[madwullie]

I don't see that as cheating. I would estimate 80% (figure pulled from my arse) of challenges on a football pitch don't have enough contact to make the player fall over - you have to go down though to show the ref you've been fouled.

[Beano 3d]

madwullie, on 16 March 2010 - 14:04, said:

I don't see that as cheating. I would estimate 80% (figure pulled from my arse) of challenges on a football pitch don't have enough contact to make the player fall over - you have to go down though to show the ref you've been fouled.

But many fouls are correctly awarded when the player hasn't gone down. Handing it over to the player to decide when he's been fouled is never going to work. Cheat's charter.

[Davie Bhoy]

Marshmallo, on 16 March 2010 - 13:22, said:

You have had some refereeing decisions go against you. But in the Utd game you mentioned at Tannadice you lost the game because your defence is a shambles and you couldn't defend a corner. The major decision which has cost Celtic the title was the decision to appoint Tony Mowbray as manager.

The Utd game away wasn't one of the worst games for decisions going against us. However the fact remains at Utd's winning goal there was a blatant foul on Loovens. If he'd have got to the ball first had the Utd player not been preventing him for going with the runner is neither here nor there and doesn't make it any less of a foul

[Davie Bhoy]

An article by Graham Spiers

Quote

Graham Spiers

Dougie McDonald, one of Scotland's leading referees, has to tread very carefully from now until the end of the season, for the sake of his own reputation. Within the space of two weeks McDonald has given a whole series of contentious decisions to Rangers - two of those against Celtic - and even neutrals have started to worry that it doesn't look too impressive.


First, two weeks ago at Ibrox, McDonald sent off Scott Brown of Celtic, when almost everyone now agrees (including Walter Smith) that Brown's heated tussle with Kyle Lafferty at best warranted a yellow card.


Indeed, replays of the incident showed that Lafferty was just about as guilty in that handbags tussle, yet McDonald showed red to Brown and nothing at all to Lafferty.


The big, lanky, £3.5 million Rangers striker had even performed his old trick of collapsing to the ground, his legs mysteriously giving way beneath him, but even that piece of feigning didn't cause Mr McDonald any duress.


By a minor miracle, in the same game, Rangers defender Madjid Bougherra somehow managed to stay on the field for the whole 90 minutes, despite having been booked in the first ten minutes, and, arguably, having fouled Robbie Keane enough thereafter to earn a second yellow. But McDonald, again, demurred on that decision.



Then came last Sunday at Ibrox, and two penalties awarded to Rangers against Dundee United in the Active Nation Scottish Cup, from which United had to heroically fight back to earn a 3-3 draw. In the first case, Dusan Pernis, the United goalkeeper, seemed to have got a touch before colliding with Kenny Miller in the box, but McDonald was having none of the debate - penalty.


Then, ten minutes later, Sean Dillon collided with Kris Boyd in the box, and once more, in the TV replays of the incident, it looked a 50-50 call by the referee. In the press gantry Craig Paterson, the former Rangers centre-half and now a BBC match analyst, said it wasn't a penalty, though again, McDonald gave Rangers the decision.


Now let's be clear about this. I have never argued - indeed, I have repeatedly lampooned the idea - that there is a pro-Rangers leaning among referees in the SPL. And I stand by that. In lovely, Presbyterian Scotland we have many flaws, but football corruption cannot be cited among them. Our referees, in the main, are good guys, Dougie McDonald among them. It's just that, right now, they are going through a terrible slump in form.


But having said that, McDonald now stands under a special, self-inflicted scrutiny. If he keeps up this momentous form of giving every 50-50 decision Rangers' way then even neutrals among us are going to feel a certain disquiet. As someone once said, it is not just the act, but the perception, that matters.


McDonald, in the near future, could really do with coming upon a 50-50 moment which he somehow decides not to give to Rangers.

[Colin M]

I think McDonald's failure to send United's goalkeeper off suggests he doesn't understand the rules, as well as being biased.

[Colin M]

madwullie, on 16 March 2010 - 14:04, said:

I don't see that as cheating. I would estimate 80% (figure pulled from my arse) of challenges on a football pitch don't have enough contact to make the player fall over - you have to go down though to show the ref you've been fouled.

Falling over when you wouldn't otherwise is simulation and cheating, whether you've been fouled or not.

That said, there's nothing to say that if you're already falling over you have to try and stop yourself

[seamus]

The diddy fans saying that Rangers and Celtic get all the decisions are only being Rangers apologists.Any neutral person can see Rangers have had the majority of decisions this season.

[The Old Northerner]

seamus, on 16 March 2010 - 23:25, said:

The diddy fans saying that Rangers and Celtic get all the decisions are only being Rangers apologists.Any neutral person can see Rangers have had the majority of decisions this season.

Of course, it's only this season that is important.

You're trying too hard now

[Davie Bhoy]

The Old Northerner, on 17 March 2010 - 00:23, said:

Of course, it's only this season that is important.

You're trying too hard now

We're talking about the here and now though. Is it too much to ask we deal with the present. Last season I thought R*****s got the decisions at the start of the season and towards the end we did. This season though it's been all one way traffic throughout the season and shows no sign of stopping.

The major decisions have also been beyond belief and hard to explain.

[The Old Northerner]

Davie Bhoy, on 17 March 2010 - 00:37, said:

Is it too much to ask we deal with the present.

No point demanding an explanation when things aren't going your way if you don't give a shite when they are

[Davie Bhoy]

The Old Northerner, on 17 March 2010 - 00:44, said:

No point demanding an explanation when things aren't going your way if you don't give a shite when they are

Think your missing the point. If things even themselves out...which last season I thought they did. Then I've no prob with just having the usual match to match gripes that is common with every football fan.

However when out of the two clubs expected to be challenging for the title & one club seems to be benefitting from these decisions and the other seems to be getting done by them then it's only right to highlight it. No???

[GAD]

Davie Bhoy, on 17 March 2010 - 01:10, said:

Think your missing the point. If things even themselves out...which last season I thought they did. Then I've no prob with just having the usual match to match gripes that is common with every football fan.

However when out of the two clubs expected to be challenging for the title & one club seems to be benefitting from these decisions and the other seems to be getting done by them then it's only right to highlight it. No???

When are things going to even themsleves out when Celtic play St. Mirren then? You've already studiously ignored the captains posts when he lists the game changing decisions that have gone Celtic's way in several games over the last few seasons. What are the decisions that have gone St. Mirren's way to even things out? You and many, many other Celtic fans on this board didn't seem too bothered then. In fact I'm sure the general consenus was that us greeting diddy fans should just get on with it. When the boot is percieved to be on the other foot however it's a full scale tantrum. Pathetic.

[madwullie]

Beano 3d, on 16 March 2010 - 15:42, said:

But many fouls are correctly awarded when the player hasn't gone down. Handing it over to the player to decide when he's been fouled is never going to work. Cheat's charter.

I've spoken about this before, but remember just prior to the Gretna - Hearts final, Skacel (I thinik) was getting pelters in the press for being a diving b*****d. Some of the stuff that was being printed was pretty harsh. Fast forward to the final, he's through with only the keeper to beat, is clearly fouled, tried to stay on his feet and missed the chance. Had he gone down he would have got the penalty.

It's a fact of football that by staying on your feet when you've been fouled you are lessening the chance of getting a foul. You have to go down to ensure the ref knows you've been fouled.

Yes, it would be great if refs correctly awarded fouls if a player stays on his feet, but they simply don't.

[Marshmallo]

Davie Bhoy, on 16 March 2010 - 23:17, said:

The Utd game away wasn't one of the worst games for decisions going against us. However the fact remains at Utd's winning goal there was a blatant foul on Loovens. If he'd have got to the ball first had the Utd player not been preventing him for going with the runner is neither here nor there and doesn't make it any less of a foul

Inter were manhandling Chelsea at just about every corner last night and no penalty was given, does that mean there is a conspiracy against Chelsea by European referees?

If Celtic could defend set pieces they would have beaten Dundee Utd (unjustly I may add). The referees are being blamed when in reality your team and manager are not good enough.

[Tio Pepe]

Marshmallo, on 17 March 2010 - 09:21, said:

Inter were manhandling Chelsea at just about every corner last night and no penalty was given, does that mean there is a conspiracy against Chelsea by European referees?

Chelsea have more to complain about than Celtic - recent refereeing errors in Europe have cost them millions. Wonder if they will anonymously brief the media or if they'll display more class.

My team are 100 hundred years old now. Do you think it will be our turn soon to have all these honest mistakes the referees make go for us or will they just continue to give virtually everything to the bigots? For any Rangers or Celtic fans to complain about referees when the balance of favourable refereeing is massively in their credit column is laughable. They have no credibility.

[deky]

tweed275, on 15 March 2010 - 21:02, said:

They attack more than everyone else.

What about our goal that was chopped of at FP, wrongly for offside?

WeAreThePeople, on 15 March 2010 - 21:11, said:

Any reason the same thing happens in the Champions League?


Rangers Vs Sevilla.

Scores are tied, last man tackle horribly wrong, Steven Naismith goes over, referee waves play on. Video Evidence shows its both a penalty and a red-card.


Big team syndrome.

Aye Europe is predominately Catholic, so they give the Protestants nothing obviously.

Karma's a bitch.

[Beano 3d]

madwullie, on 17 March 2010 - 08:45, said:

I've spoken about this before, but remember just prior to the Gretna - Hearts final, Skacel (I thinik) was getting pelters in the press for being a diving b*****d. Some of the stuff that was being printed was pretty harsh. Fast forward to the final, he's through with only the keeper to beat, is clearly fouled, tried to stay on his feet and missed the chance. Had he gone down he would have got the penalty.

It's a fact of football that by staying on your feet when you've been fouled you are lessening the chance of getting a foul. You have to go down to ensure the ref knows you've been fouled.

Yes, it would be great if refs correctly awarded fouls if a player stays on his feet, but they simply don't.

Skacel got about 12 yellow cards that season, all for either diving or dissent. I don't remember the incident, (although I did see the match and loved the Gretna cheats losing). But assuming he was clearly fouled, might the referee have played advantage since he was one-on-one with the keeper? Referees do award free-kicks when people don't fall over - happens a lot. And it might happen a lot more often if players didn't throw themselves to the ground any time they feel like it - makes it much harder to spot genuine fouls.

[The Old Northerner]

Davie Bhoy, on 17 March 2010 - 01:10, said:

However when out of the two clubs expected to be challenging for the title & one club seems to be benefitting from these decisions and the other seems to be getting done by them then it's only right to highlight it. No???

Provided such highlighting is even-handed. Which, with you involved, it isn't. You can't claim a continual conspiracy and then attempt to use one season - even if it is the current one - as proof.

[Beano 3d]

Davie Bhoy, on 17 March 2010 - 01:10, said:

Think your missing the point. If things even themselves out...which last season I thought they did. Then I've no prob with just having the usual match to match gripes that is common with every football fan.

However when out of the two clubs expected to be challenging for the title & one club seems to be benefitting from these decisions and the other seems to be getting done by them then it's only right to highlight it. No???

If it's a matter of luck, i.e. chance, then it will even itself out. But not necessarily over the entirely arbitrary period of 44 games. It could take 1,044 - who knows?

[GAD]

The Old Northerner, on 17 March 2010 - 11:24, said:

Provided such highlighting is even-handed. Which, with you involved, it isn't. You can't claim a continual conspiracy and then attempt to use one season - even if it is the current one - as proof.

It's also pretty difficult to take seriously a claim of conspiracy when the person claiming it refuses to acknowledge any decision that has gone for his club over the past few seasons. Even when Davie does finally admit a decision going in Celtic's way, it is dismissed due to the fact refs sometimes don't see things and that some Killie player should have been sent off in the same incident for a second yellow, depite the fact the guy hadn't recieved a first.

Davie has completely lost the argument due to his blinkered views and inability to address the other sidet. The fact he doesn't realise this actually backs this point up.

[Colin M]

GAD, on 17 March 2010 - 08:36, said:

When are things going to even themsleves out when Celtic play St. Mirren then? You've already studiously ignored the captains posts when he lists the game changing decisions that have gone Celtic's way in several games over the last few seasons. What are the decisions that have gone St. Mirren's way to even things out? You and many, many other Celtic fans on this board didn't seem too bothered then. In fact I'm sure the general consenus was that us greeting diddy fans should just get on with it. When the boot is percieved to be on the other foot however it's a full scale tantrum. Pathetic.

You don't understand, when they say things even themselves out they just mean between what Rangers get and what Celtic get.

[GAD]

Colin M, on 17 March 2010 - 13:21, said:

You don't understand, when they say things even themselves out they just mean between what Rangers get and what Celtic get.

I know that's what they mean. What's impressive is that I think they've managed to convince themselves it's not.

[Colin M]

GAD, on 17 March 2010 - 13:30, said:

I know that's what they mean. What's impressive is that I think they've managed to convince themselves it's not.

You have to remember we're dealing with simpletons

[Nike_Ayrshire]

GAD, on 17 March 2010 - 08:36, said:

When are things going to even themsleves out when Celtic play St. Mirren then? You've already studiously ignored the captains posts when he lists the game changing decisions that have gone Celtic's way in several games over the last few seasons. What are the decisions that have gone St. Mirren's way to even things out? You and many, many other Celtic fans on this board didn't seem too bothered then. In fact I'm sure the general consenus was that us greeting diddy fans should just get on with it. When the boot is percieved to be on the other foot however it's a full scale tantrum. Pathetic.

The fact is that Rangers being helped is more complicated than every decision from every referee going to Rangers; the timing of certain refs getting certain games and the the timing of the assistance is the point that should make every fan other than Rangers fans uncomfortable.

I remember being young and the 'joke' before every game V's Rangers (and I mean when being taken to Love St) was along the lines of how many pens will they get today? But it is really not that funny a joke anymore.

Yes, Celtic will get more assistance from the neutral ref as Celtic are going to benefit from the big team bias, (for some reason against St. Mirren more than any?) And this helps create that cushion between us and those below BUT when you are going for the title in a two horse race being the second most helped team is still disadvantageous.

To the average OF fan there are only 2 clubs in Scotland so I appreciate the apathy amongst the masses as the Celtic faithful gloss over the pro-Celtic refs and the big team bias. But the fact is if Rangers are playing a big domestic game they will 'usually' get that last minute penalty or whatever is needed and that is the design of the system. The pro-Rangers men at the top appoint the pro-Rangers refs in the important games and whether they mean to be a cheat or they just, like every other football fan, have the tinted specs on - it is the same result.

I fully expect that Celtic will get dodgy decisions between now and the end of the season and this will be claimed to have 'evened out' the errors but when the league is over, does it matter to us? No, but it will effect the views of those teams who are cheated to say same old OF bias and ignoring the context of the cheating. It will be unfortunate for those who are the bad decisions cannon fodder but it is coming as sure as the Sunday Mails 'Celtic star to be sold' headline on OF day or Rangers getting a penalty when losing in the cup.

You can distract and say if Celtic were better we would not need it but is this really fair? Do we need to be much better just to be on a level playing field with Rangers?

[The Old Northerner]

Nike_Ayrshire, on 17 March 2010 - 15:48, said:

... being the second most helped team is still disadvantageous.

This is quite the most incredible plea for sympathy