Jump to content
KingKirk

Honest Mistakes

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, The Dude said:

 

Fans of other teams DO say there is a bias against them. Motherwell fans think Craig Thomson is biased against them - citing the five red cards he issued this season with two being overturned - St/ Johnstone's manager has an issue with one referee's consistently poor performance to the point he has publicly criticised him in the media. Here we have them saying exactly what you think they would but for some reason it doesn't apply?

 

Trait 2. Deliberately miss the point. 

The Rangers supporters who believe there to be bias, do not believe that one referee is biased towards our club. We believe that all referees have a bias that has been generated over the last 8 years due to the pressure applied to them by certain clubs and their supporters while other clubs and their supporters have taken a dignified silence approach. 

Trait 1 Be Contrary

if you have watched all the Rangers games this season and feel that the decisions that have gone against us in those games. Compares equally to the decisions that have gone for us in those games. Then the discussion is over. 

In the interests of sporting investigative journalism why not create a spreadsheet and have a for and against list. Put down in the “for” list all the Pena red cards that never happened and all the Morelos red cards that never happened and then in the “against” column add in all the red cards we wrongly got or red card challenges that were overlooked and let’s see what it looks like. 

I am willing to accept that I am perceiving this incorrectly 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

... and therein lies the paranoia! That’s the essence of your post - no matter what anyone says you ‘bekieve’ The majority of incorrrect decisions went against us - no debate is going to chance your perception but perception and it being true are two different things 

On the contrary. If you can present data to refute my perception then I am happy to change it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bakbear said:

On the contrary. If you can present data to refute my perception then I am happy to change it 

No no.

You've to provide the evidence you know isn't there, right after you've proved God does or doesn't exist 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

Yes. Things went in our favour. No one is disputing that. No one.

I’d give it up mate, waste of your time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

You keep going on about conspiracy. What is it about th at and paranoia that makes you keep chirping on about them when those aren't actually being rammed down your throat?

Are you suggesting we've NOT had the majority of decisions go against us? Confirm yes or no would be great.

See above. Also, we've had players on the worse end of tackles unpunished than ours have committed (on Cardoso, Jack, Rossiter compared to by Pena ). I'm happy to look at them all and see which is worst, imo Allen's.

Penalties? We've got away with a pen v hivs, maybe more you can think of, but in no way were they stronger shouts than Morelos getting his feet headered and booked for diving, or his pen that never was v the sheep.

So overall in terms of red cards issues, rescinded, penalty issues, our players booked for being fouled, serious foul play incidents, refs booking for violent conduct, injuries received from unpunished fouls, .... comprehensive.

See how easy it is to compile lists. 

Now are you going to do one to counter all that or are you going to come out with proving God exists as an argument for failing to do so? 😂

And I'm not even discussing why I believe it to be so. Just that this season it is so.

Have the ‘majority’ of incorrect decisions gone against us?  No! 

Do you come across as  paranoid? Yes! 

It really is that simple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bakbear said:

On the contrary. If you can present data to refute my perception then I am happy to change it 

That’s the ‘god’ argument - again! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good few years ago on this forum we had this debate about referees - when we were at the top - and the next season someone started a thread on - our paranoia is not new, I can’t find the thread - might make a fun read! :pipe: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

1. Have the ‘majority’ of incorrect decisions gone against us?  No! 

2. Do you come across as  paranoid? Yes! 

3. It really is that simple. 

1. Prove it

2. Paranoid based on rational assessment of incidents im repeatedly justifying but that you repeatedly fail to counter. Aye right 😂😂😂

3. You really are that simple 😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

A good few years ago on this forum we had this debate about referees - when we were at the top - and the next season someone started a thread on - our paranoia is not new, I can’t find the thread - might make a fun read! :pipe: 

At least produce that then seeing as you're not doing so for incidents this season...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

1. Prove it

2. Paranoid based on rational assessment of incidents im repeatedly justifying but that you repeatedly fail to counter. Aye right 😂😂😂

3. You really are that simple 😂

I lone that God argument you’ve resorted to! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

At least produce that then seeing as you're not doing so for incidents this season...

You also can’t read very well 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bluepeter9 said:

I lone that God argument you’ve resorted to! 

Will I guess what you mean....?

You also can't type very well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

That’s the ‘god’ argument - again! 

Is not even close to a God argument. This is a straw man. 

Its impossible to prove the God exists because that requires faith. 

However it is possible to provide evidence that we were on the end of beneficial decisions as often as we were on the end of detrimental decisions. 

It is simple data based analysis. 

I have watched games and based on my witnessing of the data in real time, I conclude that more decisions went against us. 

However I am willing to concede that my perception based on real time decisions over the course of the season may be wrong. I would just like to see the counter argument based on incidents that I may have overlooked in real time. A factual based rebuttal other than “nah your para” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys that are trying to keep their heads firmly in the sand when it comes to the obvious bias with referees all seemingly agree that they really are a group of pathetic useless bastards.

What they wont be able to answer then is why the fenian/Scottish media are not reporting on them being pathetic useless bastards. The answer is quite simple, they are what the fenian press and fenian Scottish football authorities know as a group of useful idiots because the decisions they make are for the detriment of one team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

A good few years ago on this forum we had this debate about referees - when we were at the top - and the next season someone started a thread on - our paranoia is not new, I can’t find the thread - might make a fun read! :pipe: 

A good few years ago things were different. And not just we were on top. 

I agree that to consider that there is a grand conspiracy, orchestrated by nefarious characters who all get together (in a lodge)  at the start of the season and decide they are going to keep down one team through refereeing decisions is paranoid. 

That is not what I am suggesting. I can’t speak for others.

i am saying that referees give the vast majority of difficult decisions to our detriment because that’s the path of least resistance. I dont even think it’s consciously done. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bakbear said:

A good few years ago things were different. And not just we were on top. 

I agree that to consider that there is a grand conspiracy, orchestrated by nefarious characters who all get together (in a lodge)  at the start of the season and decide they are going to keep down one team through refereeing decisions is paranoid. 

That is not what I am suggesting. I can’t speak for others.

i am saying that referees give the vast majority of difficult decisions to our detriment because that’s the path of least resistance. I dont even think it’s consciously done. 

 

I 100% agree with this. And it does happen. I've witnessed it with one of my previous clubs I worked for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KingKirk was an honest mistake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/06/2018 at 19:46, The Dude said:

the 'fucking bizarre notion' a ref has it in for St. Johnstone comes directly from their manager who has publicly complained about Dallas' performances when he takes their games.. Weird how when a manager has an issue with a referee's performance consistently it's a 'fucking bizarre notion' but somebody makes a youtube video and it's kosher. Motherwell have also had complaints because they have had five red cards - all from the same referee - two of which were overturned. 

You say you only watch Rangers games, I watch far more than that. Think over the course of the season I've watched about 85% of Scottish Premiership games and the refereeing standard is abysmal in the overwhelming majority of them. The same stuff I see watching Rangers games I see watching Aberdeen or Hearts or Motherwell.

Last season when I was also doing the U20s games regularly I was genuinely amazed at how bad some of the refereeing was. Some of the most baffling decisions I've ever seen being made.

It's easy to call the 'path of least resistance' idea nonsense - particularly in games at Ibrox - as scientific studies have shown time and time and time again; with the size of the crowd also having a noticeable effect on referees decision making and they tend to favour the home team (assuming the home support are the louder support).

Athough Hibs are second, they also have the most booked player in the Scottish Premiership - McGinn with 15. Last season's most disciplined player? Scott Brown.

There's nothing wrong with pointing out that the refs are absolutely bollocks. I wholeheartedly agree with it.

One last wee point, there was a thing in the papers a while back (5-10 years) that something like 80% of Scottish refs failed a written exam on the Laws of the Game. I'd be surprised if that number hadn't increased.

 

Take it you're talking the 5 minutes of highlights on the BBC for the vast majority of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bakbear said:

Is not even close to a God argument. This is a straw man. 

Its impossible to prove the God exists because that requires faith. 

However it is possible to provide evidence that we were on the end of beneficial decisions as often as we were on the end of detrimental decisions. 

It is simple data based analysis. 

I have watched games and based on my witnessing of the data in real time, I conclude that more decisions went against us. 

However I am willing to concede that my perception based on real time decisions over the course of the season may be wrong. I would just like to see the counter argument based on incidents that I may have overlooked in real time. A factual based rebuttal other than “nah your para” 

Since you have the data that shows we were disadvantaged - why not just share that and prove me wrong! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

Since you have the data that shows we were disadvantaged - why not just share that and prove me wrong! 

😂😂😂😂😂

You're a riddy

The answer is within umpteen posts plus a vid on this very thread 😂😂😂

The stuff you ignore and ask those arguing we've been hard done to, to dispel for you.

You have provided zero substance to your own argument. At least when you argued (*delete where applicable) Mccoist, Warburton,  caixinho,  deserved more time I got your flawed logic.

Here you're just being a mentalist (No Dude not your IRA pal) zoomer. 😂😂

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody that watches that and tells me we're just being paranoid is a fucking idiot. Simple as that. Referees in this Country are shite, against us it's a different level of shite. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/06/2018 at 20:51, Spectre said:

Take it you're talking the 5 minutes of highlights on the BBC for the vast majority of them?

No, full games through wyscout. I'll watch two or three games from start to finish pretty much every day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×