Jump to content

Just to clear a few things up...


Muff
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jim Jefferies and all the mhedia scum.

I'm disappointed about the two goals and disappointed about the extra five minutes... I don't think five minutes of injury-time was warranted.

2nd half stats: Injuries/treatment to Nikica Jelavic, Ian Black, David Obua and Egger Jonsson during the 2nd half. Jelavic, according to Sky Sports lay on the turf for just over two minutes.

According to the stats (BBC, SPL) David Obua, Nikica Jelavic, Ian Black and Rudi Skacel, were all substituted. Darren Barr, David Obua, Rudi Skacel and Ian Black all collected yellow cards.

30 seconds added on for a substitue if I'm right - 2 minutes in all. 2 minutes for Jelavic - 4 minutes. If I remember correctly, Black had to get a bit of treatment aswell. Then there were fouls, time wasting (on Hearts behalf), and goals, which all add up. So there should have been more than five minutes added on, and Steven Naismith's goal hit the back of the net under the 94th minute mark...

A tackle from behind which endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Acts of serious foul play are punishable by a red card.

The new ruling, which is designed to further eliminate brutality from the game, will enter into force for the 1998 FIFA World Cup, and worldwide from 1 July this year. It follows the advice from the FIFA Technical and Sports Medical Committees and the large number of injuries sustained by players being illegally tackled from behind.

http://www.fifa.com/newscentre/news/newsid=70380.html

There are seven offences for which a player, substitute or substituted player can be sent off and shown the red card if he:

1. Is guilty of serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent when challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent, is guilty of serious foul play.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/7.%20law%2012_miscounduct_557.pdf

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play.

A TACKLE THAT ENDANGERS THE SAFETY OF AN OPPONENT MUST BE SANCTIONED AS SERIOUS FOUL PLAY.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty

of serious foul play.

A player who is guilty of serious foul play should be sent off and play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the offence

occurred (see Law 13 – Position of Free Kick) or a penalty kick (if the offence occurred inside the offender’s penalty are

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/football_document_libraries.cfm?page=855

So there we go. To all the idiots questioning the added on time, the tackle, Craig Thomson's decisions and to Ewan Murray (I wish some would take their heads out this cunts arse). I suggest you go and learn the rules, and stop spouting so much pish!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw this in the Jelavic thread.

It's a sickener. We dominated but always knew they would come back into it and throw everything at us.

"We deserved a win, or at least a point, and to get beaten is really hard to take."

Black has accused Craig Thomson of costing Hearts points due to the free-kick awarded and time added on. Another cunt that doesn't know the rules.

'Dominated' - come on now ffs.

Possession: Hearts 46% - 54% Rangers

Corners: Hearts 1 - 9 Rangers

Shots on target: Hearts 6 - 12 Rangers

Shots off target: Hearts 3 - 8 Rangers

Score: Hearts 1 - 2 Rangers

Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need someone from Rangers to come out and say exactly what you've said, Muff.

Too "dignified" for our own good. It probably got us kudos 30 years ago, but we need to stick up for ourself and stop bitter hateful cunts spouting lies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need someone from Rangers to come out and say exactly what you've said, Muff.

Too "dignified" for our own good. It probably got us kudos 30 years ago, but we need to stick up for ourself and stop bitter hateful cunts spouting lies.

Another one for the RST to take up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

On another day, and had it not been for some fantastic saves from Kello, we'd have given them 5 or 6. Some of our play, especially from middle to up top, was superb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love it, I couldn't believe some of the shite that was getting said, if it wasn't for Bouzid and Kello we would have slaughtered Hearts in terms of goals as well as the excellent play on the pitch.

As soon as we were going forward all the did was foul to prevent it five minutes at least was justified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to BBC Radio Scotland after the game on Saturday, and two sides of the time added on were aired.

First up was Chick Young, he is at ra Stydome and is doing a pre-match interview with Noel Lemmon. He opens with, "you've heard Rangers scored a last minute winner, all be it in controversial circumstance .....................". Richard Gordon reinforces the 'controversial circumstances' bit by reading out several e-mails, all demanding to know where five minutes came from?

Twenty minutes later, Richard Gordon goes over to Tynecastle to Daryll Somebodyorother(he was doing the Chico Young gig at Tynecastle behind the dug-outs) and he has spoken to someone close to the team of match officials. This is a euphemism for having a chinwag with the Fourth Official. Anyway, Daryll relates said Fourth Official was intent on putting up SEVEN minutes time added on; however, Billy Brown started screaming at him. When the board was produced a minute later, he was surprised to see only five minutes.

When BBC Scotland begin to quickly retreat from 'controversial circumstances' involving Rangers, then you know absolutely there is nothing controversial contained in the circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to BBC Radio Scotland after the game on Saturday, and two sides of the time added on were aired.

First up was Chick Young, he is at ra Stydome and is doing a pre-match interview with Noel Lemmon. He opens with, "you've heard Rangers scored a last minute winner, all be it in controversial circumstance .....................". Richard Gordon reinforces the 'controversial circumstances' bit by reading out several e-mails, all demanding to know where five minutes came from?

Twenty minutes later, Richard Gordon goes over to Tynecastle to Daryll Somebodyorother(he was doing the Chico Young gig at Tynecastle behind the dug-outs) and he has spoken to someone close to the team of match officials. This is a euphemism for having a chinwag with the Fourth Official. Anyway, Daryll relates said Fourth Official was intent on putting up SEVEN minutes time added on; however, Billy Brown started screaming at him. When the board was produced a minute later, he was surprised to see only five minutes.

When BBC Scotland begin to quickly retreat from 'controversial circumstances' involving Rangers, then you know absolutely there is nothing controversial contained in the circumstances.

Heard this on the radio as well, just goes to show that BBC Scotland wont let facts get in the way of their anti Rangers agenda. As someone on the bus I was on said its only controversial because ot involves Rangers, plain and simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to BBC Radio Scotland after the game on Saturday, and two sides of the time added on were aired.

First up was Chick Young, he is at ra Stydome and is doing a pre-match interview with Noel Lemmon. He opens with, "you've heard Rangers scored a last minute winner, all be it in controversial circumstance .....................". Richard Gordon reinforces the 'controversial circumstances' bit by reading out several e-mails, all demanding to know where five minutes came from?

Twenty minutes later, Richard Gordon goes over to Tynecastle to Daryll Somebodyorother(he was doing the Chico Young gig at Tynecastle behind the dug-outs) and he has spoken to someone close to the team of match officials. This is a euphemism for having a chinwag with the Fourth Official. Anyway, Daryll relates said Fourth Official was intent on putting up SEVEN minutes time added on; however, Billy Brown started screaming at him. When the board was produced a minute later, he was surprised to see only five minutes.

When BBC Scotland begin to quickly retreat from 'controversial circumstances' involving Rangers, then you know absolutely there is nothing controversial contained in the circumstances.

If BBC Scotland told me that today was Tuesday - I'd check the calendar.

BBC Scotland - the station that hates Great Britain - funded by British taxpayers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We really need someone from Rangers to come out and say exactly what you've said, Muff.

Too "dignified" for our own good. It probably got us kudos 30 years ago, but we need to stick up for ourself and stop bitter hateful cunts spouting lies.

Well said that man, 100% Correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The games not over till the final whistle blows. If Hearts think they can beat us, why the fuck were they not going for a winner in the 5 minutes off stoppage time and complaining that their was so much stoppage time ... knowing that we were all out looking for a goal, and they could easily catch us on the break?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Too "dignified" for our own good. It probably got us kudos 30 years ago, but we need to stick up for ourself and stop bitter hateful cunts spouting lies.

I've been thinking about this for a while mate, but you've put it better than I ever could.

This 'no-one likes us, we don't care' thing is all very well, but it's led to us having no-one with a creditable enough voice/reputation to defend the club in public.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this for a while mate, but you've put it better than I ever could.

This 'no-one likes us, we don't care' thing is all very well, but it's led to us having no-one with a creditable enough voice/reputation to defend the club in public.

(tu)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this for a while mate, but you've put it better than I ever could.

This 'no-one likes us, we don't care' thing is all very well, but it's led to us having no-one with a creditable enough voice/reputation to defend the club in public.

Why not give the task of defending the good name of Rangers FC to someone who does apparently not much else anyway (as it happens)?

Why not get Mr Rangers (Ham'n'Egg) to take this one on board.

Surely by dint if Rangers FC are maligned then he too (Mr Rangers) is maligned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manager in moaning about extra time and losing last minute goal shocker ! :lol:

Copyright Arsne Wegner, Alex Ferquson et. al. - except when they win in injury time.

Who cares - We scored. We won - managers moan about us winning - nothing new to see here! Move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Manager in moaning about extra time and losing last minute goal shocker ! :lol:

Copyright Arsne Wegner, Alex Ferquson et. al. - except when they win in injury time.

Who cares - We scored. We won - managers moan about us winning - nothing new to see here! Move on.

Not just the managers, the press, news outlets who were calling it a 'controversial' winner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...