Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SeparateEntityMyArse

Officialdom Conspiracy?

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

Felt contact?  Have you even seen it??  

When someone catches your trailing leg as you're running and it knocks it against your standing leg there is absolutely nothing you can do but fall.  

No mate. I've formed this opinion on an incident I haven't actually seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2018 at 13:33, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

For dodgy / debateable/ game changing / laws wrongly enforced type decisions......

Key Decisions For: 1

Versus Scum 2/9/18

McGregor not carded for kicking out at Ajer

--------------

Key Decisions Against: 9

 

Versus Sheep 5/8/18

- RESCINDED Morelos red

- No red for penalty 

- Arfield held, butted against, and booked

- GMS not carded throwing ball at player 

- May clattering Jack, no card

 

Versus Kilmarnock 19/8/18

- Blatant goal not given

 

Versus Scum 2/9/18

- Clear foul on Jack not given, "foul foul foul" according to an official, scum break and score.

- Christy blatant dive for a penalty. Goldson penalised with free kick, and booked.

 

Pre Motherwell 

- Disrepute charge ignored

Rescinded Rangers Red Cards: 1

 

Versus Dundee 15/9/18

Morelos wrongly given offside, goal denied

 

Versus ST J 23/9/18

Softest penalty in the world but I'll not include it in the figures as contact (equivalent to being hit by a feather) was apparently made ?

 

Completed Fixtures 

Game 1. Sheep away

Game 2. St Mirren home (untelevised)

Game 3. Motherwell away

Game 4. Scum away 

Game 5. Dundee home

Game 6: St J home

Game 7: Livi away

Game 8: Hearts home (untelevised)

Game 9: Hamilton away

You a fukkin referee noo? ??

Share this post


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

Not sure tbh. 

You've referred to it as soft. Seem to struggle just saying he was fouled. You've said if he stayed on his feet it wouldn't be a foul. He couldn't. You've said he felt contact and went down. Wow, Andy Walkeresque. You've said we'd be raging if the same happened at the other end. Ive given you the Arfield incident which is pretty comparable in all aspects. Wasn't raging at that, have you commented on that comparison yet?

You seem to think we have benefited from these decisions, perhaps wrongly or perhaps as they're soft so we're lucky. As I say, maybe we should be thankful for refs getting it right eh?

Of course we benefited from it and yes there's an element of luck to it.

The first penalty is an absolute stonewaller. The Morelos one could have gone either way and it's went in our favour. He's running away from the goal and gets a wee clip and goes down fairly easily IMO. If the ref had waved play on then I wouldn't have been going nuts over it that's all I'm saying.

Share this post


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

Tav was grabbing first but actually stopped pulling then the cunt went down, as if the stupid cunt had a delay in his thinking or something then twigged "oh he is pulling me I can go down" by that time he had took his hands off him. That's how I seen it anyway after I seen the replay, at first I thought Tav was lucky to get off with it.

Paused it there. Tav's hands go up, but the first grab is from the Hamilton boy, literally at the exact same moment that he turns inside and contact happens. His hand goes straight up and grabs a handful of Tav's shirt.

There's no way a penalty can be given when that's the case. It wasn't even a slight grab. Tav's shirt was getting well twisted.

Share this post


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

Of course we benefited from it and yes there's an element of luck to it.

The first penalty is an absolute stonewaller. The Morelos one could have gone either way and it's went in our favour. He's running away from the goal and gets a wee clip and goes down fairly easily IMO. If the ref had waved play on then I wouldn't have been going nuts over it that's all I'm saying.

1. Why does it matter which direction a player is running if fouled in box? Unless in the context of cards for clear goal scoring opportunity.

2. You're the only one talking about going nuts. If it wasn't given, I'd have added it to my list of decisions against us. Wrongful decisions. Be clear, would I be right or wrong in that decision of mine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Inigo said:

Paused it there. Tav's hands go up, but the first grab is from the Hamilton boy, literally at the exact same moment that he turns inside and contact happens. His hand goes straight up and grabs a handful of Tav's shirt.

There's no way a penalty can be given when that's the case. It wasn't even a slight grab. Tav's shirt was getting well twisted.

Aye they were both at it mate, impossible to give it one way or another.

Share this post


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

 

Disagree. He's felt contact and hit the deck IMO which he's entitled to do. He's hardly been cleaned out though and I stand by my opinion that we'd all be raging if that's given against us.

What part do you disagree with? The clip did floor him, whether he only went to deck because he felt contact is another matter.

If he wasn't clipped he wouldn't have went down imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

What part do you disagree with? The clip did floor him, whether he only went to deck because he felt contact is another matter.

If he wasn't clipped he wouldn't have went down imo.

I'll floor you anymore of your pish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

What part do you disagree with? The clip did floor him, whether he only went to deck because he felt contact is another matter.

If he wasn't clipped he wouldn't have went down imo.

I was disagreeing that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

Having now seen it from a different angle though, on the soccer am Facebook page of all places, I'm more inclined to agree with you and @Brian Fantana that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

plumbGER likes this

Share this post


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

Not sure tbh. 

You've referred to it as soft. Seem to struggle just saying he was fouled. You've said if he stayed on his feet it wouldn't be a foul. He couldn't. You've said he felt contact and went down. Wow, Andy Walkeresque. You've said we'd be raging if the same happened at the other end. Ive given you the Arfield incident which is pretty comparable in all aspects. Wasn't raging at that, have you commented on that comparison yet?

You seem to think we have benefited from these decisions, perhaps wrongly or perhaps as they're soft so we're lucky. As I say, maybe we should be thankful for refs getting it right eh?

 

6 minutes ago, LaudrupsPatrickBoots said:

I was disagreeing that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

Having now seen it from a different angle though, on the soccer am Facebook page of all places, I'm more inclined to agree with you and @Brian Fantana that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

:dunno: @Sportingintegritymyarse.....

 

:thumbup: Good on you for reviewing it and changing your stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LaudrupsPatrickBoots said:

I was disagreeing that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

Having now seen it from a different angle though, on the soccer am Facebook page of all places, I'm more inclined to agree with you and @Brian Fantana that he couldn't have stayed on his feet.

I thought it was soft as well btw, he's been scythed down a few times this season and got nothing from it and been booked for diving on occasion when there has been contact so I was a bit surprised it was given.

Share this post


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

 

:dunno: @Sportingintegritymyarse.....

 

:thumbup: Good on you for reviewing it and changing your stance.

We're still lucky to get the decision tbf. First glance and looking at that from the refs angle you could even argue that's a dive from Morelos.

Just because it's the right decision doesn't mean we weren't fortunate to get it. The refs don't have the benefit of replays.

Share this post


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

I thought it was soft as well btw, he's been scythed down a few times this season and got nothing from it and been booked for diving on occasion when there has been contact so I was a bit surprised it was given.

Every other angle I had seen it from I wasn't convinced there was enough in it tbh. He does get knocked out of his stride with the contact though so it's the right call even if it's accidental.

plumbGER likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LaudrupsPatrickBoots said:

We're still lucky to get the decision tbf. First glance and looking at that from the refs angle you could even argue that's a dive from Morelos.

Just because it's the right decision doesn't mean we weren't fortunate to get it. The refs don't have the benefit of replays.

Lucky to get the right decision ?

Highlighted bit - fuck off, you were doing so well there too.

Oh, and are you now saying we got lucky "and should be thankful for getting correct decisions"? :pipe:

49 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

1. Why does it matter which direction a player is running if fouled in box? Unless in the context of cards for clear goal scoring opportunity.

2. You're the only one talking about going nuts. If it wasn't given, I'd have added it to my list of decisions against us. Wrongful decisions. Be clear, would I be right or wrong in that decision of mine?

You don't seem to have answered these points.

Share this post


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

Lucky to get the right decision ?

Highlighted bit - fuck off, you were doing so well there too.

Oh, and are you now saying we got lucky "and should be thankful for getting correct decisions"? :pipe:

You don't seem to have answered these points.

Literally nobody has said that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

Yep.

And you've still not answered my points above, or commented on the Arfield comparison I raised earlier. 

But it's fine, I'll let it go seeing as you clearly don't want to weaken your argument further.

Answer them for me.

You know what I'm thinking after all...

plumbGER likes this

Share this post


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

Answer them for me.

You know what I'm thinking after all...

Yet another opportunity to do so missed.... Unsurprising.

You're thinking you wish I would stop asking you about points you don't want to answer. You're right to be thinking that way. You're also thinking about trying to save face after you fucked up with Morelos going down too easily. 

You're welcome.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...