Tiger Shaw 30,535 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Allyup said: Common sense prevails at last getting seriously pissed off with the anti Rangers press in this country ( A country I grew up being proud )its so anti Rangers now it is palpable. I am sick of it and not putting up with it any longer What you going to do to save us from tyranny? You could start a petition that will show them ForeverAndEver and Terry Hurlock Loyal 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post theblueoysterbar 19,668 Posted February 6, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 6, 2019 4 hours ago, TMB said: Neil Lennon's jacket was hit by a coin and without any evidence at all it was labelled as a sectarian act by people like Tom English. Welcome to Scotland. Fixed. Bobby Hume, Bears r us, jjbscotty12 and 3 others 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BridgeIsBlue 66,608 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 7 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said: ffs your evidence of an agenda is that the compliance officer took NO action - it’s no wonder I laugh at this paranoid nonsense that has crept into some of our support. The evidence is that it went to the compliance officer in the first case. But that's obviously lost on you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 7 hours ago, Don54 said: Are we just being paranoid about an agenda about all the shite being spouted in the media too? Yes Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 7 hours ago, coopsleftboot said: I think it's more the media scramble, or agenda, when it comes to a "Rangers Incident" when compared to incidents involving others. This kind of forces the compliance officer to look at incidents involving Rangers...again... more than any other, that's the worrying trend. It would be interesting to see the stats on referrals/reviews per club. I understand that - and the press agenda sells papers - stirring shite is what they do. What is more disturbing to me is how many on here look for some ‘agenda’ and then I laugh when something like a non referral is also classed as agenda driven - it’s daft and makes us look daft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 5 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said: The evidence is that it went to the compliance officer in the first case. But that's obviously lost on you. That’s their job! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BridgeIsBlue 66,608 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 19 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said: That’s their job! Job to do what? Courtyard Bear 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courtyard Bear 41,357 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 2 hours ago, BridgeIsBlue said: Job to do what? Investigate every tackle or fall by a Rangers player obviously. Especially when we have another teams manager demanding the player is banned, wonder what fine he’s got coming.........oh wait. Or we could just go down the resident republican twats road and it’s all just in our imagination. Negri's lovechild, BridgeIsBlue and SeparateEntityMyArse 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post TEFTONG 60,188 Posted February 6, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted February 6, 2019 DON'T FEED THE TROLL Negri's lovechild, BridgeIsBlue, SeparateEntityMyArse and 4 others 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabc10000 5,061 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 just read the 1st 3 pages of decent reading then i came to the 4th page. holy fuck what is that bluepeter9 all about. with fans like that do we even need enemies?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,765 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 25 minutes ago, rabc10000 said: just read the 1st 3 pages of decent reading then i came to the 4th page. holy fuck what is that bluepeter9 all about. with fans like that do we even need enemies?? 👇 best advice you'll get on here. That and don't waste your time or breath trying to make any sense out of his pov or posts, it's a lost cause. 38 minutes ago, TEFTONG said: DON'T FEED THE TROLL Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakes Pal 5,603 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 16 hours ago, cushynumber said: You would have to have the brain of a toaster to not see it now. I have to concur Negri's lovechild 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears r us 30,810 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Can anyone remember when the papers, TV or radio went on about the tarriers diving or getting a penalty or any other decision that was considered soft this season? I cannot remember myself but I am maybe just forgetting about it. Sparkle, Bobby Hume and Courtyard Bear 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLUEDIGNITY 33,647 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 13 hours ago, Courtyard Bear said: The taig always shines through eventually with these cunts. It surely does ! Courtyard Bear, Bobby Hume and Bears r us 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears 794 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 17 hours ago, cushynumber said: You would have to have the brain of a toaster to not see it now. 12 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said: ffs your evidence of an agenda is that the compliance officer took NO action - it’s no wonder I laugh at this paranoid nonsense that has crept into some of our support. Lunchtime! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Specky Forum Organiser 64,995 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 6 hours ago, BridgeIsBlue said: The evidence is that it went to the compliance officer in the first case. But that's obviously lost on you. That's not evidence, anyone can highlight an incident Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,765 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 46 minutes ago, Jeffrey said: That's not evidence, anyone can highlight an incident I'm not so sure they can if you mean to the Compliance Officer. I made a complaint about an incident and sent loads of follow up emails. Nothing done, no investigation, no replies to communication other than automated response to the initial complaint. I have no knowledge if it was considered, progressed, passed to CO, nothing. No complaint procedure and can't speak to anyone. Then looking into the process there's no transparency in terms of who can complain or submit incident for consideration. It seems to be that it's association members or via the msm highlighting incidents. So whilst there's a process for lodging emails with the SFA there's nothing apparent that reassures me individuals can highlight issues to the CO. (I agree it's not evidence). The Specky Forum Organiser 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BridgeIsBlue 66,608 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 2 hours ago, Jeffrey said: That's not evidence, anyone can highlight an incident But why was that penalty singled out? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 4 hours ago, Bears r us said: Can anyone remember when the papers, TV or radio went on about the tarriers diving or getting a penalty or any other decision that was considered soft this season? I cannot remember myself but I am maybe just forgetting about it. every week! Folk only see what they want to see on hear - its called confirmation bias! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Specky Forum Organiser 64,995 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said: But why was that penalty singled out? Because you could make an argument he dived. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangeclement 570 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 9 minutes ago, Jeffrey said: Because you could make an argument he dived. Mcginn himself said Defoe didn't dive and he's the one that made the tackle ...... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,765 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 8 minutes ago, Orangeclement said: Mcginn himself said Defoe didn't dive and he's the one that made the tackle ...... What did Mcginn say on it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangeclement 570 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 29 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: What did Mcginn say on it? Said he didn't touch him but felt Defoe didn't dive and that JD didn't claim for a pen also said Dallas asked Defoe if he dived after giving the penalty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangeclement 570 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 Did surprise me considering Mcginn is a filthy rhat. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Shaw 30,535 Posted February 6, 2019 Share Posted February 6, 2019 38 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said: every week! Folk only see what they want to see on hear - its called confirmation bias! @cushynumber thinks you have the brain of a toaster 😆 cushynumber 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.