Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2024/25

[Jinky67]

1 minute ago, DukDukGoose said:

VAR could easily tell the referee to go watch that decision on the monitor.

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? 

[Jinky67]

11 minutes ago, AJF said:

I never said that’s why a foul was given, I said that’s why Morelos scored - he missed the ball.

As I said before, it’s a minority view that a foul was committed and the goal should’ve been disallowed.

Your claims that the referee and SFA believe it was a foul bears no weight considering the amount of times you’ve disagreed with decisions this season.

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

Edited April 11, 2023 by Jinky67

[Jinky67]

8 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

It’s a general point, it applies beyond the old firm. We’re talking about a fairly marginal decision being used as the reason for a result going one way. 

A ref being sent death threats, a club happy for their own failings to be deflected onto a referees mistake. 

We absolutely sleepwalked into thinking VAR was a worthwhile investment. 

And I couldn’t possibly comment on your sexuality. If you are, I’m sure it’s because you’ve chosen to wait for the right person. 

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 

Edited April 11, 2023 by Jinky67

[Dons_1988]

1 minute ago, Jinky67 said:

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 

That’s really not the bottom line of the point I was making, but you do you jinky. 

[AJF]

1 minute ago, Jinky67 said:

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  

I never said you were alone, just pointing out that using the stance that the referee deemed it a foul and the SFA agreed as some kind of definitive evidence that it was a foul is futile.

[Jinky67]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

That’s really not the bottom line of the point I was making, but you do you jinky. 

I always do, thanks for your blessing though 

[Jinky67]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

I never said you were alone, just pointing out that using the stance that the referee deemed it a foul and the SFA agreed as some kind of definitive evidence that it was a foul is futile.

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

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

I always do, thanks for your blessing though 

No need to bring religion into it. I’m not playing your games. 

[Jinky67]

2 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

No need to bring religion into it. I’m not playing your games. 

Not even on my birthday? 

[Henrik's tongue]

7 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

No need to bring religion into it. I’m not playing your games. 

Aye alright, bennett. 

[AJF]

6 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

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

I am meaning that it is futile that you are using it as definitive evidence that decision is correct when you have disagreed with plenty decisions made by officials this season. If you are implying that any decision made by an official is accurate then you concede that you've been wrong to criticise any decision made in the past this season.

[DukDukGoose]

27 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

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? 

Nice strawman there.

Did you see what happened with the Brighton game this weekend? VAR makes errors, funnily enough.

[Jinky67]

7 minutes ago, DukDukGoose said:

Nice strawman there.

Did you see what happened with the Brighton game this weekend? VAR makes errors, funnily enough.

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

Edited April 11, 2023 by Jinky67

[Jinky67]

13 minutes ago, AJF said:

I am meaning that it is futile that you are using it as definitive evidence that decision is correct when you have disagreed with plenty decisions made by officials this season. If you are implying that any decision made by an official is accurate then you concede that you've been wrong to criticise any decision made in the past this season.

So I’ll ask again what is definitive evidence?

[AJF]

6 minutes ago, Jinky67 said:

So I’ll ask again what is definitive evidence?

There is none. It's subjective and no matter how hard you or I try to convince each other, we both have separate opinions and we both feel the other person is wrong in their view.

I've put my reasons across as to why I don't believe it was a foul and you've done the same for holding an opposing view.

Edited April 11, 2023 by AJF

[Molotov]

12 minutes ago, DukDukGoose said:

Nice strawman there.

Did you see what happened with the Brighton game this weekend? VAR makes errors, funnily enough.

Only big teams get the dodgy VAR decisions?

What you are saying is that Celtic are bigger than Rangers 2012?  

Morelos and Kent are both cheating b*****ds. Scottish football will be well rid of when they leave for nothing at the end of their contracts. 

£7M on Kent? Was that the fee? What a waste.

[kingjoey]

3 hours ago, Jinky67 said:

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

So in one breath you're saying that the Scottish referees governing body should have publicly said that the decision was wrong, and in the next you're saying that you can understand why it has been given? 

Interesting. 

[Drew Brees]

7 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

So in one breath you're saying that the Scottish referees governing body should have publicly said that the decision was wrong, and in the next you're saying that you can understand why it has been given? 

Interesting. 

Maybe read it again. 

[Jinky67]

1 hour ago, kingjoey said:

So in one breath you're saying that the Scottish referees governing body should have publicly said that the decision was wrong, and in the next you're saying that you can understand why it has been given? 

Interesting. 

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

[kingjoey]

2 hours ago, Drew Brees said:

Maybe read it again. 

My reading mistake.