Jinky67

What was reported originally is that this was an agreement by both clubs so this is contradictory to that and after Beales remarks about unrestricted budgets and making up handballs then I’m inclined to think he is just saying what his fans want to hear as it deflects away from coming up short …. again. You will disagree and eat from the palm of his hand which is your prerogative. Tbf I thought this may play into Rangers hands as they tended to do better in front of no fans https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/23394158.old-firm-fan-ban-rangers-celtic-make-away-support-call/ It has been agreed by both clubs that this was the best way forward and a joint decision has been reached that will once again dramatically change the sight and sound of derby day in Glasgow after issues at both stadia in recent campaigns. Earlier this month, Rangers fan Alan Crawford pleaded guilty to throwing a bottle at Celtic physio Daniel Friel, who needed four stitches and has been left with a scar on his scalp, during the Ibrox fixture last April. Rangers were 'disappointed' with the police response during the 1-1 draw at Parkhead last May and stated their fans were 'left unprotected as they were attacked by bottles and other missiles' amid injuries to elderly and disabled supporters. And the situation regarding ingress and egress at Parkhead remains an issue for Rangers as away fans are forced to gather two hours ahead of kick-off and remain in the stadium for a prolonged period post-match. It is understood that the decision to ban away supporters has now been taken in order to provide time to find solutions to sort out various arrangements at both stadia.

But again we are just right back to discussing why we are in this position in the first place and that’s because Dave King decided to “flex” and reduce allocations by 6/7k.

Key sentence in there was he was led to believe it was Celtic call so in other words he doesn’t actually know since he wasn’t privvy to the negotiations. There is no secret as to why there is reduced allocations and lockouts, Mikey just needs to open his eyes for once and stop lapping up what his paymasters tell him as gospel. He’s on a hiding to nothing this guy.

It’s conversation mate, it’s what happens on a forum when a subject interests you and the subject matter today since it was to do with our game at the weekend (I assume you watched, did you enjoy it?) it interested me as it was to do with my team and essentially a continuation of the main talking points from the match thread. The fact it irks you is of no concern to me #25

But I was reading it, but you knew that already But since you now have my attention is there something you need?

That’s what notifications from following threads are for mate and secondly why wouldn’t I be reading through the thread considering I’ve been posting in it the last few days? I mean you are reading through so why wouldn’t I?

But there isn’t a day that goes by that you don’t name drop me to try get my attention

Nope what I said is they have publicly backed Clancy which they have

Not going myself but shared your Twitter page on our bus group chat, hopefully you get some donations

So I’ll ask again what is definitive evidence?

It does yes because VAR is still operated by people and that degree of subjectivity is still in play. The difference between the 2 is they looked at the Brighton one again and the PGMOL agreed it was wrong, that isn’t the case here where the referees onfield decision has been looked at again and he has been backed by our governing body. They could easily have said no this one was wrong but they seem to be staunchly defending the decision (pun intended) I’ve already said it’s soft but I can understand why it has been given too. It’s a situation where a case is easily made for both

Not even on my birthday?

How is it futile if fundamentally they are the decision makers or what in your opinion is definitive evidence?

I always do, thanks for your blessing though

The bottom line is that Kevin Clancy didn’t cost them the result. The mistakes made by James Tavernier, Ben Davies, John Souttar and Allan McGregor did. That seems to be getting brushed over though

I have disagreed with many decisions yes and I’d guess probably close to 100% of those are to do with the application of the handball laws and how inconsistent this seems to be but I’m far from being alone in my bemusement at some of these both for and against us may I add

They could if they felt it was a clear and obvious error which they clearly didn’t. This shouldn’t be hard to understand and bear in mind the final decision is the refs and he can say no and stand by his original call. I thought we were all against VAR refereeing matches which is what you seem to be advocating for here?

Andy Walker lol And pundits don’t operate VAR mate so maybe the first thing to do is understand what VAR can and can’t correct

Thats your interpretation of it mate and one that is clearly very different to that of AJ, Kevin Clancy, the VAR officials and the SFA themselves as well as quite a few posters on here. In fact you are the only person I’ve seen anywhere to suggest a foul was given because AJ dived to head the ball I could almost backstroke in the volume of tears because of this incident

A push is a foul if he believes the player got an advantage and considering Morelos scores that is clearly gaining an advantage. And like I said VAR won’t correct it as it isn’t a clear and obvious mistake based on what he called the foul for. Again you don’t have to like it but that is how it is and how VAR is applied

You just said you saw a push which is a foul yeah? The referee can’t see AJ’s arm so can’t see or call that so he calls what he sees which is the push by fatty as you eloquently describe. VAR can’t change it as what he calls the foul for isn’t a clear and obvious error. People don’t have to like it but it’s what we decided to bring into the game

Sorry mate but saying that Livi one is a foul even if it was for Nouble and then maintaining the Morelos one isn’t suggests otherwise.

Someone has to be

It’s entirely relevant because you seem to want the benefit of every soft decision to go in your favour

Fucked it? Absolutely not and if he had VAR would have told him to go look at it if it was clear and obvious that he fucked it. Is it soft? Yes but I’ve always said that but for it to be soft there has to be some degree of fouling in the first instance which there was Would it have surprised me if the goal was given? No but I’ll take it for the Goldson handball we didn’t get and consider karma restored