[emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Emerald
He's no Ian Beale.
Am hoping he continues though, shifty as a shifty thing in his interview today.
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
Printable View
[emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Real Emerald
He's no Ian Beale.
Am hoping he continues though, shifty as a shifty thing in his interview today.
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
Missing out on a big financial windfall tonight. If they are still stupid enough to calculate their budgets on making Champions league it could be interesting times ahead.
They base it in Europa League apparently now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Not convinced by the guy Beale at all by the way. Sounds like a used car salesman.
Hmmmm, we'll see.::greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by overdrive
He sounds like a candidate on The Apprentice. All bluster and faux confidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since452
This guy? 🤔Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
https://youtube.com/shorts/L_bqdfJYz...UqXOrT9dana0zT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
Funny you should say that...
Attachment 27172
See Stubbs the other week was on the radio telling his experience of Scottish refs while at Celtic, where he explained during the match there was a stonewall penalty for Celtic in which he remistrated with the ref on the day, the refs reply was 'I don't give penalties against Rangers', Sportsound where slamming him today, think they should tell there listeners the stats down the years on the penalty statistics, some things never change.
I’m not sure I believe that. Think there’s a bit of tongue in cheek there.Quote:
Originally Posted by LunasBoots
If it was true, it would have been highlighted immediately after game and the referee subject to intense scrutiny from media ( not just the sports journalists)
Let’s face it, do you think Celtic would have kept quiet if such a comment was made during an Old Firm game? Particularly in the heat of the immediate fall out of old firm games that go on for a day or so?
I think Stubbsy’s havering here!
Never been the same since Cathy left him and Ian took over the fruit stall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Since452
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
😂Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
I see they are demanding answers from the SFA over their disallowed goal. What a bunch of self-entitled p***ks. They do this every time a decision (correct in this case) goes against them when they get far more decisions in favour (often wrongly) than any other club.
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport...sallowed-goal/
It was a shocker of a decision. Enjoyable to watch, but VAR at its very worst.Quote:
Originally Posted by 007
Whenever they lose a big game they complain about a decision to deflect attention away from how crap they really are.
I thought that incident summed up VAR perfectly. It’s completely useless. Half the folk think it’s a foul, the rest don’t. Referees can’t agree either. We’re back in the exact same position we were before VAR only now we have big delays built into the game. It’s a nonsense. Get rid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skol
As for the sticky buns, it’s a joy to watch them melt down again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For that decision and other 50/50s.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan62
I’m glad it’s picking up the more clear cut bad decisions and righting a good few wrongs.
The way things are going you can see a scottish referee awarding a penalty against sevco before the next millennium. VAR will overturn it, but its progress
Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk
I think it’s 100% the correct decision. The Rangers player trips him up without touching the ball. I don’t think it could be any clearer.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
foul or not it was terribly sloppy play by the sellick player
Totally agree. It’s a clear foul and i actually can’t get my head around how it’s even being debated. You can’t just trip players who are on the ball, if you plant your foot in their stride it’s a foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I’ve watched it loads and VAR has got it right 100%.
As for Stubbs - again i can’t believe that folk are looking at the evidence (penalty against Rangers stats) and concluding that Stubbs’ is lying.
We’ve got Levein telling a similar story from his management days, ex-refs on the after dinner circuit openly saying they didn’t give penalties against Rangers etc.
How much more evidence do you need to see that it’s corrupt here in favour of one team?
The argument is that the Celtic player kicks the Rangers player and falls because when he makes the impact, it trips him. I can see the argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Again, my point is that VAR doesn’t clear anything up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Aye but that’s just an argument isn’t it - not the actual rule/law?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan62
I'd say it was corrupt in favour of 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan62
That logic would mean anyone who is ever tripped has committed a foul because they've essentially 'kicked' the player who has fouled them. It wouldn't make any sense. Like someone getting done for assault for headbutting someone's clenched fist.
Don't know how serious that is but one can but hope. Morons the lot of them, it's financial mismanagement since the new version was created in 2012 that's the problem, not Beale.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzywuzzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzywuzzy
That's a bit of an over-reaction to losing against Celtc, surely.
Based on nothing. None of the stats back up what you 'feel'. Smelltic aren't getting the calls the lodge members do. I agree with the original poster if you still think it isn't corrupt in favour of Rangers you need your head examined.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crunchie
I'm the same. I watched it for the first time last night and immediately thought dreadful defending but also clear foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby