"Conscious" choices not to apply the game laws

Strickland Banks

Well-Known Member
I've taken my time to measure this offering, can be too easy to become over-emotional in the aftermath of a disappointment.

Remove the obvious need to question our game management, tactical shape and in-match changes etc (will cover this later) but for this thread I want to focus on the "choices" made by officials.

I will not go down the "cheat" route, as it's emotional and one size does not fit all, and I still do not believe that an official pre-meditates a bias pre-match.

However, I wish to introduce the concept of "Conscious failure" to apply the laws of the game.

In the case of John Beaton, a man so chastised and hounded after Rangers deserved to win a match, there is no doubt in my mind that "in the moment" he on several occasions consciously failed to apply the laws of the game, for fear of backlash.

You can almost see it in his body-language, when booking Morelos for diving, and completely ignoring Dicker doing the same earlier in the match. He was well aware that failure to apply the law of the game to Dicker would not result in any fall-out, but knew fine well the moon-howling that would arise if he did not take action against Morelos for the same crime.

The exact same can be said for the penalty claim and disallowed goal for identical pushes, Beaton was well aware of the exposure and fate that would behold him should he have awarded Rangers a late penalty at 1-1. (See Aberdeen away)

These have been "conscious and in the moment" decisions designed to take the path of least resistance, and are fatal in matches like last night and Aberdeen away. It's easy to say, "aye, but we shouldn't have to rely on officials making the rights calls, or we should be out of site etc.)

Football is a low-scoring Sport and marginal decisions are key in deciding the outcomes of matches. With the shite pitch, opposition strengths etc, Rangers are unlikely to win matches like last night 3 or 4-0, and ended up losing a match we scored first in to the only two shots Kilmarnock had on target.

As much as the stance taken by Gerard is extremely admirable, sporting and introspective, it will kill any future title hopes stone dead, as the marginals will always go against us. The manky mob are reaping their years of sowing grievances.

We will always pay the price for failing to call-out this "conscious incompetence" and it will only get worse.
 

Blue As

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I would like to hear from Beaton why he didn’t book Rory McKenzie for rugby tackling Tav,he was looking right at the incident.Why did he fail to produce a yellow card?
A small thing,but that is a stonewall booking in any game of football anywhere in the world,except when it is a Rangers player that is on the receiving end.
Also ask why Kent was booked for jumping back to his feet after being hauled down and grappled with by Power.
 

RenfrewBear72

Well-Known Member
The referees are intimidated.

They know if they give us fair decisions they get tore to bits in the media, their windows are panned in, they recieve death threats, their family members are threatened.

They also know if they don't give us the key decisions, see; cup final, tarrier game, last night, they get zero hassle from our club or fans.

It's easy for them to get away with fucking us over as our club are weak and we don't have that level of screwball in our support.
 

jf1960

Well-Known Member
I've taken my time to measure this offering, can be too easy to become over-emotional in the aftermath of a disappointment.

Remove the obvious need to question our game management, tactical shape and in-match changes etc (will cover this later) but for this thread I want to focus on the "choices" made by officials.

I will not go down the "cheat" route, as it's emotional and one size does not fit all, and I still do not believe that an official pre-meditates a bias pre-match.

However, I wish to introduce the concept of "Conscious failure" to apply the laws of the game.

In the case of John Beaton, a man so chastised and hounded after Rangers deserved to win a match, there is no doubt in my mind that "in the moment" he on several occasions consciously failed to apply the laws of the game, for fear of backlash.

You can almost see it in his body-language, when booking Morelos for diving, and completely ignoring Dicker doing the same earlier in the match. He was well aware that failure to apply the law of the game to Dicker would not result in any fall-out, but knew fine well the moon-howling that would arise if he did not take action against Morelos for the same crime.

The exact same can be said for the penalty claim and disallowed goal for identical pushes, Beaton was well aware of the exposure and fate that would behold him should he have awarded Rangers a late penalty at 1-1. (See Aberdeen away)

These have been "conscious and in the moment" decisions designed to take the path of least resistance, and are fatal in matches like last night and Aberdeen away. It's easy to say, "aye, but we shouldn't have to rely on officials making the rights calls, or we should be out of site etc.)

Football is a low-scoring Sport and marginal decisions are key in deciding the outcomes of matches. With the shite pitch, opposition strengths etc, Rangers are unlikely to win matches like last night 3 or 4-0, and ended up losing a match we scored first in to the only two shots Kilmarnock had on target.

As much as the stance taken by Gerard is extremely admirable, sporting and introspective, it will kill any future title hopes stone dead, as the marginals will always go against us. The manky mob are reaping their years of sowing grievances.

We will always pay the price for failing to call-out this "conscious incompetence" and it will only get worse.
We had the chance to do it after the parkhead game and never done a thing
 

Strickland Banks

Well-Known Member
The referees are intimidated.

They know if they give us fair decisions they get tore to bits in the media, their windows are panned in, they recieve death threats, their family members are threatened.

They also know if they don't give us the key decisions, see; cup final, tarrier game, last night, they get zero hassle from our club or fans.

It's easy for them to get away with fucking us over as our club are weak and we don't have that level of screwball in our support.
This is the truth. It's what we should focus on rather than muddying the water with "bias" and "conspiracy" claims.
 

Blue As

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
The referees are intimidated.

They know if they give us fair decisions they get tore to bits in the media, their windows are panned in, they recieve death threats, their family members are threatened.

They also know if they don't give us the key decisions, see; cup final, tarrier game, last night, they get zero hassle from our club or fans.

It's easy for them to get away with fucking us over as our club are weak and we don't have that level of screwball in our support.
In a nutshell,right there.
 

possil bear

Active Member
So we lost the cup to"conscious incompetence"and probably the league as well i could give you an other phrase for it but it would not go down well with the site moderators
 

RenfrewBear72

Well-Known Member
This is the truth. It's what we should focus on rather than muddying the water with "bias" and "conspiracy" claims.
I understand where it comes from though.
They are being biased, they are cheating, but not because they are timmy fans, it's out of fear.
Any respectable employee raises their hand, raises their concern, and asks for support.
Right now these so called professionals are getting a tidy wage packet and they aren't even doing their job. It will never change until we enforce it.
 

Dave Angell

Well-Known Member
I've just watched that YouTube video of Beaton last night.

Another shitebags performance from this cretin. Not quite at his "Hibs at Ibrox" level, but he's getting closer to eclipsing it .......
 

TheBuffalo

Member
I've taken my time to measure this offering, can be too easy to become over-emotional in the aftermath of a disappointment.

Remove the obvious need to question our game management, tactical shape and in-match changes etc (will cover this later) but for this thread I want to focus on the "choices" made by officials.

I will not go down the "cheat" route, as it's emotional and one size does not fit all, and I still do not believe that an official pre-meditates a bias pre-match.

However, I wish to introduce the concept of "Conscious failure" to apply the laws of the game.

In the case of John Beaton, a man so chastised and hounded after Rangers deserved to win a match, there is no doubt in my mind that "in the moment" he on several occasions consciously failed to apply the laws of the game, for fear of backlash.

You can almost see it in his body-language, when booking Morelos for diving, and completely ignoring Dicker doing the same earlier in the match. He was well aware that failure to apply the law of the game to Dicker would not result in any fall-out, but knew fine well the moon-howling that would arise if he did not take action against Morelos for the same crime.

The exact same can be said for the penalty claim and disallowed goal for identical pushes, Beaton was well aware of the exposure and fate that would behold him should he have awarded Rangers a late penalty at 1-1. (See Aberdeen away)

These have been "conscious and in the moment" decisions designed to take the path of least resistance, and are fatal in matches like last night and Aberdeen away. It's easy to say, "aye, but we shouldn't have to rely on officials making the rights calls, or we should be out of site etc.)

Football is a low-scoring Sport and marginal decisions are key in deciding the outcomes of matches. With the shite pitch, opposition strengths etc, Rangers are unlikely to win matches like last night 3 or 4-0, and ended up losing a match we scored first in to the only two shots Kilmarnock had on target.

As much as the stance taken by Gerard is extremely admirable, sporting and introspective, it will kill any future title hopes stone dead, as the marginals will always go against us. The manky mob are reaping their years of sowing grievances.

We will always pay the price for failing to call-out this "conscious incompetence" and it will only get worse.
I said similar on another thread last night - all the refs know that we've been refusing to use their poor decisions as excuses for dropping points. This creates an imbalance whereby they consciously/subconsciously know that they can get away with making 'easier' decisions that won't rock the boat. It's not surprising when you imagine yourselves in their position, call after call we've had going against us and there is 'no complaint from us' about the referees. It's only natural that we are becoming a doormat in this sense. I understand the posters who say that we shouldn't need them on our side but everyone knows that title winning sides are good at 'winning ugly' i.e. getting results when not performing all that well - winning ugly when you've got referees constantly making poor decisions against you in tight games is much, much more difficult.
 

Thornliebank_Bear

Well-Known Member
The refs love cheating, its what they do and tbf these guys are pretty good at it. Physical side of scottish football and the use of cards is so important... this is how its done this is how you manipulate the match.

We need to stop making excuses for them and showing sympathy, the idea that they dont really understand whats happening is absurd. They are comfortable cheating Rangers or any team that may stand in the tims way of another treble, i would guess they are trained to cheat the idea celtic were going to take over the sfa and not make sure they had their men in control of refereeing seems naive.

which ref thats been cheating this year is feeling guilty about handing Celtic the title ? clancy, beaton, madden, robertson, mclean ? yeah exactly none of them. Be same next year or for the next manager.
 

georgedoors

Well-Known Member
I would like to hear from Beaton why he didn’t book Rory McKenzie for rugby tackling Tav,he was looking right at the incident.Why did he fail to produce a yellow card?
A small thing,but that is a stonewall booking in any game of football anywhere in the world,except when it is a Rangers player that is on the receiving end.
Also ask why Kent was booked for jumping back to his feet after being hauled down and grappled with by Power.
Sadly this completely debunks the op theory, as no controversy comes from applying laws of the game in these incidents. The refs are clearly bias and outright cheats.
 

xd182

Well-Known Member
I've said in a previous thread that what's really grinding me gears is:

I watched from a few yards away as Borna pulled back an Aberdeen(?) player a couple of weeks ago at Ibrox - and getting booked for it.

The next game against Hibs, Alfredo is wrestled to the ground - no booking.

Last night against Killie, Tavernier is hauled back by the neck - no booking.

I agree with your points @Strickland Banks but these "conscious choices" not to book players (Killie's dive last night) is harming us.
 

Fifercolt

Well-Known Member
We are weak from boardroom to pitch. I hate to say but Celtic are slick off the pitch every thing is done to ensure they get the benefits on the pitch. If that means using their media tools to intimidate match officials and it works. Celtic have taken the fight to the gutter, and if we want to fight and then beat them the club needs to forgo “dignified silence” roll up their sleeves, hold their noses, and get in the gutter and fight back.
 

jimbear

Well-Known Member
The op's use of the term "conscious incompetence" implies that the referee has made a deliberate decision not to apply the rules of the game when it appears that one specific team would benefit had he done so. The word "cheat" to describe such a situation is emotive, however the general description of someone making a "conscious" decision to deliberately ignore the rules of any game in which they are taking part is "cheat".
 

LOL 133

Well-Known Member
Its been said on here numerous times. Refs know that any contentious decisions against Celtic will result in the media attacking and criticising them for weeks. Likewise any such decisions going in our favour will lead to a similar outcome.

I dont believe refs set out to cheat but they are only human and subject to pressure. Public opinion is shaped by what people read and hear in the media. The press and media are allowed to attack us day after day after day and that's the reason refs are intimidated and scared to be seen to give decisions in our favour.

Ive been arguing for years on here that we need to employ a professional researcher to gather evidence of the bias, double standards and lies by the MSM, footballing authorities, politicians and others. Produce academic standard reports and name and shame both the bigots and the cowards.

Issuing amateur statements every now and then with no facts and figures to back up the claims just gives our enemies more material to attack and ridicule us.

Stewart Robertson might be a good adiminstrator but that's not what we need to fight this battle.
 

Commentator

Well-Known Member
The op's use of the term "conscious incompetence" implies that the referee has made a deliberate decision not to apply the rules of the game when it appears that one specific team would benefit had he done so. The word "cheat" to describe such a situation is emotive, however the general description of someone making a "conscious" decision to deliberately ignore the rules of any game in which they are taking part is "cheat".
Thank phuk someone explained. I've re-read the OP and a few of the other posts and his meaning is clear to me. Are folk just looking for a fight?
 

1288Bear

Member
Beaton was slaughtered in the media for his performance in a cup tie we won 6-0 against Hamilton a few years ago. Thereafter he gave us absolutely nothing clearly fearing another doing.

He then decided to referee an old firm game by allowing the game to flow and not producing cards for every minor infringement - he was praised by all in the immediate aftermath of that game. Next day, however, after they had the opportunity to pour over the game looking for issues they decided he should have sent Alfie off 3 times and he was slaughtered again. By so doing they have ensured that, either in fear or simply wanting an easy life, it will be a long time before he gives anything significant in our favour.

Fact is - their intimidation at all levels (players, managers and fans) has worked.
 

RWL12

Well-Known Member
The difference between referees officiating our matches and giving decisions for us / officiating taig matches fairly and giving decisions against them... is having their windows smashed, needing police protection, family threatened by taig fans or not.
 

Boba Fleck

Well-Known Member
OP is bang on and I agree with every word. When Dicker throws himself to the ground, and the way he goes down there is simply one of two decisions to make.
  1. Penalty - There was a push/trip/pull which made him fall so dramatically to the ground inside the box. Decision: Penalty to Kilmarnock.
  2. No Penalty - Dicker has thrown himself dramatically to the ground in the box in an attempt to con the referee into giving the penalty. Decision: Simulation, free kick to Rangers, second yellow card to Dicker - sent off.
The way he went down wasn't the result of a "coming together", it was intended simulation, and how Beaton cannot see that is beyond me. If he doesn't give the penalty he has got to book him for diving.

Later in the game, Alfie's was a dive, but no difference from Dickers, no difference at all apart from Beaton's response.

I"m just surprised that he didn't give Alfie a 2nd yellow when he was pushed to the ground by the two hands of the defender.
 

Disco Deejay

Well-Known Member
Cant disagree, but we should beat kilmarnock even with a bias ref
When you score a good goal that is wrongly disallowed, get a player pulled down when clean through on goal without punishment for the culprit, see the opposition score a goal which the rules clearly say should not be allowed and see an opposition player on a yellow card clearly dive with no action taken, all on a shite pitch which gives the home team an advantage, then it really isn't that easy.
 

Cambuslangger

Active Member
It is in exactly this type of ugly dogfight of a game where you need it to be fair. I can forgive the first goal as the handball is subjective. What I can’t forgive is the blatant inconsistency of decisions which would have resulted in red cards and chopping off that potentially winning goal. If that goal is a foul then every high ball challenge should result in a foul for one side or other. For me football is ruined by the cheating and diving and now refs who are either corrupt or incompetent.
 

Robbie

Well-Known Member
Totally agree mate,refs are scared to give us an even playing field for fear of retribution from the unwashed hordes.
The concept of winning anything fairly is just not in their psyche.
Lie, Cheat,Intimidate and claim injustice at every turn is paying off big style for the shameless B@stards.
 

Stephen Johnston

Active Member
I've taken my time to measure this offering, can be too easy to become over-emotional in the aftermath of a disappointment.

Remove the obvious need to question our game management, tactical shape and in-match changes etc (will cover this later) but for this thread I want to focus on the "choices" made by officials.

I will not go down the "cheat" route, as it's emotional and one size does not fit all, and I still do not believe that an official pre-meditates a bias pre-match.

However, I wish to introduce the concept of "Conscious failure" to apply the laws of the game.

In the case of John Beaton, a man so chastised and hounded after Rangers deserved to win a match, there is no doubt in my mind that "in the moment" he on several occasions consciously failed to apply the laws of the game, for fear of backlash.

You can almost see it in his body-language, when booking Morelos for diving, and completely ignoring Dicker doing the same earlier in the match. He was well aware that failure to apply the law of the game to Dicker would not result in any fall-out, but knew fine well the moon-howling that would arise if he did not take action against Morelos for the same crime.

The exact same can be said for the penalty claim and disallowed goal for identical pushes, Beaton was well aware of the exposure and fate that would behold him should he have awarded Rangers a late penalty at 1-1. (See Aberdeen away)

These have been "conscious and in the moment" decisions designed to take the path of least resistance, and are fatal in matches like last night and Aberdeen away. It's easy to say, "aye, but we shouldn't have to rely on officials making the rights calls, or we should be out of site etc.)

Football is a low-scoring Sport and marginal decisions are key in deciding the outcomes of matches. With the shite pitch, opposition strengths etc, Rangers are unlikely to win matches like last night 3 or 4-0, and ended up losing a match we scored first in to the only two shots Kilmarnock had on target.

As much as the stance taken by Gerard is extremely admirable, sporting and introspective, it will kill any future title hopes stone dead, as the marginals will always go against us. The manky mob are reaping their years of sowing grievances.

We will always pay the price for failing to call-out this "conscious incompetence" and it will only get worse.
Maybe they are unintentionally corrupt,but we are being refereeed to a different standard.
 

THEGOVANFRONT

Well-Known Member
I'm more of the unconscious bias opinion in that referees have seen what happens to their counterparts should they give anything for Rangers that is later shown to be wrong. And this is now ingrained in referees in that they are protecting themselves from any such attack via an unconscious bias against Rangers.

Now people saying we should have beat Kilmarnock no matter the decisions made by the referee makes no sense to me.
In last nights game to use an example we had for me 2 valid goals and they had 1 but it is us that have lost the game 2-1. Are people honestly saying we need to score say an extra 3 goals to compensate for the referee awarding them a goal that shouldn't have stood & disallowing a valid goal???
Is this what it has come to?
 
Top