Sportscene Tonight

[Turrabear]

The frustration is TB, why did the club think something would change ?

Why did they back down with no hard evidence to show THE BBC had changed ?

No sackings, etc despite acknowledging bias.

I was angry at the compromise we agreed, and yesterday shows why.

To be honest grigo I have often wondered why the club let th bbc in .what was said to the club to make them change their minds .the apology was one part but surely there was more to it than that.

 

[Turrabear]

They never were banned...skeletor heid was the bbc refused to send any reporters until he was allowed in.

Yes I know that mate .I was merely quoting the poster I replied to.

 

[Chester Loyal]

I just watched the whole programme and can’t believe how amateurish it is.

I also can’t believe that Miller and Stewart both said those two tackles in the st Johnstone v Hibs game weren't red cards.

 

[Main Stand]

I quite like sportscene, but wtf was that opening all about?

 

[Grigo Yossarian]

To be honest mate did you actually expect anything to change. The BBC sports department is still full of Rangers haters.

The frustration is TB, why did the club think something would change ?

Why did they back down with no hard evidence to show THE BBC had changed ?

No sackings, etc despite acknowledging bias.

I was angry at the compromise we agreed, and yesterday shows why.

To be honest grigo I have often wondered why the club let th bbc in .what was said to the club to make them change their minds .the apology was one part but surely there was more to it than that.

I couldn’t see what we got out of it mate. Even their so called apology wasn’t what I’d have deemed one.

This has been going on for many years, and was institutional TB.

All of those who CHOSE to carry it out are all still there.

 

[Grommitt]

I have submitted a complaint via the BBC website.

For the first time in years, solely due to BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers Football Club, I watched Sportscene.

The discussion after the replay of the Livingston v Rangers match was in my view biased. This being due its omission of important discussion points from the match.

The replay did not show Livingston player Cancar's first yellow card or the foul that most viewers and pundits viewed as a second yellow card offence which would have led to a red card. The Livingston manager knowing his player was on extremely shaky ground substituted him almost immediately after this event. A first-half substitution in such circumstances is a talk-worthy point, but your editors chose not even to show any of this, and your presenters and pundits made no mention of these notable events either.

We were then treated to much discussion and repeated footage of a disallowed Livingston 'goal' for which the referee had already blown for a foul before the ball was put into the net.

Prior to that disallowed 'goal' Rangers had had a goal chalked off themselves in dubious circumstances. To many in the ground, and to many viewers, that refereeing decision was controversial. Exactly the sort of match event one would expect to be discussed by your pundits post match. But... nothing! Silence!

BBC Scotland's presentation came across to me like it was manufactured to give an 'Ooh, look at lucky Rangers' feel.

At the time of BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers, I thought that it was done solely for the purpose of ending its self-embarrassment at its own pathetic stance on Rangers. I now firmly believe this to be the case.

I have no expectation that BBC Scotland will give Rangers fair, impartial or balanced coverage. As such, I will not be watching any future BBC Scotland coverage (live or highlights) of Rangers, and will also not listen to radio output or view any BBC Scotland website journalism. Enough is enough!

 

[gilf]

For the first time in years, solely due to BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers Football Club, I watched Sportscene.

The discussion after the replay of the Livingston v Rangers match was in my view biased. This being due its omission of important discussion points from the match.

The replay did not show Livingston player Cancar's first yellow card or the foul that most viewers and pundits viewed as a second yellow card offence which would have led to a red card. The Livingston manager knowing his player was on extremely shaky ground substituted him almost immediately after this event. A first-half substitution in such circumstances is a talk-worthy point, but your editors chose not even to show any of this, and your presenters and pundits made no mention of these notable events either.

We were then treated to much discussion and repeated footage of a disallowed Livingston 'goal' for which the referee had already blown for a foul before the ball was put into the net.

Prior to that disallowed 'goal' Rangers had had a goal chalked off themselves in dubious circumstances. To many in the ground, and to many viewers, that refereeing decision was controversial. Exactly the sort of match event one would expect to be discussed by your pundits post match. But... nothing! Silence!

BBC Scotland's presentation came across to me like it was manufactured to give an 'Ooh, look at lucky Rangers' feel.

At the time of BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers, I thought that it was done solely for the purpose of ending its self-embarrassment at its own pathetic stance on Rangers. I now firmly believe this to be the case.

I have no expectation that BBC Scotland will give Rangers fair, impartial or balanced coverage. As such, I will not be watching any future BBC Scotland coverage (live or highlights) of Rangers, and will also not listen to radio output or view any BBC Scotland website journalism. Enough is enough!

Not being funny, but did you state that you wished this to be taken as a formal complaint? If not, they almost certainly will not do so.

 

[Turrabear]

I have submitted a complaint via the BBC website.

For the first time in years, solely due to BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers Football Club, I watched Sportscene.

The discussion after the replay of the Livingston v Rangers match was in my view biased. This being due its omission of important discussion points from the match.

The replay did not show Livingston player Cancar's first yellow card or the foul that most viewers and pundits viewed as a second yellow card offence which would have led to a red card. The Livingston manager knowing his player was on extremely shaky ground substituted him almost immediately after this event. A first-half substitution in such circumstances is a talk-worthy point, but your editors chose not even to show any of this, and your presenters and pundits made no mention of these notable events either.

We were then treated to much discussion and repeated footage of a disallowed Livingston 'goal' for which the referee had already blown for a foul before the ball was put into the net.

Prior to that disallowed 'goal' Rangers had had a goal chalked off themselves in dubious circumstances. To many in the ground, and to many viewers, that refereeing decision was controversial. Exactly the sort of match event one would expect to be discussed by your pundits post match. But... nothing! Silence!

BBC Scotland's presentation came across to me like it was manufactured to give an 'Ooh, look at lucky Rangers' feel.

At the time of BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers, I thought that it was done solely for the purpose of ending its self-embarrassment at its own pathetic stance on Rangers. I now firmly believe this to be the case.

I have no expectation that BBC Scotland will give Rangers fair, impartial or balanced coverage. As such, I will not be watching any future BBC Scotland coverage (live or highlights) of Rangers, and will also not listen to radio output or view any BBC Scotland website journalism. Enough is enough!

Well said sir.

 

[50delboy50]

To be honest mate did you actually expect anything to change. The BBC sports department is still full of Rangers haters.

Thought they might have made a effort for at least 1 game .

 

[Grommitt]

Not being funny, but did you state that you wished this to be taken as a formal complaint? If not, they almost certainly will not do so.

I submitted my complaint via their online complaints process. I clicked the 'Yes' box for the 'Do you want a response?' question.

There was no option throughout the process to declare it 'formal' or not. I filled in the forms, made my complaint and requested a response. What else was I supposed to do?

 

[Professor Yaffle]

The BBC are paedo hiding scum and not fit for purpose.

 

[EC54]

I have submitted a complaint via the BBC website.

For the first time in years, solely due to BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers Football Club, I watched Sportscene.

The discussion after the replay of the Livingston v Rangers match was in my view biased. This being due its omission of important discussion points from the match.

The replay did not show Livingston player Cancar's first yellow card or the foul that most viewers and pundits viewed as a second yellow card offence which would have led to a red card. The Livingston manager knowing his player was on extremely shaky ground substituted him almost immediately after this event. A first-half substitution in such circumstances is a talk-worthy point, but your editors chose not even to show any of this, and your presenters and pundits made no mention of these notable events either.

We were then treated to much discussion and repeated footage of a disallowed Livingston 'goal' for which the referee had already blown for a foul before the ball was put into the net.

Prior to that disallowed 'goal' Rangers had had a goal chalked off themselves in dubious circumstances. To many in the ground, and to many viewers, that refereeing decision was controversial. Exactly the sort of match event one would expect to be discussed by your pundits post match. But... nothing! Silence!

BBC Scotland's presentation came across to me like it was manufactured to give an 'Ooh, look at lucky Rangers' feel.

At the time of BBC Scotland's apology to Rangers, I thought that it was done solely for the purpose of ending its self-embarrassment at its own pathetic stance on Rangers. I now firmly believe this to be the case.

I have no expectation that BBC Scotland will give Rangers fair, impartial or balanced coverage. As such, I will not be watching any future BBC Scotland coverage (live or highlights) of Rangers, and will also not listen to radio output or view any BBC Scotland website journalism. Enough is enough!

Excellent and it's something our club should be onto in a flash as well. They should be asking why are we still not getting an unbiased review of our games despite your recent apology. Nothing has changed.

 

[Vince]

Once more they try to project the narrative that Rangers are benefiting from decisions - even in games where the biggest decisions are actually going against us. This narrative is to protect refs from criticism who are serial offenders to the Rangers cause - and also create and project a narrative that puts pressure on neutral refs to give decisions against us.

They are a clique of Rangers haters who can’t be impartial. Thats who our club have got involved with again!

 

[Cooperfan]

That's why I'm confused. Livi's "disallowed goal" doesn't happen if the whistle isn't blown. Our players stopped as the whistle blew. I'm sure McLaughlin made no attempt at a fairly easy ball.

Exactly.