Jump to content

 

 

Bluedell

  • Posts

    17,299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    83

Posts posted by Bluedell

  1. 34 minutes ago, Bill said:

    Surely the denial of a penalty against Celtic and the subsequent cloak and dagger cover up suggests there is something VERY wrong with VAR. It's not just a case of missing things when the process becomes steeped in denials and contradictory explanations. The problem (as it was always bound to be) is that VAR has become just another tool to be employed by corrupt officials in Scottish football.

    That's more an issue with the corrupt officials than it is with the principle of VAR. Without VAR, they've got more of a cop-out that the ref didn't see it. It's the existence of VAR that's proven the corruption. Without it, it would just be another "honest" mistake.

  2. Just now, Rousseau said:

    I don't know. 

     

    It's a handball, but that doesn't mean it's a penalty. The Referee did make that decision; VAR just backed him up because it's not wrong.  

    The ref didn't decide it wasn't a penalty. How could be when he awarded a bye kick? He couldn't have seen the handball. 

  3. 31 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

    I don't think VAR did release it; SKY did. I don't know why - probably to show that it wouldn't have mattered what the Referee gave on the pitch; it would have been offside anyway. 

     

    Where's the cheating? Because the Referee made a decision we disagree with? That's childish. Even if you remove all the offside stuff and focus on the penalty, it's not an egregious decision, IMO. I do think the Referee was wrong, but, like I said elsewhere, if that goes against our defender I'd be furious. 

     

    It's just incompetence. 

    Did the SPFL not release the still to Sky? 

     

    The cheating is the VAR. It was handball and surely nobody is denying that. The ref apparently didn't see it, hence the bye kick. VAR should therefore highlight that there was a handball and allow the ref to decide on whether it's a penalty. Surely it's the ref that should make that decision?

  4. 2 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

     

    I'm just repeating what Dermot Gallagher said on Ref Watch. 

    But dB's post suggests he's wrong, so maybe it should have been a penalty?

     

    I know we can become entrenched in our views on things like this but there's a strong argument to say it should have been given. 

  5. 3 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

    It was clearly offside. This is a non-issue. 

     

    They didn't check for offside; It didn't matter, it didn't get that far. 

     

    I'll leave you to that opinion. 

    He may or may not have been in an offside position but either way, it's not clear. 

  6. 18 hours ago, RANGERRAB said:

     

    3) I also believe that at the Dessers miss in the first half he is brought down in the penalty box. Johnston doesn’t get a touch on the ball

     

    Agreed. 

     

    The number of bears saying it's not a penalty because it goes against their agenda of hating Dessers is unbelievable.

  7. 3 hours ago, PoohBear said:

    Decisions didn't lose us the game today, the simple fact is that we aren't good enough and we haven't been for a long time. We've seen it before that this side can't even beat a severely depleted Celtic team. They had two different CD lineups today who were inexperienced and we couldn't test them. That is the simple truth, whenever we get into a decent position we conspire to fuck it up for ourselves.

    We're not great but that shouldn't be a reason for ignoring corrupt refereeing. Are we only allowed to highlight it when we play well? 

  8. 14 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

    Need a whole new front line and midfield.

     

    Always important to strengthen the defence first though. We all know that Tavernier and Barišić are suspect so both need replaced quickly. We've needed a settled partner for Goldson for quite some time now. We should make that a priority too. Goldson has been here for years so we should freshen things up by finding a replacement for him.

     

    Sadly we will be forced to replace the goalkeeper. He will leave in January for two million pounds. Given the number of first team players required this money will be very useful.

    So basically replace the whole team in January.

  9. 3 hours ago, SykseyBear said:

    An entire new front 3. Left to right we are powderpuff as hell and not close to being good enough. That's priority for me. 

    You think replacing Sima is a priority? Seriously? 😳

  10. We need a forward. We can't only have Dessers playing in that position for 90 minutes every week. 

     

    We can't rely on McCausland every week so having someone else on the right would also be good. 

     

    We may need a midfielder depending on how long Raskin is out for. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.