Madden rumoured to be claiming he didn’t see the McGregor

Whatever Madden, you useless twat -


DzTla3VXgAoExgf.jpg
That’s fucking embarrassing for the fucking liar.
 
The referee who didn’t see the incident that he was staring at from a short distance has been appointed to probably the most recent fixture this weekend. Strange that a short sighted bloke should be on duty at Rugby Park on Sunday. Or is it?
 
How can he only give Ferguson a yellow, surely he couldn’t have seen that properly?

That incident should’ve been upgraded to a red.
 
Last edited:
If I was him, I'd be utterly embarrassed to claim I never seen an incident in which there is direct photographic evidence of me staring directly at the incident I'm claiming not to have seen.
 
Madden is being made to look:

1) completely useless
2) a liar.

He surely can’t be happy with this situation.

Is it possible the Compliance Officer is just simply way out her depth and the SFA are loath to sack her for fear of losing even more credibility?
 
He's part of the lying, cheating, corrupt, 19th Century Terrorist organisation.

Next time some one on here says; the referees aren't cheats, simply just poor at their job... they should be watched closely.
 
Weekly Meeting of the Ceptic Referees Preference Committee

Hi guys and thanks all for attending !

You will all recall that the Huns have been improving, and we are hugely concerned about that.

We need to nip this in the bud so we are depending on you to stop their push for 55 ! , try to flag up on minor indiscretions, you know the sort of thing, like looking directly at you the referee, going down when albeit we have even seriously fouled their player, etc. but, if that is not possible, then go for route one for the questionable like scratching their arses or having their shin pads showing !

We, as usual, rely on you !

******* on behalf of Brenda .
 
A referee’s main duty is to follow the play, I.e. where the ball is,, and in this case it’s in McGregor’s hands. Similarly the Asistant referee would be watching the ball to check for potential offside. The fourth official may have been attending to something on the sideline so we can exonerate him. However, the referee and the assistant are either even more incompetent than we generally maintain or they are lying. On balance of probability it would appear they are lying.
 
Whatever Madden, you useless twat -


DzTla3VXgAoExgf.jpg
Genuine question. I assume the club have access to photos such as this. Why are we not walking into these appeals with video, photos anything which proves they are liars and calling them out directly.
Ffs the photo above would see a case thrown out in a court of law in any country if the counter arguement was i didn't see it. Corrupt to the core.
 
Does no one read the thread headline " rumoured " ......the media and the SFA can't possibly have put Madden in a position where he'd have to lie about seeing/not seeing an incident where there is concrete proof stating the bloody obvious that there is .......
 
It states quite clearly on the SFA website that the match officials didn't see the incident. Rangers should be calling them out publicly on this and asking for clarification on how Madden could not see an incident he was looking directly at. We are being cheated and our players are regularly losing earnings and having their professionalism brought into question due to corruption within the governing body.
 
Madden is being made to look:

1) completely useless
2) a liar.

He surely can’t be happy with this situation.

Is it possible the Compliance Officer is just simply way out her depth and the SFA are loath to sack her for fear of losing even more credibility?

why would they be reluctant to sack her? she's doing a splendid job to many
 
The precise reason the club have shat to make an example of a ref

Collum lied about Candeias making a gesture to send him off
Madden appears to have lied stating he didn’t see McGregor incident despite clear tv footage showing him staring at it

Remember when Dougie McDonald lied about coming to the correct decision anyway?

Tims made an example of him and are reaping the benefits

We’ve shat it twice now by refusing to question the integrity of Collum and Madden
 
Simply a case of public atonement for the 3 highlighted incidents on the 29th.

A contrived form of revenge for referees stating they saw incidents in a game but never took action. This way they allege they never saw anything and take retrospective action.

As stated on H&H they are refereeing games after the event by citing players. We should take this matter up with a higher authority. They are not officiating the game by the laws of the game they are making it up to satisfy a certain club and it is as clear as day who that club are.
 
Watch his facial expression change when McGregor makes the challenge,that should tell you all you need to know.

Rangers should have the balls to come out publicly and confirm that Madden did say he never saw Shaggers high leg otherwise he would have issued a red, then produce the photographs that shows he had a clear line of sight and demand answers. This is now war and the time for talking behind closed doors is over.
 
That's the thing now, the SFA and CO are now putting words into the ref's mouth, therefore putting more pressure on to already stressed out ref's as they are being made to look like complete buffoons and downright liars
We can go on and on picking the bones of all this,and what's done is done,but we should be demanding the removal of head honchos Lawwell and Doncaster,as long as they are there,nothing will change and will remain corrupt.
 
Probably a daft question but do the clubs involved in these hearings get minutes of the meetings to see what was actually said.

If Madden is claiming he never saw that then he is either blind or lying.
 
It’s quite strange how the rules on the CO and what they can cite has changed even in the last few days.

“We can’t cite a player if a refeeree has already given them a card”.

Bad tackle on Celtic player, yellow card.

“We can now retrospectively upgrade yellow cards”.

Next one could go two ways:

“We can’t cite a player if the referee has seen the incident”

Picture of Bobby Madden looking directly at the incident...

“We can now cite a player even if the referee has seen the incident” / “Bobby, can you just lie and say you didn’t see the incident even though it’s blatanlty obvious you did? You’ll get your Lawwell brown envelope in the post.”
 
The SPFA and Fraser Wishart should be questioning referee's lying to get their players suspended. Thomson and Collum have also been caught lying this week.

We should be really pushing that line. I can't believe we're not shouting from the rooftops about it.

Dignified silence again?
 
Does no one read the thread headline " rumoured " ......the media and the SFA can't possibly have put Madden in a position where he'd have to lie about seeing/not seeing an incident where there is concrete proof stating the bloody obvious that there is .......

My assumption would be that they don't physically ask the referee if he has seen an incident. They will refer to his match report and if there is no mention of an incident (which there wouldn't be for an incident in which he considered innocuous) then that will give the CO the authority to assume that none of the match officials saw the incident.

Whilst it is not a court of law, the referee should be present in these hearings and under oath!
 
No, a lie designed to give the SFA the authority to retrospectively punish a Rangers player! It has nothing to do with absolving anyone. It is simply the mechanism that their own rule-book requires in order to offer retrospective punishment.
I believe that is exactly what they are doing, if madden sees it they can't ban Mcgregor,,, its the same with colum, l believe he was pressured by the sfa to come with that pile of shite he spouted
 
It’s quite strange how the rules on the CO and what they can cite has changed even in the last few days.

“We can’t cite a player if a refeeree has already given them a card”.

Bad tackle on Celtic player, yellow card.

“We can now retrospectively upgrade yellow cards”.

Next one could go two ways:

“We can’t cite a player if the referee has seen the incident”

Picture of Bobby Madden looking directly at the incident...

“We can now cite a player even if the referee has seen the incident” / “Bobby, can you just lie and say you didn’t see the incident even though it’s blatanlty obvious you did? You’ll get your Lawwell brown envelope in the post.”

And she had the option to cite a Lewis Ferguson but didn’t.
 
why would they be reluctant to sack her? she's doing a splendid job to many

Because they only appointed her a few months back.

She already seems to have ruffled a few feathers re Beaton and Collum. They have been made to look like fools or liars. Same thing here.
 
We would do well to remember this is an internet rumour.

If more than a rumour he's finished.


It is not an internet rumour and he won't be finished.

The Compliance Officer cannot re-referee a game (no laughing at the back!) and can only act when NONE OF THE OFFICIALS have seen an incident, or only saw part of the incident, but not the part that merited a red card.

In McShaggers case, it states on the SFA website "Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 200 : Where any one of the sending off offences of (A1) serious foul play, (A2) violent conduct, and (A3) spitting at an opponent or other person is committed by a player at a match, but that sending off offence was not seen by any of the match officials at the time that it was committed the mandatory suspension for that sending off offence as provided for in Annex C of the Judicial Panel Protocol shall be applied to the player.

All 4 officials would have been asked by the C.O. if they had seen the incident. If any of them say "yes, I saw it", the Compliance Officers involvement ends there and proceedings cannot continue. If they say "No, I never saw it", they are asked to submit statements, which are part of the case.

So, by citing and banning McShagger, Madden, who pictures prove had a clear view of the incident, and the other 3 officials, including the Assistant, who should have been directly in line with the incident, looking for a potential offside, must all have claimed (in writing) to the Compliance Officer, that they never saw it.

If ever we needed proof that the system is corrupt and people are lying, it is right there in this one incident.
 
It is not an internet rumour and he won't be finished.

The Compliance Officer cannot re-referee a game (no laughing at the back!) and can only act when NONE OF THE OFFICIALS have seen an incident, or only saw part of the incident, but not the part that merited a red card.

In McShaggers case, it states on the SFA website "Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 200 : Where any one of the sending off offences of (A1) serious foul play, (A2) violent conduct, and (A3) spitting at an opponent or other person is committed by a player at a match, but that sending off offence was not seen by any of the match officials at the time that it was committed the mandatory suspension for that sending off offence as provided for in Annex C of the Judicial Panel Protocol shall be applied to the player.

All 4 officials would have been asked by the C.O. if they had seen the incident. If any of them say "yes, I saw it", the Compliance Officers involvement ends there and proceedings cannot continue. If they say "No, I never saw it", they are asked to submit statements, which are part of the case.

So, by citing and banning McShagger, Madden, who pictures prove had a clear view of the incident, and the other 3 officials, including the Assistant, who should have been directly in line with the incident, looking for a potential offside, must all have claimed (in writing) to the Compliance Officer, that they never saw it.

If ever we needed proof that the system is corrupt and people are lying, it is right there in this one incident.

Rangers should simply send that excerpt from their judgement and the picture of Madden clearly looking at the incident.

They are absolute cheating bastards.
 
He's (and or his bosses) are inventing a retrospective excuse.

He was looking right at it. No doubt in my mind he saw it.
 
There wasn't a 2 footed tackle on our 'keeper.

Let's keep things to facts, and we'll prove there's an agenda.
 
Rangers should simply send that excerpt from their judgement and the picture of Madden clearly looking at the incident.

They are absolute cheating bastards.

The clubs solicitor was present at the appeal, so I would like to think that we did, but didn't accept it.

I can only assume that Madden has claimed that sweat ran into his eyes or he blinked at the moment of impact and didn't get a clear view, the linesman sneezed and the 4th Official was watching Morelos in the stand, hoping to catch him dropping litter for a 4 game ban.

The press should print the image and ask the SFA why Madden in particular can possibly claim that he missed it.

If it was the other lot, the mhedia would be demanding answers like a dog with a bone and it would have been raised in Holyrood long before now.
 
Back
Top