, as it has already been. The people laugh and that's it.
Penal
Penal, how not ashamed to use the Admin resource on the site and rub the comments of Zenit fans
Why are these cigarette accusations? I did not use any admin resource and did not delete comments. If someone was rubbed here, then this is not a question for me.
Here is the episode of Barrios with Tiknizhan and Vlashic not cut from the beginning There is no one “Barrios episode with Tiknizhan and Vlashic”.There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a barrios foul on Vlashic. If you want, you can add an even earlier episode of Tiknizyan Driussi. Here is a common video since Oblukov’s interception passes of Dziuba
radikal.ru/video/ovnamf6gfnp
Below the moment Tiknizyan-Barrios

Radikal.ru/users/zenit-tsska20.

Igor Fedotov talks about the fola Barrios on Vlashic and
nothing

About the so -called foy ?? Tiknizhanyan.

And here are the words of Denis Kazan, who commented on the match: “Tiknizyan, (pause). And he left the ball under his control. It turns out that Kazansky also does not see Tiknizhane fola. It seems that this foul ?? It exists only in your head and the heads of your like -minded people.
We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?
Strelna

There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a barrios foul on Vlashic.

And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?

We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?

Well, if you see that others do not see, why can I not say that you do not see?

Regarding the holy of the Pope – I categorically do not say anything anywhere about refereeing and do not master Honest -Prescription Tables
PenalAnd there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.You will stamp the errors against CSKA, using shyler methods, cutting the pictures from the place that it is beneficial to you. So the episode of Barrios with Tiknizhan and Vlashich was not cut from the beginning. At first, Tiknizhane at high speed rolled under Barris, who barely got out of his feet and then played into the ball, hitting Vlashich’s leg with his knee. Your club did not count this touch for violation of the rules and did not apply to ESC. ESK and Bobrov also did not notice any foul here. I.ibb.co/6brn4vp/ezgif-5-61e85.
I.ibb.co/r3zpndm/ezgif-5-376c8.
I repeat once again – what respect for your materials and personally can you talk about you if you use the Admin resource and plug your mouth to opponents with its help? Better write your opuses and turn off the comments right away, as it has already been. The people laugh and that's it.
Penal
Penal, how not ashamed to use the Admin resource on the site and rub the comments of Zenit fans
Why are these cigarette accusations? I did not use any admin resource and did not delete comments. If someone was rubbed here, then this is not a question for me. Here is the episode of Barrios with Tiknizhan and Vlashic not cut from the beginning There is no one “Barrios episode with Tiknizhan and Vlashic”.
There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a barrios foul on Vlashic. If you want, you can add an even earlier episode of Tiknizyan Driussi. Here is a common video since Oblukov’s interception passes of Dziuba

radikal.ru/video/ovnamf6gfnp

Below the moment Tiknizyan-Barrios
Radikal.ru/users/zenit-tsska20.
Igor Fedotov talks about the fola Barrios on Vlashic and
nothing
About the so -called foy ?? Tiknizhanyan.

And here are the words of Denis Kazan, who commented on the match: “Tiknizyan, (pause). And he left the ball under his control. It turns out that Kazansky also does not see Tiknizhane fola. It seems that this foul ?? It exists only in your head and the heads of your like -minded people.

We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?
corner Zenit's goal from the corner.
After the ball bounced from the injured Vlašić to Lovren, he passed into the possession of Zenit and the attack began. This Zenit attack included Lovren's cross, Magnusson's header, after which the ball went over the goal line, and a corner kick. The attack ended in a goal. It is obvious that if Meshkov had not made a mistake and had appointed a free kick for Barrios' foul on Vlašić, then there would have been no 2nd Zenit goal against CSKA.
Strelna penalWho is Kazansky or Fedotov? The ultimate truth? Officially appointed experts?What kind official
experts? Who are you talking about?
And what about the ultimate truth?
I will never believe that you do not know who Kazansky and Fedotov are. Just in case, Denis Kazansky is a well-known football TV commentator, and Igor Fedotov is a former RPL referee, and now an expert on the Championship portal.
It is important for me that they are people of football, more or less equidistant from Zenit and CSKA, although Kazansky is an employee of Gazprom-media.
Don't you like that they didn't see Tiknizyan's foul? So Pavel Bogdanov and Alexander Burenin, who commented on the match on St. Petersburg TV channel, did not see him either: “Barrios put two people on the lawn at once with one blow.” lang=en style=height: 28px;Strelna
There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a foul by Barrios on Vlasic.

And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball over the front corner Zenit's goal from the corner.

Who is Kazansky or Fedotov? The ultimate truth? Officially appointed experts?
We once discussed this episode with you earlier, and you claimed that there was a blow with spikes to the bone. It’s just strange why Barrios himself didn’t react to these spikes in any way? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holier than the Pope?
Well, if you see what others don't see, why can't I claim what you don't see?
Regarding holier than the Pope – I do not categorically state anything anywhere about refereeing and do not make honest-honest tables

penal

And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball over the front corner Zenit's goal from the corner.
After the ball bounced from the injured Vlašić to Lovren, he passed into the possession of Zenit and the attack began. This Zenit attack included Lovren's cross, Magnusson's header, after which the ball went over the goal line, and a corner kick. The attack ended in a goal. It is obvious that if Meshkov had not made a mistake and had appointed a free kick for Barrios' foul on Vlašić, then there would have been no 2nd Zenit goal against CSKA.
Strelna
penal
Who is Kazansky or Fedotov? The ultimate truth? Officially appointed experts?
What kind
official
« experts? Who are you talking about?And what about the ultimate truth?

I will never believe that you do not know who Kazansky and Fedotov are. Just in case, Denis Kazansky is a well-known football TV commentator, and Igor Fedotov is a former RPL referee, and now an expert on the Championship portal.

It is important for me that they are people of football, more or less equidistant from Zenit and CSKA, although Kazansky is an employee of Gazprom-media.
Don't you like that they didn't see Tiknizyan's foul? So Pavel Bogdanov and Alexander Burenin, who commented on the match on St. Petersburg TV channel, did not see him either: “Barrios put two people on the lawn at once with one blow.” corner Zenit’s goal from the corner..
After the ball bounced off the injured Vlashich to Layren, he went into the possession of Zenith and the attack began. Zenit’s attack included both the canopy of Loveren and the play of the head of Magnusson, after which the ball went beyond the gate line, and the rally of the corner blow. The attack ended with a goal. It is obvious that if Meshkov had not mistaken and appointed a penalty area for Barrios folus on Vlashic, there would be no 2nd goal of Zenit on the gates of CSKA.
Strelna
Penal
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
What kind
Official lang=en style=height: 28px;Strelna
There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a barrios foul on Vlashic.
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?
Well, if you see that others do not see, why can I not say that you do not see?
Regarding the holy of the Pope – I categorically do not say anything anywhere about refereeing and do not master Honest -Prescription Tables
Penal
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner. After the ball bounced off the injured Vlashich to Layren, he went into the possession of Zenith and the attack began. Zenit’s attack included both the canopy of Loveren and the play of the head of Magnusson, after which the ball went beyond the gate line, and the rally of the corner blow. The attack ended with a goal. It is obvious that if Meshkov had not mistaken and appointed a penalty area for Barrios folus on Vlashic, there would be no 2nd goal of Zenit on the gates of CSKA.Strelna
Penal
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
What kind
Official corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
After the ball bounced off the injured Vlashich to Layren, he went into the possession of Zenith and the attack began. Zenit’s attack included both the canopy of Loveren and the play of the head of Magnusson, after which the ball went beyond the gate line, and the rally of the corner blow. lang=en style=height: 28px;Strelna

There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a barrios foul on Vlashic.
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
We once previously discussed this episode with you, and you claimed that there was a blow to the bone with spikes. It is only strange why Barrios himself did not react to these spikes? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holy pope?
Well, if you see that others do not see, why can I not say that you do not see?

Regarding the holy of the Pope – I categorically do not say anything anywhere about refereeing and do not master Honest -Prescription Tables

Penal
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
After the ball bounced off the injured Vlashich to Layren, he went into the possession of Zenith and the attack began. Zenit’s attack included both the canopy of Loveren and the play of the head of Magnusson, after which the ball went beyond the gate line, and the rally of the corner blow.Strelna

There is an episode of Tiknizyan-Barrios, where there is no crime, and an episode with a foul by Barrios on Vlasic.

And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball over the front corner Zenit's goal from the corner.
Who is Kazansky or Fedotov? The ultimate truth? Officially appointed experts?
We once discussed this episode with you earlier, and you claimed that there was a blow with spikes to the bone. It’s just strange why Barrios himself didn’t react to these spikes in any way? But you see a blow to the bone. Or are you holier than the Pope?
Well, if you see what others don't see, why can't I claim what you don't see?
Regarding holier than the Pope – I do not categorically state anything anywhere about refereeing and do not make honest-honest tables
Penal
And there is a third episode. CSKA football player knocked the ball behind the front corner Zenit’s goal from the corner.
After the ball bounced off the injured Vlashich to Layren, he went into the possession of Zenith and the attack began. Zenit’s attack included both the canopy of Loveren and the play of the head of Magnusson, after which the ball went beyond the gate line, and the rally of the corner blow. The attack ended with a goal. It is obvious that if Meshkov had not mistaken and appointed a penalty area for Barrios folus on Vlashic, there would be no 2nd goal of Zenit on the gates of CSKA.
Strelna
Penal
Who is Kazan or Fedotov? Truth in the last instance? Officially appointed experts?
What kind
Official
Experts? Who are you talking about?
And where is the truth in the last instance?

I will never believe that you do not know who Kazan and Fedotov are. Just in case, Denis Kazan is a well -known football television team, and Igor Fedotov is a former judge of the RPL, and now the expert of the championship portal.

It is important for me that they are football people, more or less equidistant from Zenith and CSKA, although Kazan is an employee of Gazprom Media.
Don't you like that they did not see the “foul” of Tiknizhan? So he was not seen by the commented on the match on the St. Petersburg television channel Pavel Bogdanov and Alexander Burenin: Barrios immediately laid on the lawn with one blow.
But most of all I was impressed by the reaction, more precisely
Lack of reaction

Barrios himself for the so -called foul ?? Tiknizhanyan.In other situations, Barrios behaved much more actively.

www.radikal.ru/users/Barrios
Strelna

For me personally, Kazansky and Fedotov are anti-Zenith people. biased, biased. And Bogdanov is so afraid that he will be kicked out of MatchTV again that in every match he barks at his Moscow colleagues, he has no personal opinion.

Barrios reaction? 🙂

Similarly, I can say about Vlasic's reaction
twitter.com/AnatoByshovets/sta.
Little football tricks (c) :))
penal
For me personally, Kazansky and Fedotov are anti-Zenith people. biased, biased. And by whom are they engaged? CSKA? Kazansky is an employee of Gazprom-Media and, it would seem, I should have doubted his impartiality in the Zenit-CSKA match. And in your opinion, it turns out that he is an anti-Zenit man, drowning for CSKA.Why do you use him unprovenly of bias? Just because he truthfully described what he saw in the match?
But what about Fedotov? Why is he on the side of Zenith in the episode of Normann-Rolren from the Zenit Rosts match? Esk itself».
decided that the judge was right, without appointing a penalty against Rostov, but

Antizhenitovets

Fedotov took, and sided with Zenith.
And Bogdanov is so afraid that he will be kicked out again with the match, that he has no personal opinion in every match.
And why is he afraid to be dismissed from the TV match, if the management of Gazprom Media is enough for them and appointed him a home (although not the main) commentator of Zenith. Such an honor, except Zenith, was not a single team of pl.Bogdanov does not comment on only individual home-made matches for the TV match and then he works on the St. Petersburg channel, as happened in the Zenit-Oska match. And to whom is he bent down here? Burenin? Or, conversely, Burenin “bent” Bogdanov?
Similarly, I can say about Vlashic's reaction
And where does Vlashic? We are discussing the episode of Tiknizhan-Barrios. Arrows are usually translated when in fact there is nothing to say. I remembered and added another case to the album with the Barrios reaction. Other football players are already parodying him
radikal.ru/users/barrios#alb=te-ba
The more such cases accumulate, the stronger the lack of Barrios reaction to an imaginary foul is more close to me ?? Tiknizhanyan and there is more and more confidence that the foul simply was not.
Strelna

All commentators, Gazprom-Media employees, frankly and shamelessly drown for Moscow teams. Kazan is no exception. His comment was especially remembered in the Zenit match with Spartak (5-1), when he spoke “Listen to the stadium”, he sighed heavily and fell silent at each goleep in the goal of Spartak.

Bogdanov was dismissed with the Match, only recently returned to the sakes to Moscow comrades.
You discussed Barrios and talked about his reaction in a clash with Vlashic, gave examples of how he reacts to clashes with players in other matches. I showed an example of how Vlashich “reacts” in another match with Zenith. What's wrong? Reread your comment or something that I answered
Looking at such simulations of Vlasic, you are convinced that there was simply no foul.
penal
All commentators, employees of Gazprom-Media, frankly and shamelessly drown for the Moscow teams.
Unfounded. And then how do you imagine it? For example, Kazansky, does he give 1/4 of his sympathies to Dynamo, 1/4 to Lokomotiv, 1/4 to Spartak and 1/4 to CSKA?
Obviously, all commentators are employees of Gazprom-Media and are forced to adhere to the leading and guiding line of Gazprom-Media. That is life. A subordinate always fulfills the wishes of his superiors, and those who do not do this will face the fate of Igor Fedotov.
I especially remember his commentary in the Zenit match with Spartak (5-1), when he said “Let's listen to the stadium” with every goal against Spartak, sighed heavily and fell silent. Kazansky – shot sparrow. I will never believe that in a match with Zenit, against the will of his superiors, he said something against Zenit with the risk of being thrown out into the street.
Even if he somewhere expressed sympathy for Spartak, this does not mean that he is an anti-Zenite. And this does not mean that he supports CSKA. So all your arguments have nothing to do with Kazansky's comments in the Zenit-CSKA match. Bogdanov was fired from MatchTV, only recently returned to sing along to his Moscow comrades. Recently
Bogdanov was not fired from anywhere. Throughout the season, by the will of the leadership of Gazprom-Media, as an assistant, he commented on Zenit's home games at the Match. The only exceptions are 4 top home games of Zenit: round 3 with CSKA,14 Tour with Krasnodar, 19 Tour with Spartak and 28 Tour with locomotive.

Penal

So, you can summarize. I previously brought you 5 reasons why Tiknizyan tackle is not a folus.
Base 1 (actual)
Take a look, please, again
Radikal.ru/users/zenit-tsska20.
You wrote that Tiknizyan rolled under Barris at high speed. It is not true.
Tiknizyan in the tackle plowed 3 (three) meters and his speed, when he played the ball at the Barrios's legs, was small ~ 12 km/h. This speed does not pose a threat to security. Below is an example from the UEFA video, when the tackle is made at a speed of ~ 19km/hour. However, UEFA verdict is no foul
Radikal.ru/users/zenit-tsska20. ;;; IMG = 6242777804
You did not give any evidence that Tiknizyan, continuing the tackle between Barrios's legs, hit him on the leg.
Base 2.
The expert of the portal Championship I. Fedotov did not see any crime in the tucking of Tiknizhan. Your allegations that Fedotov is “anti -zenitovets” and engaged in CSKA is unfounded.
Base 3.
The same applies to the commentator Match TV D. Kazansky. Your assertion is that in one of the matches of Zenit Spartak, he allegedly sympathized with Spartak, does not say anything about Kazan’s attitude to CSKA and Zenit.

Base 4.

P. Bogdanov, who commented on the match on the St. Petersburg television channel, did not see the foul of Tiknizhanyan (as well as Fedotov and Kazan).
You said, as I understand it, he was afraid that in the 2020-21 season they might not give him to work in the match when Gazprom-Media’s leadership instructed him to help him with Zenith's home games.
For example, in the 4th round, he helped Krivokharchenko in the Zenit Tambov match, and in the 7th round-Cherdantsev in the Zenit-Arsenal match. And so, so he drowned for CSKA against Zenit when

previously

In the 3rd round on the television channel, St. Petersburg commented on the Match of Zenitz? Sorry, but this is nonsense.
Base 5.
Lack of Barrios reaction to the so -called foul? Tiknizhanyan. And this despite the fact that in other cases his reaction was very violent.
Radikal.ru/users/Barrios Made another gif on this topic

radikal.ru/users/20-21propro#a.

So, Tiknizyan at a low speed of ~ 12 km/h makes a tack between Barrios's legs placed. Barrios’s legs are not visible.
The judicial expert of the Championship portal does not see the foul.
Both telecumentors do not see the foul: one Gazprom-Media employee, the other is a commentator on the St. Petersburg television channel.
Finally, Barrios himself does not see the foul, since he does not react in any way to Tiknizyan's tackle. And this is all on the one hand. What are the counter arguments? They simply don't exist Strelna

Yes, I was already bored of crushing water in a mortar. I can make such reasons for a cart and a small cart, and designate the speed of Barrios at 5 km per hour, Tiknizyan at 25 km per hour .
The fact that all commentators are drowning against the regions and for Moscow teams is not only me, but the majority of those discussing matches on sports resources. Among the commentators from St. Petersburg, only Bogdanov, who sang along with the Muscovites at home matches, was fired from the rest of Gazprom-Media. Yes, Bogdanov worked this season, but as a resident of St. Petersburg I knowthat at first he commented only on hockey on the St. Petersburg channel, then around 2015 he was allowed to be the second commentator on football, but after some time he disappeared from the federal channels. And last season he barked, desperately cowardly, was afraid to blurt out something positive about Zenith and Muscovites would not like it
penal
I can make such reasons for a cart and a small cart, and designate the speed of Barrios at 5 km per hour, Tiknizyan at 25 km per hour Please take a look at the picture radikal.ru/users/Zenit-TsSKA20. imgur.com/a/oBAGQeK ».

The time between the top and bottom frames is 40ms. During this time, Tiknizyan's leg covered a distance of 14 cm (this is the distance between the red lines). Then it is easy to calculate Tiknizyan's speed by dividing the distance by the time.This speed is approximately 12 km/h.

The fact that all commentators are drowning against the regions and for Moscow teams, I say not only me, but most of the discussing matches on sports resources.

General, non -based and not related words.

This is not about “all commentators”, but specifically about Denis Kazan.

Firstly, he is a professional who has fan feelings in the background.

Secondly. Even if he is rooting for Spartak, then he cannot root for CSKA. This is excluded and this is clear, as twice two. Moreover, many people who are rooting for Spartak are very unfriendly to CSKA.

You argued that in the match of Zenit-Nrozsk Kazan drowned for CSKA.So give evidence that he sympathizes with CSKA. You see, evidence is needed. Obviously, you do not have such evidence.

And last season he piled, frantically cowardly, was afraid to blurt out a positive about Zenith and this would not like Muscovites

Unfounded.

Why should Bogdanov betray a native club for some Muscovites? Bogdanov is primarily a professional, and in the absence of evidence to blame him, like any other person, is that, because of some kind of far-fetched fear, he neglects his professional duties.
If Bogdanov is afraid of someone, then, probably, first of all, his authorities from Gazprom Media.

Strelna

Stump and wash – start first :)))

You absolutely do not hear the opponent. There are only two opinions for you – yours and wrong.

Boring.

Judging from your bell tower, all your arguments are far -fetched and biased. Outfit, in general.

Penal

All your arguments are far -fetched and biased. Outfit, in general.

In vain you scold me. I laid out a combined drawing, from where it implies that the speed of Tiknizyan is small ~ 12km/hour.
Inkeri.inkeri
Penal

Then he played in the ball, hitting Vlashich's leg with his knee