No further action on the morelos challenge

MurciaBear

Active Member
Some tech minded member should superimpose a Rangers strip onto Edwards and a ceptic strip onto Alfredo...and put that in front of the panel. Let's see their decision then...should be the basic for every such issue. Corrupt f*ckers.
 

Buffel87

Well-Known Member
I'm not one for asking for statements - in fact I regularly take the piss out of people who do.

But in what way is the incident any different to Ryan Jack at Pittodrie, which was punished with a straight red card then failed at appeal? I've watched them both several times since the weekend and we're talking about literally the exact same thing - player plays the ball, natural momentum/swing takes his studs on to the opponent.

Either both are red cards for endangering an opponent, or nothing - just an accidental collision from the natural momentum.

So why's it only a fucking red card for the Rangers player? Surely this is something we've got to be asking?
For what it's worth, I think both were red cards.

The problem is the way the referral/appeal process works. It's set up to basically side with the referees original decision. Three ex-refs looking at it separately and the verdict only getting overturned if all three decide independently that the ref was wrong. That's a stupid system.
It's why most of the appeals or referrals fail. It's set up in a way that protects the ref, which is just plain stupid and needs changed.
 

Desert Loyal

Well-Known Member
Just seen the 'inside Ibrox' video on RTV which shows the 'tackle' from behind Edwards.

From that angle I don't think it was intentional (I did before). However, he still should have walked.

By the letter of the law which refs should follow its endagering a player, how 3 of them cannot agree that I will never know.
 

BSPECIAL

Well-Known Member
And Dermot Gallagher said it wasn’t a card because he got the ball first, the same Gallagher who said that Ryan Jacks definitely was a red card.
Maybe dermot gallagher is the new yardstick to be used by celtic/sfa/spfl ref panels. He'll never side with us, guaranteed
 

the only way is up

Active Member
The media is full of "no intent", "touched the ball first".
I was under the impression neither of these are a factor in whether it was a reckless challenge. Until the referees and media actually know the rules, nothing will improve.
They do know the rules. Cheat, lie, deflect, sweep. However, when broadcasters allow individuals to take what can be demonstrated as sectarian or racist views, Ofcom can and will act. Anyone think there’s any mileage in exploring that?
 

MurciaBear

Active Member
Conroy, Clark and Thomson I bet.
[/QUOTE
Hand picked no doubt or like the computorised fixture list Craig Thomson would be in their chosen three no doubt the corruption just doesn't stop does it.
Wer'e told three former referees, but not who they are. How do we know these three 'former referees' even exist as a 'panel'? Clerr could put issues forward, but this could literally be an A4 sheet of paper arriving on Liewell's desk on a Monday for him to make the decision. There is absolutely no transparency here. The sheer front of this SPFL is astounding.
The three referees should be foreign referees, via a conference / zoom call to at least help in this aspect. The board needs to speak out, but after the 'smoking gun dossier' debacle I'm afraid I don't see it happening.
 

jaws73

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
The most blatant example of something sinister going on this season was when a blatant penalty for handball at the Copland end was denied to us this season. Some poster may be able to identify the match but it was a league game which we won and the ref (it may have been Bobby Madden but I'm not sure) gave the reason that he made an allowance because of the condidtions. It was simply bizarre, an obvious cover up but it was never followed through by anybody including Rangers. It was an astounding decision and it makes me feel very unseasy about the football authorities.

That was this year but last season Rangers v Livingston (16 February) . Cross comes in and Livingston player punches the ball with no-one near him .

Gerrard: “There was a blatant handball. The referee said it is because of the conditions he didn’t mean it. He said to Connor Goldson he couldn’t give it because of the conditions. That is a new one."
 

Balogun1

Well-Known Member
Even if it wasn’t intentional it was still dangerous / reckless play.

Games a bogey with these corrupt bent scum in charge of it
Agreed, the level or corruption and insidious behaviour in Scotshit football between the authorities and the shettlestons is truly unparalleled in world football.
 

Balogun1

Well-Known Member
That was this year but last season Rangers v Livingston (16 February) . Cross comes in and Livingston player punches the ball with no-one near him .

Gerrard: “There was a blatant handball. The referee said it is because of the conditions he didn’t mean it. He said to Connor Goldson he couldn’t give it because of the conditions. That is a new one."
Incredible. Officials making it up to suit their agenda.
 

Norskger

Well-Known Member
Just disgusting that decision. Utter scumbags running a mockery of trying to run and govern leagues and allowing challenges on players like that
 
change consent
Top