Quote Originally Posted by Kavinho View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Missed this reply a couple of days back - sorry.

Opinions, or at the least valid ones, should be based on evidentially correct information, and on a thread about perceived bias, Id have thought interest in stats, as a measurement metric, to be fairly obvious.

More than one poster has disparaged individual egs as anecdotal.


Your point about the stat coming from an SG releases raises an interesting point. I'd consider the misrepresentation of the stat to be a stronger eg of manipulation of information by the BBC. They read it, and managed to change the context entirely
No worries mate!

Ive been thinking about the craig thomson analogy here, because in my view, part of the problem here is that some people treat politics like they treat a fitba team - with an irrational and unquestioning support, particularly when challenged by someone they percieve as from the 'other team'.

So, i habe witnessed with my own eyes thomson giving terrible, big and important decisions against us (or not giving them in tge case of that wee runt Black elbowing Griffiths).

Do i believe he is rubbish, arrogant or any other defect that means hr makes terrible decisions from time to time? Yes. Do i believe he let the pressure of that occasion get to him, and either conciously or unconciously made poor decisions as a result? Yes.

Do i believe he is personally biased against hibs? I dunno, im open minded about that but he has made enough bad decisions elsewhere that i lean more towards him just being rubbish than having a vendetta against hibs.

But, even if i believe he is biased, it is quite a leap to think that he is biased because of orders he recieves from the SFA, decided by some anonymous committee of behind the scenes fitba guys who meet in total secrecy, who manage to exclude not only anyone involved with hibs, but also just anyone involved in fitba who has any integrity, professionalisn or sense of fair play. And of course, this committee has decided it will persecute hibs for reasons unknown, and give orders to presumably a team of 4 match officials without anyonr knowing, or blowing the whistle.

Noe i have no difficulty that the SFA have, in the past been corrupt, but i just find it hard to believe that in a world of transparency, digital leaks, hacking and tv money, that such practices could exist without being exposed. And im also not sure why they would decidd to pick on hibs?

So is it possible that a particular journo might be anti SNP? Yeah, i would say so. Is it possible that the entire BBC is systematically biased against the SNP? I suppose its possible, but it seems unlikely.

I think there is lots of confirmation bias that goes on. I dont remember how many games thomson has had where he hasnt given bad decisions against hibs, orbhas given decisions for us. The bad ones stick in my mind, not the uneventful or positive ones.

Also, supporters of the SNP have to accept that as a party pf govt, they will be attacked by all sides, fairly relentlessly. Thats the business of govt, and would and does happen to every govt, regardless of party. The tories down south are getting it relentlessly, as did the labour govt before them.

And lastly, there also has to an acceptance that if your personal viewpoint is biased, then what you view as normal or fair will also be biased. And something that to a non-aligned person would seem fair, would appear biased to you because of your own bias.

This is an interesting discussion. I take your point on stats, i am just too lazy to look for them - plus i am very suspicious of them anyway as they are too easily manipulated and spun.