Statement regarding disciplinary procedure

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

41 minutes ago, Rfc52 said:

Yes people are making out it's only us 

If that was the case why are we constantly highlighting all the other blatant fuck ups

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,766]

6 minutes ago, Rfc52 said:

Killie and Aberdeen have both lost the plot regarding it 

Lost the plot but not been cited?

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

33 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

It's been reported he's said it, what he's actually said hasn't came to light yet. But it's implications are potentially huge, Rangers need to progress it.

If he hasn't had any issues observing it, hasn't said that he has, then quite simply put our games are being retrospectively refereed because a lawyer isn't happy with an incident highlighted to her.

6.27 he has a clear view he even picks up speed to make sure he is in the right position to see anything. 

[dummiesoot 16,008]

Unless a team of ex-refs and professional footballers watch the full match for every team after the weekend in the league then this disparity will continue. It has to be the same team of refs and professionals for that week also. 

[The Dude 20,026]

27 minutes ago, Rfc52 said:

Killie and Aberdeen have both lost the plot regarding it 

Nah mate, they're all bending the knee to Scottish football's might overlord Peter.

[The Dude 20,026]

32 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Aye but others seem to scared to upset their fenian masters, hibs should have been in every media outlet after the tarriers game when their already booked boy got cited

Why? The rules allow them to go back if it's deemed the referee made an error. The Hibs boy isnt the first one booked to have later had it increased to a red.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,766]

11 minutes ago, Courtyard Bear said:

6.27 he has a clear view he even picks up speed to make sure he is in the right position to see anything. 

Something stinks about the whole retrospective review, charge and decision.

[SJGF5 38]

37 minutes ago, ger4life_1872 said:

Either way he has too go imo , because hes either lied about having a full view of the incident , or hes so incompetent he isn't following the ball as it goes into the box where anything could have happened,  its understandable that refs will miss off the ball incidents etc but this isn't something he shouldn't have seen 

It's even more ridiculous because the linesman also had a clear unobstructed view from a completely different angle as the highlights show.

[Negri's lovechild 14,117]

I think we need to get back on track here. 

Every team will have decisions go against them at some point. The referees being part time most certainly does not help with consistency. They will have little time for extra training during the season, so the inconsistencies will still be there until there's a point where they can take the time needed for extra training. 

the issue with the compliance system is not that everything is controlled by a puppet master, it is that the system has gone away from the purpose and the reasons it was set up.

The c.o was only meant to kick in when the referee has missed something off the ball. Now, even decisions the referee has seen and acted in are being re-refereed. 

trial by media is what is killing us. We are more heavily scrutinised than any other team in Scotland. The shift in reporting to the more sensationalist style in the televised media has (in my opinion) had an effect. We can moan about papers (and I do), but certain ones have always been about getting people to buy papers. You have louder and more eccentric characters in tv now, more opinionated. Those views said often enough can make Some people agree with them. The narrative then becomes Rangers are a dirty team, Morelos is a hot head etc. 

Opposition players play up to that, referee then buys into it. more yellow cards for us. 

the compliance officer and disciplinary procedure does need re -rexamined, refreshed and put back to basics. The interview from the former Fa head of compliance is a good place to start. They have offered support as well. 

Time for Scotland and our fa to stop being so insular. Take the support, our game is not in a good state. 

[BridgeIsBlue 66,608]

We've been fucked over more than any other side this season. 

Prove me wrong. 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,563]

22 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Why? The rules allow them to go back if it's deemed the referee made an error. The Hibs boy isnt the first one booked to have later had it increased to a red.

Because in the same gane both brown and simunovic got away with just as bad fouls, hibs have lost a defender for two games after the ref deemed it a booking, whereas the tarriers still have both brown and simunovic, 

Hibs should be blasting this at every opportunity in every media outlet, hell even st johnstone should be screaming from the rooftops, brown scored against them when he should have been banned, clarke was happy to talk about our player and how he should have been banned against them, so why don't st johnstone do the same

[Bearsden bear 2,376]

Its clear to me that Greegs and Alfredo are only now paying for earlier indiscretions. 

After the old firm game the knives were out and Alfredo was always gonna cop it first opportunity.  McGregor has had a few iffy moments and escaped, again this time it was payback.

Point is these incidents are obviously  not looked at in isolation with clear eyes. Previous perceived issues and media noise are influencing the decisions. Just not sure how we can best change this to get a fair crack of the whip?

[Negri's lovechild 14,117]

1 minute ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

Because in the same gane both brown and simunovic got away with just as bad fouls, hibs have lost a defender for two games after the ref deemed it a booking, whereas the tarriers still have both brown and simunovic, 

Hibs should be blasting this at every opportunity in every media outlet, hell even st johnstone should be screaming from the rooftops, brown scored against them when he should have been banned, clarke was happy to talk about our player and how he should have been banned against them, so why don't st johnstone do the same

There are some wild inconsistencies in how teams are disciplined. They do need to take either the hardest line possible when referees are being criticised or do nothing. Picking and choosing when to fine clubs does make it look like there's an agenda.

[TMB 14,167]

11 minutes ago, Negri's lovechild said:

The c.o was only meant to kick in when the referee has missed something off the ball. Now, even decisions the referee has seen and acted in are being re-refereed. 

I completely agree.  Using it as a system of appeal is fine but this retrospective banning is just nonsense.  The bigger teams will be on TV more frequently, have more viewers, and therefore come under a lot more scrutiny.  

[KingKirk 25,658]

Going by our statements at the beginning of this season when we basically questioned who was running our game.

Why are we now back to the weak hearted pish especially after seeing one of our players kicked in the head and not be cited because of "lack of evidence" whilst our keeper is cited for protecting himself.

That's why our statement is pathetic 

[KingKirk 25,658]

21 minutes ago, Negri's lovechild said:

I think we need to get back on track here. 

Every team will have decisions go against them at some point. The referees being part time most certainly does not help with consistency. They will have little time for extra training during the season, so the inconsistencies will still be there until there's a point where they can take the time needed for extra training. 

the issue with the compliance system is not that everything is controlled by a puppet master, it is that the system has gone away from the purpose and the reasons it was set up.

The c.o was only meant to kick in when the referee has missed something off the ball. Now, even decisions the referee has seen and acted in are being re-refereed. 

trial by media is what is killing us. We are more heavily scrutinised than any other team in Scotland. The shift in reporting to the more sensationalist style in the televised media has (in my opinion) had an effect. We can moan about papers (and I do), but certain ones have always been about getting people to buy papers. You have louder and more eccentric characters in tv now, more opinionated. Those views said often enough can make Some people agree with them. The narrative then becomes Rangers are a dirty team, Morelos is a hot head etc. 

Opposition players play up to that, referee then buys into it. more yellow cards for us. 

the compliance officer and disciplinary procedure does need re -rexamined, refreshed and put back to basics. The interview from the former Fa head of compliance is a good place to start. They have offered support as well. 

Time for Scotland and our fa to stop being so insular. Take the support, our game is not in a good state. 

It's basically a cheap version of Var the CO 

[Negri's lovechild 14,117]

2 minutes ago, KingKirk said:

It's basically a cheap version of Var the CO 

It could be seen that way.

It's just a much longer process and the people reviewing it remain nameless, which is wrong.

[Bears 794]

Until all clubs can request citations and have access to the decision-making process, which is carried out by properly independent experts, then the whole process is only going to reflect the existing power-base within Scottish football and the bias of those making the narrative, and reflect the honesty of those people.

Basically, a bunch of cheats have created a system to make sure they win through any means necessary and they're trying their best to hold on to that power.

[BlueKnight87 17,302]

14 minutes ago, TMB said:

I completely agree.  Using it as a system of appeal is fine but this retrospective banning is just nonsense.  The bigger teams will be on TV more frequently, have more viewers, and therefore come under a lot more scrutiny.  

It is trial by TV now and we will be more scrutinised than others teams. Pundits like Stewart, Sutton etc will see to that. 

The system itself is a joke. No confirmation who's reviewing incidents and no information how they have come to the decisions made. 

It's all cloak and daggers when it needs to be wide open. A detailed explanation how similar challenges are coming up with different results each time would be good. 

 

[eejay the dj 31,964]

1 hour ago, Courtyard Bear said:

Well I might care about them if they actually cared about their own club, but they are just happy to see us getting shafted and nothing else. 

Too many hypocrites on here change their views to suit their wee arguments mate 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,766]

58 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

We've been fucked over more than any other side this season. 

Prove me wrong. 

Ok, I'll take on that challenge. Here goes... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nah, impossible, you're right.

[Bears r us 30,810]

6 minutes ago, BlueKnight87 said:

It is trial by TV now and we will be more scrutinised than others teams. Pundits like Stewart, Sutton etc will see to that. 

The system itself is a joke. No confirmation who's reviewing incidents and no information how they have come to the decisions made. 

It's all cloak and daggers when it needs to be wide open. A detailed explanation how similar challenges are coming up with different results each time would be good. 

 

That is how I see it, and that is why I believe we are being treated differently than other teams, especially the one we are trying to beat to the league title.

Yes other teams have had bad decisions against them, but nothing to what we have had and it is because of how the TV, Radio pundits deal with our games but not our biggest rivals that is having a huge effect on what players we have available for games.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,766]

2 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

That is how I see it, and that is why I believe we are being treated differently than other teams, especially the one we are trying to beat to the league title.

Yes other teams have had bad decisions against them, but nothing to what we have had and it is because of how the TV, Radio pundits deal with our games but not our biggest rivals that is having a huge effect on what players we have available for games.

In a nutshell mate.

[Bears r us 30,810]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

In a nutshell mate.

It seems simple to me, but I am an old paranoid protestant.  

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,766]

2 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

It seems simple to me, but I am an old paranoid protestant.  

Me too, though I'd class myself as a mid-age ranged one. 😏