The Referree / Var thread..

[LoganRoy]

1 minute ago, RDFH64 said:

If/when it happens it’ll probably be when rangers are 3 goals up so it doesn’t matter.

Aberdeen had two blatant penalties turned down in the recent cup final, the first one was for a far bigger & obvious shirt pull than the one var gave rangers at the last pittodrie game. 
I await your explanation on that.

 

The only people who can explain it are the referees and the SFA.  Due to a lack of accountability and zero output to explain these, it means fans jump on the conspiracy bandwagon.

In truth, the Aberdeen one should have been a penalty in the Cup Final if we go by other shirt pulls.  People saying the ball wasn't near, why should it matter if it is or not.

The PL do a show where they explain ref decisions and release the audio.  I'd say it would be good to do it up here, but I suspect some of the cringe we've heard would be 100x worse up here.  

Penalty to Celtic Saturday is a great bet to put on.

[RDFH64]

57 minutes ago, LoganRoy said:

 

The only people who can explain it are the referees and the SFA.  Due to a lack of accountability and zero output to explain these, it means fans jump on the conspiracy bandwagon.

In truth, the Aberdeen one should have been a penalty in the Cup Final if we go by other shirt pulls.  People saying the ball wasn't near, why should it matter if it is or not.

The PL do a show where they explain ref decisions and release the audio.  I'd say it would be good to do it up here, but I suspect some of the cringe we've heard would be 100x worse up here.  

Penalty to Celtic Saturday is a great bet to put on.

Would love to hear the conversation between ref & var during a rangers penalty review.

penalty review for other team - var to ref “nothing to look at there so no penalty to the diddy team”.

penalty review for rangers- var to ref “nothing to look at there so penalty to rangers, WATP”

[LoganRoy]

1 hour ago, RDFH64 said:

Would love to hear the conversation between ref & var during a rangers penalty review.

penalty review for other team - var to ref “nothing to look at there so no penalty to the diddy team”.

penalty review for rangers- var to ref “nothing to look at there so penalty to rangers, WATP”

😂😂 the thing is, people genuinely believe that is what happens.  

[Diamond Scot]

4 hours ago, N4Footsoldier said:

I wasn't sure what to expect on this thread but honestly I just look forward to the next penalty against Rangers whether deserved or not just so everyone can stop banging on about it and move on to the next thing that serves as apparently irrevocable evidence that Scottish Football is a wider masonic conspiracy.

As for the VAR process, we know ourselves from every other league that applies it that it is highly imperfect. The concept of "clear and obvious" is something they need to look at to get right, which will come from IFAB and filter through every association. Honestly I think VAR does actually work 9/10 times and no one ever remembers the times when it comes in useful, just the minority of incidents that are debatable, although it should be 100% effective, there are still humans behind the technology who can make mistakes whether on the technical side or just out of misjudgment. We really don't have the transparency at present to understand what they are using it for.

Take the Motherwell penalty appeal from Sunday. Any number of factors could lead to it not being a penalty such as handball in the build up, O'Donnell kicking Butland in the head while trying to get the loose ball, or the fact that in no way should the Motherwell player have gone down like that with his legs totally giving way at just a tiny tug on the arm. This would have been run through the ref's earpiece.

Honestly I think the next step for the VAR process would be transparency on the comms in real time, like rugby for example. They are trying to introduce it in England with Howard Webb on TV after the fact, but the overall refereeing community I'm not sure has a level of comfort yet with that type of transparency. Especially because football as a game has such subjective judgment-based rules versus other sports, not to mention the terrible ethos within football towards officials from the grassroots up, and to be honest the level of self importance that does exist within football officials to the point they just don't come across like real people, are all factors that block any progress here.

A big part of the problem is alot of people in the game who arent refs are absolute idiots so having more transparency doesnt help.

The fact that co commentators dont know the basic rules of the game, thsrefore feeding misinformation to the viewers. Then you have people like Paul Merson who I watched a bit of footage recently when they had an ex ref and they were reviewing VAR decisions so far this season and the ref was explaning them / saying whether he thought were correct etc. There was one where the ref explained that the laws dictate that the decision was the only one the ref could provide. Merson starts shouting about common sense, the ref then says well yes but the laws would need to be changed first as refs cant just apply common sense if its against the laws. Merson then starts ripping the mickey out of the ref saying, its football, not the laws of the country, refs wont go to jail etc. The ref was then trying to explain what should be obvious to anybody in football that refs cant just make stuff up as they go along or it would lead to chaos but Merson wasnt having it.

Everyone involved in football needs to improve in order for the game to improve.

[N4Footsoldier]

17 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

A big part of the problem is alot of people in the game who arent refs are absolute idiots so having more transparency doesnt help.

The fact that co commentators dont know the basic rules of the game, thsrefore feeding misinformation to the viewers. Then you have people like Paul Merson who I watched a bit of footage recently when they had an ex ref and they were reviewing VAR decisions so far this season and the ref was explaning them / saying whether he thought were correct etc. There was one where the ref explained that the laws dictate that the decision was the only one the ref could provide. Merson starts shouting about common sense, the ref then says well yes but the laws would need to be changed first as refs cant just apply common sense if its against the laws. Merson then starts ripping the mickey out of the ref saying, its football, not the laws of the country, refs wont go to jail etc. The ref was then trying to explain what should be obvious to anybody in football that refs cant just make stuff up as they go along or it would lead to chaos but Merson wasnt having it.

Everyone involved in football needs to improve in order for the game to improve.

I think this is all spot on, back to the point on football ethos. Not only do people generally not have a clue what the rules and application of rules are, they have no interest in trying to understand to bridge the gap.

Headlines over dodgy decisions and controversy is a staple item for the media which drives click rates, newspaper purchases etc and in general is part of the money making machine that is the football industry. And no one in any position of influence who benefits from said commercialism really has any motivation to try and make things better in this regard as long as the gravy train keeps running.

[vanderark14]

Hearing the conversations between ref and VAR room and having the ref miked up so viewers and fans can hear would solve a lot of problems

[LoganRoy]

2 hours ago, vanderark14 said:

Hearing the conversations between ref and VAR room and having the ref miked up so viewers and fans can hear would solve a lot of problems

It would lead to another paranoia; no doubt its all scripted or prerecorded...

[dan cake]

Nick Montgomery was ment to be miked up for the derby but it was blocked at the last minute, one of the reasons being for betting purposes. Apparently bookies weren’t happy that punters would be privy to early information regarding substitutions etc

[slasher]

On 12/27/2023 at 1:37 PM, Redz said:

Quite - It needs to be transparent - That, or vote with feet 

It's a closed shop, and obvious to anyone that they do not give one fuck what supporters think

The silence from DC & AB when they should be all over these clear inconsistencies from an AFC perspective (Cheating? I'm now in that camp) is galling

My ST / DNA cost will enhance our holiday spending pot from here on in until something positive (For all clubs) changes

Totally agree my friend.

I only saw the Duk/Goldson incident a day or two after but it’s one of the worst I’ve seen, I’m surprised DC left it to his manager he should’ve been all over it 👍

[slasher]

On 12/28/2023 at 6:09 PM, vanderark14 said:

Hearing the conversations between ref and VAR room and having the ref miked up so viewers and fans can hear would solve a lot of problems

I can confirm that Willie Collum said ‘up the ra’ after reviewing The Rangers erroneous penalty claim. 🤔

[slasher]

I did say to all the troops in the lead up to today ‘we’d beat the huns and then probably lose in Paisley.’ 
 

Hopefully half right 🤣

[RDFH64]

Their brass neck & arrogance knows no bounds, why haven’t they demanded var audio recordings be released of the numerous dodgy var decisions that have gone their way since var started.

[vanderark14]

1 hour ago, RDFH64 said:

Their brass neck & arrogance knows no bounds, why haven’t they demanded var audio recordings be released of the numerous dodgy var decisions that have gone their way since var started.

Why are sky unhappy and why are they speaking to rangers about it?

The SFA and SPFL reaction to this has to be to approach sky and ask what the fuck this has to do with them and to tell rangers to shut their fucking mouths

[RDFH64]

52 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

Why are sky unhappy and why are they speaking to rangers about it?

The SFA and SPFL reaction to this has to be to approach sky and ask what the fuck this has to do with them and to tell rangers to shut their fucking mouths

By sky being unhappy they mean the worlds most eloquent & impartial expert on all things football (Rangers) related the honourable sir Chris Boyd of Govan.

Edited December 31, 2023 by RDFH64

[Diamond Scot]

3 hours ago, RDFH64 said:

Their brass neck & arrogance knows no bounds, why haven’t they demanded var audio recordings be released of the numerous dodgy var decisions that have gone their way since var started.

Why would they? Rangers are only doing what all clubs should be. They are challenging / seeking clarity on a decision that they feel has gone against them.

Maybe if all clubs took the same approach and had more of a backbone / stopped rolling over at boardroom level then refs wouldnt find it so easy to give these questionable decisions against the non OF clubs.

[dan cake]

49 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Why would they? Rangers are only doing what all clubs should be. They are challenging / seeking clarity on a decision that they feel has gone against them.

Maybe if all clubs took the same approach and had more of a backbone / stopped rolling over at boardroom level then refs wouldnt find it so easy to give these questionable decisions against the non OF clubs.

Good post, folk are letting their hatred of the stickies cloud the issue.  Rangers are 100% in the right here (can’t believe I’m saying that)

[Redz]

44 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Why would they? Rangers are only doing what all clubs should be. They are challenging / seeking clarity on a decision that they feel has gone against them.

Maybe if all clubs took the same approach and had more of a backbone / stopped rolling over at boardroom level then refs wouldnt find it so easy to give these questionable decisions against the non OF clubs.

Agreed

Go public as often as it takes to resolve this shitshow (Ironically, it's the club who benefits most who are getting their crayons out again)

Zero sympathy for the authorities, they've tied themselves in knots attempting to 'look after' some, but not all

[Redz]

1 minute ago, dan cake said:

Good post, folk are letting their hatred of the stickies cloud the issue.  Rangers are 100% in the right here (can’t believe I’m saying that)

👍

[Fairbairn]

So, when contentious decisions go in Rangers favour the clubs on the receiving end should be demanding answers and sharpening the pitchforks but when contentious decisions go against Rangers we’re supposed to just shut the fuck up? Right you are. No double standards there at all. 

[Redz]

That's not what the last 3 posts have said at all

[Big Ramy 1314]

52 minutes ago, Fairbairn said:

So, when contentious decisions go in Rangers favour the clubs on the receiving end should be demanding answers and sharpening the pitchforks but when contentious decisions go against Rangers we’re supposed to just shut the fuck up? Right you are. No double standards there at all. 

Happy New Year big man.... 😂🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿

[Big Ramy 1314]

1 hour ago, dan cake said:

Good post, folk are letting their hatred of the stickies cloud the issue.  Rangers are 100% in the right here (can’t believe I’m saying that)

Are they fuck !! Greetin faced bastards they are..  How many decisions have gone their way ?????  Fuck them !!!!

[vanderark14]

1 hour ago, Fairbairn said:

So, when contentious decisions go in Rangers favour the clubs on the receiving end should be demanding answers and sharpening the pitchforks but when contentious decisions go against Rangers we’re supposed to just shut the fuck up? Right you are. No double standards there at all. 

Contentious? It wasn't contentious at all. 

 

2 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Why would they? Rangers are only doing what all clubs should be. They are challenging / seeking clarity on a decision that they feel has gone against them.

Maybe if all clubs took the same approach and had more of a backbone / stopped rolling over at boardroom level then refs wouldnt find it so easy to give these questionable decisions against the non OF clubs.

If we are talking about a very dubious decision I would understand, however this isn't contentious at all. This is Rangers pandering to the brain dead part of their support to cover for their loss yesterday. They lost because their striker is pish and couldn't score with a barrow load of fannies. 

This is not a good move by Rangers, staying quiet for once would be the right move, pick a fight where there is one. They could be opening a can of worms which could go against them.

[Big Ramy 1314]

1 minute ago, vanderark14 said:

Contentious? It wasn't contentious at all. 

 

If we are talking about a very dubious decision I would understand, however this isn't contentious at all. This is Rangers pandering to the brain dead part of their support to cover for their loss yesterday. They lost because their striker is pish and couldn't score with a barrow load of fannies. 

This is not a good move by Rangers, staying quiet for once would be the right move, pick a fight where there is one. They could be opening a can of worms which could go against them.

Great post ! 👍

[Fairbairn]

8 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

Contentious? It wasn't contentious at all. 

 

I’m sorry but that’s just nonsense. If that penalty shout and then the manner and reasoning of the offside decision had went in Rangers favour against Aberdeen, you and a few other Dons on here would have been, rightly, moaning about it for a couple of days at least.