Do Rangers get a "free pass" from referees?

[G51]

4 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

The only objective way to look at is by looking at which team has had the most retrospective decisions made against their players. The referee has therefore made an error. So the answer is yes.

But that's only objective if you assume that the retrospective disciplinary system picks up every potential red-card offence and cites players for them. It doesn't do that. Therefore this is not an objective method of evaluating refereeing conspiracies.

[Ric]

Interesting that wee Benny would rather throw around the insults than address the issue at hand. Funny that.

Edited February 4, 2021 by Ric

[gannonball]

16 minutes ago, AJF said:

I think the issue is mainly a by-product of the added coverage and scrutiny that Rangers (and Celtic) receive from the press and broadcasters.

There are contentious decisions in almost every single match on a weekly basis. If anyone is trying to imply that only contentious decisions given in favour of Rangers (or Celtic) are biased whereas contentious decisions given in favour of other teams isn't biased, then I think they are mistaken.

There is an element of truth to this. You hear about ‘trial by sportscene’ from folk on here complaining about the added scrutiny when playing either of us. This in turn gives a higher chance of being cited by the compliance officer. However you could argue that surely its less favourable to us as the scrutiny is every week. Again Im not suggesting any bias here its just the way Scottish football is.

[Orbix]

It’s clear that the compliance officer doesn’t watch every game, and that contentious decisions are only investigated after being highlighted by the media. Because of the larger amount of coverage the Old Firm receive, and the general incompetency of our refs,  the more their incidents (and incidents against them) are looked at, the more opportunity for things to be overturned, the more it appears they’re favoured on the pitch.

 

I’d argue that both Rangers and Celtic suffer from their opponents being under-refereed in some games, with refs giving allowances for tackles based on differences in talent level to even things up. Look at the Aberdeen games for an example.

[Dons_1988]

Who knew it would come full circle to the OF being the real victims in all this 

 

[Alert Mongoose]

5 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Is it really Rangers?

A table with that detail would be illuminating.

As follows post 2010;

Rangers*  17

Celtic  4

Aberdeen  2

Livingston  2

Hearts 1

The remainder are on 0.

 

[Leith Green]

1 minute ago, Alert Mongoose said:

As follows post 2010;

Rangers*  17

Celtic  4

Aberdeen  2

Livingston  2

Hearts 1

The remainder are on 0.

 

I think its a disgrace that The Rangers are being singled out like this by the Celtic minded SFA.

SNP / Papal conspiracy etc etc etc...............

[AJF]

2 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

As follows post 2010;

Rangers*  17

Celtic  4

Aberdeen  2

Livingston  2

Hearts 1

The remainder are on 0.

 

If correct, I think this highlights the flaws of the disciplinary system. It's ludicrous to believe that only 5 teams have "gotten away with one" during a match since 2010.

[Dons_1988]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

If correct, I think this highlights the flaws of the disciplinary system. It's ludicrous to believe that only 5 teams have "gotten away with one" during a match since 2010.

It is obviously to do with media coverage. Off the top of my head I know one of ours was Scott Mckenna against Celtic because Brendan Rodgers had a cry about it.

[coprolite]

8 minutes ago, Orbix said:

It’s clear that the compliance officer doesn’t watch every game, and that contentious decisions are only investigated after being highlighted by the media. Because of the larger amount of coverage the Old Firm receive, and the general incompetency of our refs,  the more their incidents (and incidents against them) are looked at, the more opportunity for things to be overturned, the more it appears they’re favoured on the pitch.

 

I’d argue that both Rangers and Celtic suffer from their opponents being under-refereed in some games, with refs giving allowances for tackles based on differences in talent level to even things up. Look at the Aberdeen games for an example.

Must try harder

[Alert Mongoose]

Just now, AJF said:

If correct, I think this highlights the flaws of the disciplinary system. It's ludicrous to believe that only 5 teams have "gotten away with one" during a match since 2010.

Which goes back to the original statement. Referees are not refereeing in an impartial manner.

[bennett]

6 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

As follows post 2010;

Rangers*  17

Celtic  4

Aberdeen  2

Livingston  2

Hearts 1

The remainder are on 0.

 

Highlighted by a partisan media while other teams get a free pass, very interesting. 

[AJF]

Just now, Alert Mongoose said:

Which goes back to the original statement. Referees are not refereeing in an impartial manner.

I think it points to the opposite in my opinion. It suggests that teams are getting away with offences during games and are then not picked up afterwards by the compliance officer due to comparatively low media scrutiny.

[coprolite]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

If correct, I think this highlights the flaws of the disciplinary system. It's ludicrous to believe that only 5 teams have "gotten away with one" during a match since 2010.

It also highlights that rangers* have been shown to have got away with quite a lot. 

[Alert Mongoose]

Maybe you should ban the media from Ibrox.

[SANTAN]

This thread is bait to lure out the most deranged and delusional diddies surely. 

[Alert Mongoose]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

I think it points to the opposite in my opinion. It suggests that teams are getting away with offences during games and are then not picked up afterwards by the compliance officer due to comparatively low media scrutiny.

Not sure about the current one (is there even one at the moment?) but the previous two compliance officers reviewed the full live coverage of every game. 

[AJF]

1 minute ago, coprolite said:

It also highlights that rangers* have been shown to have got away with quite a lot. 

It does suggest that, but that doesn't take into account the discrepancies in decision making. If we use the most recent Morelos incident as an example, there are 3 other almost identical incidents that spring to mind that went unpunished.

[GAD]

9 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

As follows post 2010;

Rangers*  17

Celtic  4

Aberdeen  2

Livingston  2

Hearts 1

The remainder are on 0.

 

Don't think this is correct. Can think of at least 4 retrospective bans for St Mirren players just off the top of my head since 2010, two of them were Jim Goodwin for elbowing Dundee United no marks, one for Isma for diving and another for Tansey after some whining Jambo grassed him up on Twitter. Probably been more.

[Jambomo]

I do think it exists for both Rangers and Celtic. It actually seems to be something you see in other leagues - Man U and Liverpool, a Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Real - all of them are seen to get decisions in their favour more often than smaller teams.

There are probably a lot of reasons for it, the power and influence they have, the large fan bases and their matches tend to have extra scrutiny by being on TV more often and wider written coverage in general. 

Going back to the VAR point, I don’t think it actually helps much. We can see down south that it still creates marginal and contested calls, I am not sure it actually helps in that regard. It also is only as good as the ref viewing it so any bias or incompetence is still there.