Jump to content

Club Statement


BridgeIsBlue

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 277
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

If we have evidence that TLB said whatever and was not cited then that has to be used any time we are cited, if the SFA still don't accept they have been using a different set of rules for the two bog clubs then we must take it further IMO.  

It is a clusterfuck and been going on far too long now. 

We are treated differently, they're not even hiding it mate. They don't even care how blatant it is.

Would love to see how we take it further, seems every way I look is a closed door. I'm sure someone will say CAS. Complaining to them about the authorities will only have 1 outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’d imagine he’s being brought up on ‘implied bias’, which the hearing panel could very easily swing as true.

 

They could potentially make a case that Gerrard was saying Clancy is biased against Morelos/Rangers and that only if we/Morelos had committed the foul then it would’ve been a red card offence.

 

Any decent argument from us would rip that thought process to shreds, which is why I think we'll struggle to overturn the citation. We’re fucking useless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

We are treated differently, they're not even hiding it mate. They don't even care how blatant it is.

Would love to see how we take it further, seems every way I look is a closed door. I'm sure someone will say CAS. Complaining to them about the authorities will only have 1 outcome.

I am no expert in the rules of football associations, but in most walks of life there is usually a route to take IF an authority is treating certain members differently to others, so it is up to our legal guys to sort that out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The blatant anti-Rangers stance by authorities is staggering. While as covid continues many of it's members are about to go belly up. They only care about the 10 in a row bullshit.

Put our top legal team on this, win the case, and call for a vote of no confidence is surely the only way forward. Fight fire with fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bears r us said:

I am no expert in the rules of football associations, but in most walks of life there is usually a route to take IF an authority is treating certain members differently to others, so it is up to our legal guys to sort that out. 

I'm all ears to suggestions where that could be mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bluenoz said:

And people question why he doesn't speak out more often.

Who made the notice of complaint. Clancy? the CO? Doncaster?

Scottish football is corrupt to the core and I'm beginning to think we have no chance of stopping 10.

Clancy wasn’t the referee it was Don Robertson! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

So you want us to publicly criticise him for that?

Do I want us as a club to publicly criticise Clancy for basically saying that he and the other refs are aware of the special importance of decisions made concerning the fact that that lot are trying to win a record breaking supposed tenth title in a row (no matter how tainted it is)? Yes.

But I was meaning that this should be used as the basis of the defence for Gerrard's statement that implied that rules were not being applied fairly concerning us (and them and the teams we are both playing). Your thread on Officialdom Conspiracy shows plenty of that. The defence of Gerrard can show many examples of this to support the fact that Clancy is at least being consistent in his biased decisions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

I'm all ears to suggestions where that could be mate.

I honestly don't know but we should have some route to take when we are being treated differently from other teams in the same league. We must have pages and pages of evidence just ready to use.

I would be happy to contribute to a crowdfund for a legal case if that was our only way to do it. No football association can be above the law of the land. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Said it before but unless anything is contractually obliged then give the SFA/SPFL fuck all.

Interviews with Sky after the game send someone from back room staff.

Photo - shoots send a 16 yr old academy player.

Give them the absolute bare minimum and that includes use of stadium and Auchenhowie.

Their contempt towards us should be reciprocated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

Our game is in a terrible state in Scotland now. 

At a time when the governing body are talking about going cap in hand to the Scottish assembly (not govt. as point of principle) they decide to push on with this nonsense whereas the money it will undoubtedly cost in administration and legal fee’s alone could and should have been put to some other more worthwhile cause in keeping the game afloat at this time.
Any half competent legal representative could present a credible and compelling case proving that Morelos has undoubtedly been harshly, wrongly and unfairly treated by officials in the past 2 seasons which imo justifies SG’s comments. I would also cite other managers comments which have been controversial yet have not faced any sanction. This will be an interesting process...

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, ScottBF2 said:

I’d imagine he’s being brought up on ‘implied bias’, which the hearing panel could very easily swing as true.

 

They could potentially make a case that Gerrard was saying Clancy is biased against Morelos/Rangers and that only if we/Morelos had committed the foul then it would’ve been a red card offence.

 

Any decent argument from us would rip that thought process to shreds, which is why I think we'll struggle to overturn the citation. We’re fucking useless.

if it is 'implied bias' like you say which you are probably right, then Clancy's comments about 10iar were even worse 'implied bias'

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Robmc1 said:

At a time when the governing body are talking about going cap in hand to the Scottish assembly (not govt. as point of principle) they decide to push on with this nonsense whereas the money it will undoubtedly cost in administration and legal fee’s alone could and should have been put to some other more worthwhile cause in keeping the game afloat at this time.
Any half competent legal representative could present a credible and compelling case proving that Morelos has undoubtedly been harshly, wrongly and unfairly treated by officials in the past 2 seasons which imo justifies SG’s comments. I would also cite other managers comments which have been controversial yet have not faced any sanction. This will be an interesting process...

It is always said we cannot do anything because the SFA cannot be challenged, but I think there has to be someway, even if it is through the courts.

Our dossiers on these wankers must be huge now with the amount of shite that has been going on for years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, .Williamson. said:

You don't hate anybody, that's an awful thing to say

I genuinely despise them to the pit of my stomach .So much .It will make me contemplate walking away this season .Football is a farce in Scotland and our board are gutless to a man .It is not enjoyable anymore and they are a massive part of our weakness in everything that happens up here 

The days of football before politics in this Country are well gone .Our board are quite happy ,just to rake in the season ticket money .No doubts for me 

This will be like the Collum episode .Big statements but ultimately take it up the arse with a fine and no comeback like  the Candeas disgrace 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Bears said:

Do I want us as a club to publicly criticise Clancy for basically saying that he and the other refs are aware of the special importance of decisions made concerning the fact that that lot are trying to win a record breaking supposed tenth title in a row (no matter how tainted it is)? Yes.

But I was meaning that this should be used as the basis of the defence for Gerrard's statement that implied that rules were not being applied fairly concerning us (and them and the teams we are both playing). Your thread on Officialdom Conspiracy shows plenty of that. The defence of Gerrard can show many examples of this to support the fact that Clancy is at least being consistent in his biased decisions.

1. The club would be sanctioned.

2. Theres numerous examples but don't be surprised if we're told they're irrelevant its all about this specific matter. If so he'll get done for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

I genuinely despise them to the pit of my stomach .So much .It will make me contemplate walking away this season .Football is a farce in Scotland and our board are gutless to a man .It is not enjoyable anymore and they are a massive part of our weakness in everything that happens up here 

The days of football before politics in this Country are well gone .Our board are quite happy ,just to rake in the season ticket money .No doubts for me 

This will be like the Collum episode .Big statements but ultimately take it up the arse with a fine and no comeback like  the Candeas disgrace 

I was taking the piss mate. I hate loads of people 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 28 April 2024 11:30 Until 13:30
      0  
      St Mirren v Rangers
      The SMiSA Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Football

×
×
  • Create New...