Jump to content

Corrupt officiating again


Recommended Posts

Just now, LaudrupsPatrickBoots said:

We were 3-0 up when that player kicked out at Bates, who made a fucking meal of it btw, so that's not a game changing decision.

But you know that.

So in other words you are agreeing with me. He did not send him off because we were coasting the game. He ignored the rules. So he cheated. Cheers for finally getting there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 minute ago, Bristoe1872 said:

So in other words you are agreeing with me. He did not send him off because we were coasting the game. He ignored the rules. So he cheated. Cheers for finally getting there.

No. I was quoting another poster there. Nowhere did I agree with you but if it stops you quoting me then I'm happy for you to believe that I'm agreeing with your taig-like paranoia. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Domthenbud said:

You are a fucking brass neck. Waken up and look at the decisions. Look at our injury list. Don’t think we got a decision in any of them. At least a decision that was fair with the offence.

From the other thread, looks like Murphy has a broken bone.

Yes, just incompetent refereeing, if you are an uber staunch moron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LaudrupsPatrickBoots said:

We were 3-0 up when that player kicked out at Bates, who made a fucking meal of it btw, so that's not a game changing decision.

But you know that.

It's game changing in that they should be a man down, significant further advantage would have came our way. 

A strike at goal from 12 makes it likely a goal will be scored. 

Either of these seriously affect advantage or likely the score line so yes, they're game changing decisions.

And even if Bates did go down lightly it's about the intent as much as the contact. But maybe you don't know that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

It's game changing in that they should be a man down, significant further advantage would have came our way. 

A strike at goal from 12 makes it likely a goal will be scored. 

Either of these seriously affect advantage or likely the score line so yes, they're game changing decisions.

And even if Bates did go down lightly it's about the intent as much as the contact. But maybe you don't know that.

He doesn't. Obviously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bristoe1872 said:

Ah it's the old "taig like" card..always a sure fire sign a balloon has lost the argument when that card is played. I'd actually say accepting Rangers players being assaulted openly on the pitch is more "taig like". See..trumped your taig card with my own.

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

I would like to see Murty mention these type of decisions, like the kick on Bates and ask why a yellow was given rather than the correct red.

A red card was deserved, my only question and I'd like to see it again, did the ref see the incident or was it based on comms from one of the linesmen?   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, siddiqi_drinker said:

A red card was deserved, my only question and I'd like to see it again, did the ref see the incident or was it based on comms from one of the linesmen?   

Ref was watching the two of them from about 15 yards and ran straight to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, siddiqi_drinker said:

A red card was deserved, my only question and I'd like to see it again, did the ref see the incident or was it based on comms from one of the linesmen?   

I am sure the replay showed him looking straight at the player, but I might be getting mixed up with the Murphy one. :unsure: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

It's game changing in that they should be a man down, significant further advantage would have came our way. 

A strike at goal from 12 makes it likely a goal will be scored. 

Either of these seriously affect advantage or likely the score line so yes, they're game changing decisions.

And even if Bates did go down lightly it's about the intent as much as the contact. But maybe you don't know that.

It didn't influence the outcome of the game so it's not game changing.

It would have been a harsh red anyway IMO it's being made out to be a vicious assault on here when it was no more than a tedious wee kick. Aye, it could have been a red but if the roles were reversed the same folk on here would probably be complaining if our man was sent off.

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.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...