Sky presenter

[Scaramanga]

Probably screamed that when she was with McLaughlin!

Something tells me the only time Gollum made her scream was when he forgot to flush a jobby

 

[Tailwind]

Okay thanks for making it easy.

1) She does indeed say she is playing devils advocate and asks whether there is an argument that a player can go over when a challenge is made even if no contact. McFadden then says possibly but that’s not what happened in this situation.

2) Walker says there may be minimal contact and he’s gone over feeling that.

3) Never met her in my puff.

Now do me the courtesy and answer my question. Did Boyd, McFadden, Walker and then McCoist agree it wasn’t a penalty?

Boy did, McFadden did. I never disputed this. Walker may have been forced to backtrack. I already told you I turned over.

So someone starts a thread saying this:

Is she not supposed to be there as a presenter and not someone giving her opinion?

How many times is it going to be mentioned she thought it was a penalty.

So you have the presenter, O'neil and Walker saying it was a penalty and Boyd, Ally and Mcfadden saying it wasn't yet Walker has just said it is 3-1 for a penalty.

Amatuer bullshit on scottish sky as usual.

I don’t understand your claim of saying this thread is embarrassing. Everything claim people have made against Sky in here is true. You have even finally admitted this yourself.

Seems you owe some FFers an apology for your “embarrassing“ claim and siding with the bias presenter over bears.

 

[Tailwind]

Clearly in the minority but i think she’s lovely.

 

[Louch]

As presenter she’s likely pushing the producer in her ears agenda towards what they want discused. They had 75 minutes after the game finished to talk about a game with next time no incidents. If they had all agreed it would have been them just talking about camera flies vs pigeons

 

[Peekaboo]

Boy did, McFadden did. I never disputed this. Walker may have been forced to backtrack. I already told you I turned over.

So someone starts a thread saying this:


I don’t understand your claim of saying this thread is embarrassing. Everything claim people have made against Sky in here is true. You have even finally admitted this yourself.

Seems you owe some FFers an apology for your “embarrassing“ claim and siding with the bias presenter over bears.

Walker at no point said it was a penalty and was clear at the end it wasn’t. So the 3-1 in the original post which was supposed to be an example of the bias was in our favour.

You have already said you haven’t seen it so you might want to sit the rest of this out.

 

[Tailwind]

Walker at no point said it was a penalty and was clear at the end it wasn’t. So the 3-1 in the original post which was supposed to be an example of the bias was in our favour.

You have already said you haven’t seen it so you might want to sit the rest of this out.

The evidence was literally broadcast on tv. You keep arguing black is white.

 

[Coplandbear]

Is she not supposed to be there as a presenter and not someone giving her opinion?

How many times is it going to be mentioned she thought it was a penalty.

So you have the presenter, O'neil and Walker saying it was a penalty and Boyd, Ally and Mcfadden saying it wasn't yet Walker has just said it is 3-1 for a penalty.

Amatuer bullshit on scottish sky as usual.

She's a mentally challenged wee cow with an agenda.

 

[Anoldranger]

Is she not supposed to be there as a presenter and not someone giving her opinion?

How many times is it going to be mentioned she thought it was a penalty.

So you have the presenter, O'neil and Walker saying it was a penalty and Boyd, Ally and Mcfadden saying it wasn't yet Walker has just said it is 3-1 for a penalty.

Amatuer bullshit on scottish sky as usual.

Ach I wouldn’t get excited about it #55

 

[Bristol_bnose3]

Clearly in the minority but i think she’s lovely.

Did you get your Labrador to type that?

 

[Peekaboo]

The evidence was literally broadcast on tv. You keep arguing black is white.

You’ve just said everything on this thread is true. The 3-1 in favour of a penalty is nonsense.

Why are you lying? You’ve already said you didn’t see it so I’ll let you go back and watch it.

 

[Tailwind]

Walker at no point said it was a penalty and was clear at the end it wasn’t. So the 3-1 in the original post which was supposed to be an example of the bias was in our favour.

You have already said you haven’t seen it so you might want to sit the rest of this out.

You are trying to create a false narrative that only a conversation at the end of the game counts.

We have been discussing the narrative they created throughout the whole match and at half time.

You are trying to force through an opinion that Walker was aligning himself with it not being a pen when he said 3-1. Others on the thread have indicated they believe Walker was confused and assumed that McFadden and O'Neill had taken the green eyed view that it was Celtic and must be a pen, when in fact McFadden had made an honest call. So this part is in question.

Many Rangers fans over many months have questioned Barbour's impartiality relating to not just her outrageous take and muddying of the waters on what is a 100% blatant dive and act of simulation but also to a whole season of favouring Celtic.

So it is perfectly reasonable to question Barbour's contributions here.

You taking only the comments at the end of the game when they have backtracked on an initial absurd stance, when viewed alongside a whole season of bias, to then say other bears discussing her blatant bias as "embarrassing" is, in itself, embarrassing. You certainly aren't a bear I would want to have any discussion with in real life. Bear makes reasonable point about lack of impartiality in Sky broadcasts and staff. You defend those who seek to do Rangers down and attack the bears. You are a strange Rangers fan.

Come back now with some more deceitful comments about how only the full time back tracking is relevant...

 

[Tailwind]

You’ve just said everything on this thread is true. The 3-1 in favour of a penalty is nonsense.

Why are you lying? You’ve already said you didn’t see it so I’ll let you go back and watch it.

Not only FT is relevant.

Are you being deliberately beligerent?

 

[Tailwind]

I dont believe you arent personally invested with defending Barbour.

Your weird and distorted defence on the situation. Denying anyone to point to what was said at HT by Barbou and during the game by Walker does not stand up.

If you are not personally invested why are you deliberatly being duplicitious in how you debate this point.

I repeat. It is not only the FT conversation that is relevant.

 

[Peekaboo]

You are trying to create a false narrative that only a conversation at the end of the game counts.

We have been discussing the narrative they created throughout the whole match and at half time.

You are trying to force through an opinion that Walker was aligning himself with it not being a pen when he said 3-1. Others on the thread have indicated they believe Walker was confused and assumed that McFadden and O'Neill had taken the green eyed view that it was Celtic and must be a pen, when in fact McFadden had made an honest call. So this part is question.

Many Rangers fans over man months have questioned Barbour's impartiality relating to not just her outrageous take and muddying of the waters on what is a 100% blatant dive and act of simulation in addition to a whole season of favouring Celtic.

So it is perfectly reasonable to question Barbour's contributions here.

You taking only the comments at the end of the game when they have backtracked on an initial absurd stance, when viewed alongside a whole season of bias, to then say other bears discussing her blatant bias as "embarrassing" is, in itself, embarrassing. You certainly aren't a bear I would want to have any discussion with in real life. Bear makes reasonable point about lack of impartiality in Sky broadcasts and staff. You defend those who seek to do Rangers down and attack the bears. You are a strange Rangers fan.

Come back now with some more deceitful comments about how only the full time back tracking is relevant...

It was quite clear Walker says it wasn’t a penalty and he even gave his reason why afterwards.

There are those in the media that attack us and I’m happy to defend us against them.

I’ll leave you to argue over something that didn’t happen.

 

[Tailwind]

It was quite clear Walker says it wasn’t a penalty and he even gave his reason why afterwards.

There are those in the media that attack us and I’m happy to defend us against them.

I’ll leave you to argue over something that didn’t happen.

It did happen.

At the time.

And during half time.

You keep spreading lies to attack follow followers and defend those who wish to do Rangers down.

 

[bluetonic]

She'll be screaming 'penalty' in her sleep tonight.

I wouldn’t mind taking a dive in her box

 

[Grigo Yossarian]

McCoist doesn't really push the Rangers perspective, trying too hard to be neutral.

Boyd fighting a lone fight v about 5 of them.

On this occasion McCoist at least said a dive.

He has to do that more.

 

[Arminius]

She’s a cow.

also let’s not forget Chris McLaughlin turned her gay

Never let Gollum forget it, either

 

[alexg123]

One of the worst yet. Having bitter old O'Neill is just making it absolutely awful.

I'm only hanging on to see the Gerrard interview.

Other than that it is brutal viewing.

I was sick of the sight of O'Neil who had far too much talking time on it . I was starting to think I was watching the Martin O' Neil show plus the fact he is a boring bassa .

 

[Tailwind]

On this occasion McCoist at least said a dive.

He has to do that more.

I'm not speaking about one comment when I make that point.

Its more the general tone he brings to the game.

Walker - disgustingly biased Celtic.
Crocker - disgustingly biased to Celtic
O'Neill - do I even need to say.
McFadden - Pretty fair on big calls it seems. Slight bias towards Celtic.
Boyd - Pretty fair on big calls it seems. Slight bias towards Rangers.
McCoist - Straight down the line. Constant talk of how great Rodgers, Turnbull, O'Neill etc are.

 

[Grigo Yossarian]

I'm not speaking about one comment when I make that point.

Its more the general tone he brings to the game.

Walker - disgustingly biased Celtic.
Crocker - disgustingly biased to Celtic
O'Neill - do I even need to say.
McFadden - Pretty fair on big calls it seems. Slight bias towards Celtic.
Boyd - Pretty fair on big calls it seems. Slight bias towards Rangers.
McCoist - Straight down the line. Constant talk of how great Rodgers, Turnbull, O'Neill etc are.

Don’t disagree with your main point T.

 

[Peekaboo]

It did happen.

At the time.

And during half time.

You keep spreading lies to attack follow followers and defend those who wish to do Rangers down.

Watch it again. Walker at no point says it’s a penalty. He says to McCoist he may have felt slight contact and went down and McCoist says not for me.

At half time Barbour raises the question of whether a player making a tackle but you go over trying to avoid it and McFadden rubbishes it.

O’Neill them rambles on about agreeing with her when she says I’m removing myself from this because as she said she was just playing devils advocate.

The guys on Sky Sports agreed 4-1 it wasn’t a penalty with only O’Neill saying it was without giving a reason.

It’s not even a matter of debate as I’ve watched it back and I am basically quoting word for word.

I’m sure there are idiots like Hartson and Sutton trying to suggest it was a penalty so perhaps it would be better if we both took our fight to them.

 

[stonewall Jackson]

She's not a mentally challenged by any stretch. Grew up a st johnstone. Been in her company a few times and certainly no bias either way.

MON came across as a bitter old bastard mind you and I don't really think she knew what to do about it.

O'Neill is the bastard who ramped up bigotry and sheer hatred when he was manager of the mentally challengeds. He practically groomed the tramp in his evil ways. A bitter old lady's front bottom as was proven today by his pathetic performance.

 

[Tailwind]

Watch it again. Walker at no point says it’s a penalty. He says to McCoist he may have felt slight contact and went down and McCoist says not for me.

At half time Barbour raises the question of whether a player making a tackle but you go over trying to avoid it and McFadden rubbishes it.

O’Neill them rambles on about agreeing with her when she says I’m removing myself from this because as she said she was just playing devils advocate.

The guys on Sky Sports agreed 4-1 it wasn’t a penalty with only O’Neill saying it was without giving a reason.

It’s not even a matter of debate as I’ve watched it back and I am basically quoting word for word.

I’m sure there are idiots like Hartson and Sutton trying to suggest it was a penalty so perhaps it would be better if we both took our fight to them.

You stand with those who want to create an agenda against Rangers / for Celtic.

I stand with those who want to question bias from what should be a impartial broadcaster.

Sorted.

Good to know where we both stand and where I should file all future posts from you.

 

[Peekaboo]

You stand with those who want to create an agenda against Rangers / for Celtic.

I stand with those who want to question bias from what should be a impartial broadcaster.

Sorted.

Good to know where we both stand and where I should file all future posts from you.

Was still 4-1 no penalty. Even if that doesn’t fit your narrative.

 

[Laudrup11Cooper]

Why does anyone care what she thinks?
It’s just her opinion.You have yours, she has hers.

She puts it out there, to play devils advocate, and keep the discussion going.That’s what all tv and radio presenters do.That is part of their job.

It’s not like her decision, or Wibble’s or Walker’s, who are totally playing to the gallery, is going to mean it gets over turned.
It’s done.

The ref made his decision.
End of.

 

[Laudrup11Cooper]

Wibble keeps trying to humiliate Boyd, but he doesn't have the patter.

He also just said hoohoo for hoodoo.

Is there a link for this?

 

[Robbie Hepburn]

naw

 

[Tailwind]

Why does anyone care what she thinks?
It’s just her opinion.You have yours, she has hers.

She puts it out there, to play devils advocate, and keep the discussion going.That’s what all tv and radio presenters do.That is part of their job.

It’s not like her decision, or Wibble’s or Walker’s, who are totally playing to the gallery, is going to mean it gets over turned.
It’s done.

The ref made his decision.
End of.

Their agenda contributes to Morelos getting cited for things and Edouard getting away with everything and not “having a reputation“ that they use to castigate Alfie.

It would be naive to ignore the influence the press have had on the CO/trial by tv system we have in Scotland and how it has negatively impacted Rangers and benefitted Celtic.

That is why.

What I don’t understand though, is those who would wage a spirited defence of someone who has a hand in setting an agenda that contributes to damaging Rangers.

We all know if Alfie did identical dives to Edouard yesterday Barbour, Walker and Crocker would be leading the furore to have him cited. And we all know he would be cited.

In a recent European game, I think, in commentary they used Alfie’s “reputation” for going down easy as a reason he didn’t get a decision. How wild is that. Alfie has a reputation for diving and Edouard doesn’t. Yet who is guilty of the more frequent and more absurd acts of simulation?

 

[Corkinator]

This post match analysis is brutal.

Basically, they were amazing, should have had a penalty and did I say, they were amazing.

It was a shitey 1-1 draw.

Long May it continue, they’ll never address their frailties! The bravest man in football said tge were brilliant!! But didn’t want to talk about the goal they conceded! Fucking mentalists

all Ally has to do is similar to Carragher and Neville, professional to other teams but people know who you are supporting and want to win

trying to be everybody's pal is nauseating when it's quite obvious who he wants to win the game

one of the tim leaning commentators do this though, even Crocker

 

[Corkinator]

I was sick of the sight of O'Neil who had far too much talking time on it . I was starting to think I was watching the Martin O' Neil show plus the fact he is a boring bassa .

He thought he was a superstar! 2 decent seasons and he’s pep gusrdiola

 

[BlueBuzz]

It's lovely to see that we still upset Wibble so much. I used to still have grudging respect for O'Neill as a former NI playing great, but his spell managing the beggars (international variety) and his palpable bitterness has wiped it out. Cheer up Martin O'Neill!

Pricks like him and Lennon are the reason bigotry will never die .

 

[BlueBuzz]

Walker at no point said it was a penalty and was clear at the end it wasn’t. So the 3-1 in the original post which was supposed to be an example of the bias was in our favour.

You have already said you haven’t seen it so you might want to sit the rest of this out.

Who really gives a %^*&. If the papish ref that teaches at a papish school says no penalty. Then hallelujah

 

[Laudrup11Cooper]

Their agenda contributes to Morelos getting cited for things and Edouard getting away with everything and not “having a reputation“ that they use to castigate Alfie.

It would be naive to ignore the influence the press have had on the CO/trial by tv system we have in Scotland and how it has negatively impacted Rangers and benefitted Celtic.

That is why.

What I don’t understand though, is those who would wage a spirited defence of someone who has a hand in setting an agenda that contributes to damaging Rangers.

We all know if Alfie did identical dives to Edouard yesterday Barbour, Walker and Crocker would be leading the furore to have him cited. And we all know he would be cited.

In a recent European game, I think, in commentary they used Alfie’s “reputation” for going down easy as a reason he didn’t get a decision. How wild is that. Alfie has a reputation for diving and Edouard doesn’t. Yet who is guilty of the more frequent and more absurd acts of simulation?

Their agenda contributes to Morelos getting cited for things and Edouard getting away with everything and not “having a reputation“ that they use to castigate Alfie.

It would be naive to ignore the influence the press have had on the CO/trial by tv system we have in Scotland and how it has negatively impacted Rangers and benefitted Celtic.

That is why.

What I don’t understand though, is those who would wage a spirited defence of someone who has a hand in setting an agenda that contributes to damaging Rangers.

We all know if Alfie did identical dives to Edouard yesterday Barbour, Walker and Crocker would be leading the furore to have him cited. And we all know he would be cited.

In a recent European game, I think, in commentary they used Alfie’s “reputation” for going down easy as a reason he didn’t get a decision. How wild is that. Alfie has a reputation for diving and Edouard doesn’t. Yet who is guilty of the more frequent and more absurd acts of simulation?

'spirited defence'?
Mate.
A lot of what you say could be true, and is your opinion, which I totally respect.
But in the grand scheme of things ...we had the last laugh, and in the grand scheme, it doesn't matter what they think.In fact it make them look even more embittered.Especially MON who in my opinion was very disrespectful to Boyd, and McFadden.
Just embarrassed himself once again on TV.

But again... it won't change a thing.
The result yesterday stands, and the result who won the league is in the history books.
Nothing will ever change those facts.

 

[Duranman]

Did she go to a non denominational school?

 

[Jonathan E]

She might be a St Johnstone fan, but so is Stuart Cosgrove.

The Diddy Alliance (Tartan Army) claim they hate Rangers and Celtic equally, but for the most part, they hate one club more equally than the other.

 

[Marstonbear]

Their agenda contributes to Morelos getting cited for things and Edouard getting away with everything and not “having a reputation“ that they use to castigate Alfie.

It would be naive to ignore the influence the press have had on the CO/trial by tv system we have in Scotland and how it has negatively impacted Rangers and benefitted Celtic.

That is why.

What I don’t understand though, is those who would wage a spirited defence of someone who has a hand in setting an agenda that contributes to damaging Rangers.

We all know if Alfie did identical dives to Edouard yesterday Barbour, Walker and Crocker would be leading the furore to have him cited. And we all know he would be cited.

In a recent European game, I think, in commentary they used Alfie’s “reputation” for going down easy as a reason he didn’t get a decision. How wild is that. Alfie has a reputation for diving and Edouard doesn’t. Yet who is guilty of the more frequent and more absurd acts of simulation?

The time they were on about Alfie’s reputation was the Beaton no pen decision v Livi.

 

[Boydy's Pearly Whites]

McCoist doesn't really push the Rangers perspective, trying too hard to be neutral.

Boyd fighting a lone fight v about 5 of them.

That's the difference between professionalism and rabid yahooism .
Boyd gives a big grin and a chuckle now and again and it sees him sidelined for a couple of games ...
This needs changed for next season because Alfie will have no chance if he's still here .

 

[BSPECIAL]

I'd give her a drunk boabying

 

[JD65]

Perth

So she’s no a peh eater...

 

[Tailwind]

'spirited defence'?
Mate.
A lot of what you say could be true, and is your opinion, which I totally respect.
But in the grand scheme of things ...we had the last laugh, and in the grand scheme, it doesn't matter what they think.In fact it make them look even more embittered.Especially MON who in my opinion was very disrespectful to Boyd, and McFadden.
Just embarrassed himself once again on TV.

But again... it won't change a thing.
The result yesterday stands, and the result who won the league is in the history books.
Nothing will ever change those facts.

The spirited defence comments weren’t aimed at you, for clarity.

 

[Tailwind]

The time they were on about Alfie’s reputation was the Beaton no pen decision v Livi.

My mistake. Thanks for putting me right.

May have got the game/team wrong, but the overall point is still valid.

Thanks to the likes of Barbour , Crocker, Walker and their ilk in our media Alfie has a “reputation” for diving when a far worse perpetrator like Edouard flies under the radar for his acts of simulation. In large part because of the narrative perpetuated by Sky and their employees.

 

[Tailwind]

That's the difference between professionalism and rabid yahooism .
Boyd gives a big grin and a chuckle now and again and it sees him sidelined for a couple of games ...
This needs changed for next season because Alfie will have no chance if he's still here .

Like you say, Boyd clearly favours Rangers. But he never takes absurdly biased views on incidents involving Rangers. If a decision objectively should have gone for or against us he will say so. Again, the triple threat of C, W and B will never do that.

Boyd clearly favours us with smiles when they get a shit result. But he tries to call everything impartially and professionally. On Sky, he is just about alone in that regard (McFadden appeared fair this weekend).

 

[gilliangers]

Clearly in the minority but i think she’s lovely.

Low Standards for a Bear?

 

[Tailwind]

Low Standards for a Bear?

Never mind that cnut turning her to women, if she was the best I could do I’d have to take a look at my chances with men!

 

[Brant Hurley]

Barbour is no friend of RFC. All I ask is fairness. Her h/t attempt to generate controversy was a) naive bordering stupid or b) playing Celtc's victim mantra. Not sure I care which.

 

[Laudrup11Cooper]

The spirited defence comments weren’t aimed at you, for clarity.

I know ...it’s cool.

 

[Laudrup11Cooper]

If Barbour had said it wasn’t a penalty, she would have been praised to the skies.
Anyone remember this little gem?
Don’t see any anti Rangers stuff here!
I think she set it up for Boydy perfectly ...on a plate!!

Approx 1:15