after being at the game on sunday, and seeing replays on tv that night i was thinking "will the officials be man enough to give both sides of old firm any dubious decisions"

take broadfoots booking for "diving". it was a defo penalty as tv has shown yet he got booked for play-acting. what if the game had been level at the time? it could have cost us 2 points

same for celtic as well. im sure there have been a few decisions that they havent gotten as well, because they are "questionable" decisions

basically im saying that after their piss poor start to the season the officials seem scared to give the old firm decisions that could swing either way.

boyds penalty was a stone-waller (the one he missed), his second tumble was embarassing , clarkson should never have raised his hand like that. but these were all easy decisions

and before the non-old firm fans start about not getting decisions, we have a lot more possession than you lot especially in and around the penalty box so its easy to see why rangers and celtic are in more decision making situations

You poor thing.
You have a disturbed thought process which manifests in times of extreme fear & anxiety , often to the point of irrationality & delusion. This condition is known as paranoia .
There is only one known cure for this illness - WIN THE LEAGUE.

In the case of the Broadfoot penalty incident, and any other decison that may not be going for the old firm for that matter, may be down to the fact that referees have to be 100% sure that it is a penalty, foul etc to give the decision. If there is any doubt in his mind then he is correct not to give it. If he makes a mistake then he makes a mistake it's not because the refs are out to get you or even the score. They're human and they don't get the benefit of TV replays and only have a split second to make a decision.

It's frustrating as hell when it goes against you but you win some you lose some.

while i totally agree with you i thought there was something from uefa/fifa or some numbnut that ru(i)ns that game stating that to aid attacking football and entertainment that if the officials were in doubt then the benifit was to be given to the attacker?

Quite possibly but if this was to be used then it again all comes down to that referees opinion of what happened and big mistakes will still happen.

That’s a good post. However when we ‘win some’ it’s because the referee is a cheat. When we ‘lose some’ it’s because the referee is only human. Go figure.

I'm one of the few non OF fans that don't think that way. I've seen some awful decision both for and against Clyde this season. Likewise i've seen some bad decisions against and for the OF this season already. Shit happens. It's just part and parcel of the game and if we didn't have these decisions going for/against your team then it would make work on Monday morning even more boring than it already is.

Refreshing to hear. Keep up the good work.

Rangers have had so many poor decisions over recent months that it will never even itself up. 2 terrible decisions on Sunday by Smith in fact 3 when you consider Broadfoot now has a booking for being tripped by a keeper who should have been off in the 1st half!!!

How do you know this is the case? Referees have bad games, they're human and are prone to err. Until we have robotic refs. or at least video replays to assist them mistakes will happen so teams just have to suck it up and get on with it.

Aye, when dealing with the fecking offside rule.

He is completely correct on penalties/fouls. If the referee isn't 100% sure, no foul should be awarded. Although, if he he is in doubt, then he shouldn't be booking the player for diving. He should just be waving on play.

Their is no 'us'.