Blame the SFA BLAH BLAH BLAH.....

[Francis Albert]

... and I am bored by Hearts fans moaning about other Hearts fans moaning about referees. From fans' reaction in the ground those with this high minded view that we shouldn't complain and focus only on our inadequacies are in a minority. On the balance of play Rangers deserved to win today but the refs decision on the Thomson foul cost us an undeserved point which I would certainly have taken. 5 bookings to 1 was also ridiculous, with yet again Hearts players booked for fairly innocuous first fouls. And if 5 minutes extra time was right then should have played 5 minutes, not 4 minutes and 1 minute of Rangers goal celebrations.

[Harry Palmer]

The player that scored the winning goal should not have been on the park...

 

Therefore, it all goes back to inept refereeing.

[neave]

The decision to give a free-kick against Thomson was the reason we conceded. It meant our players were out of position and Rangers were able to take advantage of this; anything that happened after the free-kick was taken was a direct consequence of the foul being incorrectly given in the first place.

 

It was also probably one of the worst decisions I have ever seen. From my view in N2 Lower, the boot goes no higher than a foot off the ground and he wins the ball cleanly. Again, from my view he makes no, and I mean absolutely no, contact with the Rangers player, who was challenging for the ball too. How he managed to see that as a foul I will never know.

 

Naismith didn't even shout for it, and that wee ***** shouted for ******* everything.

 

Here's a tip for the next time you ref a game, Thompson: do the exact opposite of what you think is right. There's every chance that'll be the correct call, you ******* idiot.

[Gambo]

. How he managed to see that as a foul I will never know.

 

 

 

You seriously don't know?

[hmfc1440]

I'm sick of our fans coming on here and moaning about the SFA the 5 mins was about right 5 subs and a couple of injuries plus us time wasting since the 46th minute! Fair enough Thomson high feet could have went either way but did the ref tell the big pole at the back to fall over and Jonsson to leave Naismith?? Or did the ref tell Kello to leave his wall is a extremley poor position?? We were poor throughout and only took 1 of the 3 chances we created!

 

We need to learn to retain the ball and keep going to the end! Plus Jonsson was lucky to stay on the park he was tugging every jersey he could!

[hmfc1440]

Wake up & smell the Costa. Crikey! Some would let folk walk into their home grab their goods, have a crap on the floor on the way out and then say

"I'm not sure I was robbed & crapped on!" It's daylight robbery and two fingers straight in your face.

[hmfc1440]

I'm sick of our fans coming on here and moaning about the SFA the 5 mins was about right 5 subs and a couple of injuries plus us time wasting since the 46th minute! Fair enough Thomson high feet could have went either way but did the ref tell the big pole at the back to fall over and Jonsson to leave Naismith?? Or did the ref tell Kello to leave his wall is a extremley poor position?? We were poor throughout and only took 1 of the 3 chances we created!

 

We need to learn to retain the ball and keep going to the end! Plus Jonsson was lucky to stay on the park he was tugging every jersey he could!

[audrey65]

We were all a bit upset at the manner and the circumstance of the defeat, especially after going a goal up but I dont buy into the ref's corruption thing. Sure they make mistakes and are, at times inept, but corrupt? No. While the ref made mistakes so did they and so did we except we probably made the most (kello excepted). The last 20 minutes felt like a week but rather than focus on the referee, who probably got one or two things wrong, I would be concerned about our highly paid squads inability to pass the ball five yards in a straight line or to actually speak to each other. That we held on for eighty minutes was in itself a feat.

 

... and I am bored by Hearts fans moaning about other Hearts fans moaning about referees. From fans' reaction in the ground those with this high minded view that we shouldn't complain and focus only on our inadequacies are in a minority. On the balance of play Rangers deserved to win today but the refs decision on the Thomson foul cost us an undeserved point which I would certainly have taken. 5 bookings to 1 was also ridiculous, with yet again Hearts players booked for fairly innocuous first fouls. And if 5 minutes extra time was right then should have played 5 minutes, not 4 minutes and 1 minute of Rangers goal celebrations.

[Francis Albert]

We were all a bit upset at the manner and the circumstance of the defeat, especially after going a goal up but I dont buy into the ref's corruption thing. Sure they make mistakes and are, at times inept, but corrupt? No. While the ref made mistakes so did they and so did we except we probably made the most (kello excepted). The last 20 minutes felt like a week but rather than focus on the referee, who probably got one or two things wrong, I would be concerned about our highly paid squads inability to pass the ball five yards in a straight line or to actually speak to each other. That we held on for eighty minutes was in itself a feat.

There is rarely a shortage of threads on here about our inadequacies. But this thread is about those of the referee, and I think we are perfectly entitled to talk about those too.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

I'm sick of our fans coming on here and moaning about the SFA the 5 mins was about right 5 subs and a couple of injuries plus us time wasting since the 46th minute! Fair enough Thomson high feet could have went either way but did the ref tell the big pole at the back to fall over and Jonsson to leave Naismith?? Or did the ref tell Kello to leave his wall is a extremley poor position?? We were poor throughout and only took 1 of the 3 chances we created!

 

We need to learn to retain the ball and keep going to the end! Plus Jonsson was lucky to stay on the park he was tugging every jersey he could!

 

You're a Hun b****** . Never in a million years was that a foul. AND, Naismith should have been sent off, given the yellow cards we got.

[linkin- hearts]

Yes the added time allocated was probably correct, but how Naismith can go through the second half without picking up a second yellow for dissent beggars belief. And no, there was no foul committed by CT which led to their second goal, but it will be given to the OF time and time again until, as someone posted earlier, we have 10 SPL chairmen who will stand united against the corrupt ineptitude of the GFA:verymad:

[Tiberius Stinkfinger]

By giving as many players in our team Yellow cards every week the officials are purposely making life as difficult as possible for Hearts in a very sneaky way that never gets picked up.

 

We will always concede late goals because nearly everyone in crucial areas is in danger of getting Red.

[adso7]

The added time may have been correct. It is crazy to look at the subs and add the injuries to come to that time however. Refs in Scotland do not consistently add 30 secs per sub plus injuries. In fact, in most games I watch where the OF are not involved or are winning, injury time = 2 or 3 minutes despite most matches having 4 - 6 subs plus injuries. If the ref was being so spot on with these subs and injuries where was the added time for the winning goal. Five mins minimum plus a minute of celebrations yet he blew up after 5 mins (or once rangers were ahead depending on how you want to perceive it).

 

It's a bit hard to take that it is always this way against the OF. Roll back to the St J home game to open the season. They had a player down at the goalpost who was down for a full five minutes (my mate and me were sad enough to sky plus it back and watch the clock). We are chasing the late winner and what did we get in that game? 2 mins added. That's all, despite the ref blowing on 45 in the first half. Not saying we would have scored but we weren't given the opporutnity.

 

None of this however excuses the rank lack of composure shown by our team in the second half yesterday. The number of times our players kicked for touch in a panic was unbelievable. There was very little guile or craft in the way we defended the lead. A little composure and we could have seen that game out but it seems we are back to the days of being scared witless by the pressures of the OF matches.

[audrey65]

While we are upset about the free kick we're not so upset about Miller not getting a penalty and a Rangers friend of mine thought it was a "stonewaller"/ While it was never that I have seen them given and if, as some suggest, that the referee was corrupt and determined to see Rangers win, as opposed to being simply useless, it would have been given. We, as fans, tend to see things one way.

 

There is rarely a shortage of threads on here about our inadequacies. But this thread is about those of the referee, and I think we are perfectly entitled to talk about those too.

[winston churchill]

fun how.

 

rangers and dundee hibernian both had mid-week games in europe but still finished stronger than us.

[Seymour M Hersh]

I don't care what anyone says it is not a level playing field for teams playing the infirm.

 

It is not a level playing field when Heart of Midlothian are playing.

 

Referees treat HMFC to the letter of the law but show leniency to our opposition for similar infringements.

 

Does it cost us? Definitely.

 

Does it excuse our basically average team and management? No.

[B4 Part B]

The added time may have been correct. It is crazy to look at the subs and add the injuries to come to that time however. Refs in Scotland do not consistently add 30 secs per sub plus injuries. In fact, in most games I watch where the OF are not involved or are winning, injury time = 2 or 3 minutes despite most matches having 4 - 6 subs plus injuries. If the ref was being so spot on with these subs and injuries where was the added time for the winning goal. Five mins minimum plus a minute of celebrations yet he blew up after 5 mins (or once rangers were ahead depending on how you want to perceive it).

 

It's a bit hard to take that it is always this way against the OF. Roll back to the St J home game to open the season. They had a player down at the goalpost who was down for a full five minutes (my mate and me were sad enough to sky plus it back and watch the clock). We are chasing the late winner and what did we get in that game? 2 mins added. That's all, despite the ref blowing on 45 in the first half. Not saying we would have scored but we weren't given the opporutnity.

 

None of this however excuses the rank lack of composure shown by our team in the second half yesterday. The number of times our players kicked for touch in a panic was unbelievable. There was very little guile or craft in the way we defended the lead. A little composure and we could have seen that game out but it seems we are back to the days of being scared witless by the pressures of the OF matches.

 

Spot on!

 

I thot 5 minutes was absolutely ridiculous! I'm sure that those who have attempted to justify it will be able to provide an explanation to the above tho..........................

[Gods a Jambo]

While we are upset about the free kick we're not so upset about Miller not getting a penalty and a Rangers friend of mine thought it was a "stonewaller"/ While it was never that I have seen them given and if, as some suggest, that the referee was corrupt and determined to see Rangers win, as opposed to being simply useless, it would have been given. We, as fans, tend to see things one way.

 

 

I have very little time for people like yourself. How about Weir jumping with his hands all over Kyle in the box time after time? I've seen them given yet not once did the ref even think about giving us a pen.

[audrey65]

As I said it's about opinions. The point I made is a valid one which was if the ref was intent on letting Rangers win, which is the opinion of some, he would have given that as a penalty. If ref's gave penalty's for holding at corner's/set pieces, as he is supposed to, then there would be 15 penalties a game. We would object to the ones that went against us but claim that they were "stonewallers" when we get them. If footballers were not all cheating, diving, injury feigning big girl's blouses the ref's job would be easier. We cant even agree on the injury time allowed!

 

And for giving an opinion you have little time for me? I think anybody who has an opinion which differs from yours you will have little time for.

 

I have very little time for people like yourself. How about Weir jumping with his hands all over Kyle in the box time after time? I've seen them given yet not once did the ref even think about giving us a pen.

[hearts_crazy]

Anybody see Man City v Newcastle today? All subs used, proper injury to a player that probably took a couple of minutes to sort out on it's own in the second half = 3 minutes stoppage time. Anybody really think that 5 minutes in a game with no actual stoppages was 'about right'? We were screwed, end of story.

 

That said it was still our own fault we let them in though.

[Malinga the Swinga]

There were 2 key decisions at the game. The first was the decision to add 5 mintues on, which won't be seen at any other game unless either of the old firm are not winning, or someone has a serious injury such as a leg break. If the normal amount of time had been added, 1-1 was the final score, we would have been reasonably happy and they would be upset.

The second key decision was the one to give a foul against CT, and allow Rangers to break and score the winner. If no foul awarded, then CT running into their half against Weir, whilst Kyle and Elliot were up for the cross. Maybe we score, but more likely, more time taken as the ball goes for throw, corner or bye kick. Instead,rangers receive gift, because in my opinion, ref panicked as he thought Rangers might lose goal in time he had awarded, and he just couldn't let that chance happen, therefore he cheated to cover his own back. Maybe he didn't want Rangers to score, but he sure as anything didn't want his name in the papers being criticised by Uncle Walter and his media mates, as a reason why Rangers lost a goal.

[audrey65]

Then perhaps Vlad should withdraw us from the league like he did with Kaunas? What is the point of even turning up then?

 

There were 2 key decisions at the game. The first was the decision to add 5 mintues on, which won't be seen at any other game unless either of the old firm are not winning, or someone has a serious injury such as a leg break. If the normal amount of time had been added, 1-1 was the final score, we would have been reasonably happy and they would be upset.

The second key decision was the one to give a foul against CT, and allow Rangers to break and score the winner. If no foul awarded, then CT running into their half against Weir, whilst Kyle and Elliot were up for the cross. Maybe we score, but more likely, more time taken as the ball goes for throw, corner or bye kick. Instead,rangers receive gift, because in my opinion, ref panicked as he thought Rangers might lose goal in time he had awarded, and he just couldn't let that chance happen, therefore he cheated to cover his own back. Maybe he didn't want Rangers to score, but he sure as anything didn't want his name in the papers being criticised by Uncle Walter and his media mates, as a reason why Rangers lost a goal.

[rudi]

Okay,watched the game again today,firstly their first goal was shocking defending,Bouzid turned his back on the ball when laugherty had his pass back,Black was just wandering all over the place and Kello didn't seem to know what he wanted the wall to do.

 

Next their winning goal,whether it was a free kick or not naismth should never have been allowed to run with the ball that long,40-50 yards without anyone going near him is just not on,add to that no one running with him after he passed the ball was just criminal.

 

5 mins injury time was correct,Black,Eggy and jelovic(sp) were all needing treatment,which all in all took over 3 mins plus 4 subs and any kind of time wasting.

 

I doubt very much if there would have been any complaints had stevenson taken his chance 3 mins into injury time,also on injury time, I take it no one noticed that in at the end of the first half the ref played 1 min of injury time but played 1 min 14 seconds to allow us to take a corner let the ball rattle about the box and wait for them to clear it before blowing for half time giving us time to score from said corner,he could easily have blow the whistle right after the corner was taken and the first attempt by a Hearts player to get the ball.

 

As for the usual"they get everything" well that laddie wiess went down on at least 3 occasion thinking he was fouled in fairly dangerous positions and got none,1 resulted in a throw in for us another a free kick for us and the third wave play on,weir also went down late on in the second half which could easily been given as a foul(looked to be sandwiched) but the ref gave a throw in as Thomson got a foot to the ball after said incident.

 

What cost us the game was defending to deep poorly and pretty poor attacking play,Kyle should have two attempts at the very least on target add to that they had loads more chances on goal and Kello was MoTM says quite a lot.

 

On a positive we didn't get the hammering I and other thought we would get,Obua has proved beyond doubt that he aint no good and we have found an answer to the left back problem,that being Jason Thomson done really well IMO and could slot in there until Wallace is fit.

 

The wall fiasco apart Bouzid looked the part,Kello had a great game and Rudi looks like he still has it provided he is allowed to play in a more attacking position.

[heart of lothian]

I'm another one who has been going for 30 years and I think the corruption is worse than ever.

 

Proof of Old Firm/GFA cheating is shown every time both teams are in a cup semi-final and avoid each other!

 

I'm sure the statistics would be interesting, does anyone know where I could find them?

[Gambo]

 

Referees treat HMFC to the letter of the law but show leniency to our opposition for similar infringements.

 

 

 

 

 

That according to some on here is perfectly okay. They don't mind us being refereed differently from the rest and totting up fines.

[Seymour M Hersh]

That according to some on here is perfectly okay. They don't mind us being refereed differently from the rest and totting up fines.

 

I think that's how they screw us on a pretty regular basis tbh. Bookings yesterday were 5-1 to us (wish it had been goals!) but apart from Barr and Black whose were stonewall yellows the others were week. Look at Eggarts first tackle gets the arm waving cut it out warning for all to see, yet, the first dodgy hun tackles that actually get fould awarded don't merit the same treatment. Why? They both looked as bad if not worse.

 

Oh and in answer to what you pointed out. No it's not okay. All we are asking for is a level playing field. Either both teams get refereed to the letter of the law or both teams get some leniency. Personally imo, refs would be doing themselves a favour if they chose the latter option.

[Malinga the Swinga]

The foul on Elliott by Bugehra (or however it is spelt) was so obvious as to be criminal. The ref was looking right at it and did nothing, yet we are supposed to accept that these happen, it was an honest decision, they will even themselves out. Well they don't happen, it wasn't fair and they don't even themselves out. SFA corrupt cheats.

[Gambo]

 

Oh and in answer to what you pointed out. No it's not okay. All we are asking for is a level playing field. Either both teams get refereed to the letter of the law or both teams get some leniency. Personally imo, refs would be doing themselves a favour if they chose the latter option.

 

I agree with you, just that some on here are delighted to see us get different treatment.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Not sure they delight (although perhaps there is infiltrators amongst them) but are in denial that the game in Scotland is bent in favour of the infirm. I fully expect them to see the light one day.

[audrey65]

Good post but it's not what some people want to hear. You must be a GFA/referee planted on kickback in case we uncover their dastardly plot.

 

 

Okay,watched the game again today,firstly their first goal was shocking defending,Bouzid turned his back on the ball when laugherty had his pass back,Black was just wandering all over the place and Kello didn't seem to know what he wanted the wall to do.

 

Next their winning goal,whether it was a free kick or not naismth should never have been allowed to run with the ball that long,40-50 yards without anyone going near him is just not on,add to that no one running with him after he passed the ball was just criminal.

 

5 mins injury time was correct,Black,Eggy and jelovic(sp) were all needing treatment,which all in all took over 3 mins plus 4 subs and any kind of time wasting.

 

I doubt very much if there would have been any complaints had stevenson taken his chance 3 mins into injury time,also on injury time, I take it no one noticed that in at the end of the first half the ref played 1 min of injury time but played 1 min 14 seconds to allow us to take a corner let the ball rattle about the box and wait for them to clear it before blowing for half time giving us time to score from said corner,he could easily have blow the whistle right after the corner was taken and the first attempt by a Hearts player to get the ball.

 

As for the usual"they get everything" well that laddie wiess went down on at least 3 occasion thinking he was fouled in fairly dangerous positions and got none,1 resulted in a throw in for us another a free kick for us and the third wave play on,weir also went down late on in the second half which could easily been given as a foul(looked to be sandwiched) but the ref gave a throw in as Thomson got a foot to the ball after said incident.

 

What cost us the game was defending to deep poorly and pretty poor attacking play,Kyle should have two attempts at the very least on target add to that they had loads more chances on goal and Kello was MoTM says quite a lot.

 

On a positive we didn't get the hammering I and other thought we would get,Obua has proved beyond doubt that he aint no good and we have found an answer to the left back problem,that being Jason Thomson done really well IMO and could slot in there until Wallace is fit.

 

The wall fiasco apart Bouzid looked the part,Kello had a great game and Rudi looks like he still has it provided he is allowed to play in a more attacking position.

[Francis Albert]

I think that's how they screw us on a pretty regular basis tbh. Bookings yesterday were 5-1 to us (wish it had been goals!) but apart from Barr and Black whose were stonewall yellows the others were week. Look at Eggarts first tackle gets the arm waving cut it out warning for all to see, yet, the first dodgy hun tackles that actually get fould awarded don't merit the same treatment. Why? They both looked as bad if not worse.

 

Oh and in answer to what you pointed out. No it's not okay. All we are asking for is a level playing field. Either both teams get refereed to the letter of the law or both teams get some leniency. Personally imo, refs would be doing themselves a favour if they chose the latter option.

Quite. I can't believe any Hearts fan who saw yesterday's game could possibly argue that 5 bookings to us and one to them was fair. Fouls committed were fairly even (something like 16 to 14 according to the papers). In terms of dissent I don't think there is a shadow of doubt which team was more guilty, indeed Naismith probably out-did the rest of theplayers on the pitch on his own, without once being spoken to. And at one point in the second half another Rangers player came close a Miko-type protest to a linesman who had merely awarded a throw-in gainst them! Again not even a word of warning. And after Naismith's goal we had Smith, McCoist and at laest half a dozen other Rangers staff amnd players on the pitch celebrating. Level playing field? You've got to be kidding.

[Era Macaroons]

I'm sick of our fans coming on here and moaning about the SFA the 5 mins was about right 5 subs and a couple of injuries plus us time wasting since the 46th minute! Fair enough Thomson high feet could have went either way but did the ref tell the big pole at the back to fall over and Jonsson to leave Naismith?? Or did the ref tell Kello to leave his wall is a extremley poor position?? We were poor throughout and only took 1 of the 3 chances we created!

 

We need to learn to retain the ball and keep going to the end! Plus Jonsson was lucky to stay on the park he was tugging every jersey he could!

 

 

Im of the same opinion, sick of folk greeting SFA every time we lose.5 mins injury time was prob about right. enough time for us to go and get a winner.

 

We were unable to hold the ball or create any meaningful football beyond our own half for 2nd 45 mins.

 

I jotted down every scoring incident in the highlights just shown on TV

 

Rangers....

 

1 Clearded off line

1 Miller pen claim denied

4 Good Kello saves

2 posts rattled Papic, Davies

1 sitter , Davies over bar

7 squaddies

2 goals

 

Hearts...

 

1 Kyle back post over bar

1 Kyle header over bar

1 squaddie

1 goal

 

its sore to lose late, cannae always be the SFAs fault, perhaps we need to raise our game.

[Era Macaroons]

There were 2 key decisions at the game. The first was the decision to add 5 mintues on, which won't be seen at any other game unless either of the old firm are not winning, or someone has a serious injury such as a leg break. If the normal amount of time had been added, 1-1 was the final score, we would have been reasonably happy and they would be upset.

The second key decision was the one to give a foul against CT, and allow Rangers to break and score the winner. If no foul awarded, then CT running into their half against Weir, whilst Kyle and Elliot were up for the cross. Maybe we score, but more likely, more time taken as the ball goes for throw, corner or bye kick. Instead,rangers receive gift, because in my opinion, ref panicked as he thought Rangers might lose goal in time he had awarded, and he just couldn't let that chance happen, therefore he cheated to cover his own back. Maybe he didn't want Rangers to score, but he sure as anything didn't want his name in the papers being criticised by Uncle Walter and his media mates, as a reason why Rangers lost a goal.

 

 

I reckon CTs studs were horizontal (showing & waist high) as he made that challenge, he needs to nick it with the toe of his boot , and he was coming in at pace. thats a modern day foul.

[Cabbie754]

All I can say is in the 98 Cup Final when we were 2-1 up against Rangers we had SEVEN minutes of extra time. That time we managed to hold on but it's always the same when we play either of the old infirm.

[Era Macaroons]

All I can say is in the 98 Cup Final when we were 2-1 up against Rangers we had SEVEN minutes of extra time. That time we managed to hold on but it's always the same when we play either of the old infirm.

 

 

Your right, it is is always the same, us hanging on for dear life instead of trying to score ourselves.

 

the SFA had a fine opportunity to give McCoist a pen towards the end of that cup final.

[shaun.lawson]

Your right, it is is always the same, us hanging on for dear life instead of trying to score ourselves.

 

the SFA had a fine opportunity to give McCoist a pen towards the end of that cup final.

 

To this day, I haven't the foggiest where all that injury time came from. But it's a really good point you make. Why are we always hanging on against the OF? Why is it always them who seem to be coming with wave after wave of attack in those situations?

[mac]

To this day, I haven't the foggiest where all that injury time came from. But it's a really good point you make. Why are we always hanging on against the OF? Why is it always them who seem to be coming with wave after wave of attack in those situations?

 

 

Good point, SL.

[audrey65]

That would be the game in which Steve Fulton was fouled outside the box and we were given a penalty?

 

 

All I can say is in the 98 Cup Final when we were 2-1 up against Rangers we had SEVEN minutes of extra time. That time we managed to hold on but it's always the same when we play either of the old infirm.

[Charlie-Brown]

eggert, black and j.thomson all got justified bookings on saturday however can anyone explain why bugherra, weir and naismith also didn't get equally deserved yellow cards for blatant fouls on c.elliot in the first half? naismith yellow card on obua should have been his second and thus a deserved red card. One law for them iam afraid.

[mikescotland]

I think its good to analyse decisions both for/against us. I also think there's no doubt at all that Scottish refs seem to be poorer than ever just now, but I don't think its part of some grand conspiracy against us. I think its the same situation you get in any league in the world that is dominated by a small group of teams. In our case the situation is amplified because of the size of our country and the passion for the football, the increased media coverage and intensity etc.

 

Its fine if you buy-in to the conspiracy stuff, everyone should be free to have their view and its an interesting debate. I just feel that we've gone way past that point of reason on here. Anything and everything that goes against is because of the SFA/GFA and when you see people talking about what decisions will go against us in the lead-up to a game its pretty depressing. Its also become the case on here that if you don't buy in to the conspiracy stuff, you end up getting abuse hurled at you.

 

We've had a shocking lack of consistency in the management and playing staff over the last 5 years. What sort of results would any team in the country get with those sort of changes? The huns over the last few years have shown just what team spirit coupled with a core playing and management team can get you. I know their spending is way above ours, but they've been drastically cutting salaries and transfer fees for years, yet still manage to come out on top of the tims and the rest of the league. This season they seem to never let their heads go down and whether its fitness or team spirit, they keep playing until the final whistle. Much as I hate to say it, we could take a leaf out of their book. Its been mentioned elsewhere about this siege mentality and I think that's spot-on. We need to develop a siege mentality here rather than a persecution complex.

[The Treasurer]

Referees in Scotland take the "easy" option. ie give the decision to the OF club.

If they do that all that happens is the other teams manager will bump his gums to the media but it will get very little coverage and be swept away by the next day.

However if they gave a crucial decision AGAINST the OF then it's headline news, it gets analysed to death, the ref gets threatened and his background called into question,

So basically they no doubt think it's not worth the hassle and take the easy route.

 

 

A wee side note to the injury time added, the board didn't actually go up until 92 minutes so there was actually 7 minutes added on.

[269miles]

That would be the game in which Steve Fulton was fouled outside the box and we were given a penalty?

 

 

 

 

Technically you are correct but anyone watching would agree , I'm sure , that it was one of the most marginal decisons ever, given Fulton's proximity to the penalty area.

 

As has already been said on this matter : Bazza's basketball skills which allowed him to score in the LC semi , the incredible spineless/gutless action shown by Hugh Dallas in not slapping down his assisant for THAT penalty, the farcical sending off at Aberdeen in which the video evidence exonerates the Hearts player....

 

there is plenty to be upset about.

 

I haven't seent he match (yet) but a mate of mine down here has recorded it for future viewing said the ref was shocking. His dad is a former Aston Villa player and said pretty much the same. Scottish refs are just not good enough.

[audrey65]

I do not disagree with you 269miles. The bit I am having difficulty with is that there is some sort of conspiracy against us. My argument in this case is that if the ref's were corrupt cheats, which has been alluded to here, as opposed to merely incompetent buffoons then Willie Young would not have given us a penalty that day. The suggestion was that he (willie young) added on seven minutes to help Rangers score and I was pointing out that if that was the case surely he would not have given us a dubious penalty. It's getting a bit out of hand when people are suggesting that the referee in the Hamilton game had been instructed by the SFA to send of four Hearts players which was the reason he sent the guys off for fighting in the tunnel. Surely you see the obvious flaws in this logic? Furthermore it has even been suggested elsewhere that the BBC are now in on it by being selective with their editing of the highlights.

 

I am not alone as there appears to be plenty posters providing evidence to contradict the paranoia but it is, in general, being ignored. Opinions eh!

 

 

 

 

Technically you are correct but anyone watching would agree , I'm sure , that it was one of the most marginal decisons ever, given Fulton's proximity to the penalty area.

 

As has already been said on this matter : Bazza's basketball skills which allowed him to score in the LC semi , the incredible spineless/gutless action shown by Hugh Dallas in not slapping down his assisant for THAT penalty, the farcical sending off at Aberdeen in which the video evidence exonerates the Hearts player....

 

there is plenty to be upset about.

 

I haven't seent he match (yet) but a mate of mine down here has recorded it for future viewing said the ref was shocking. His dad is a former Aston Villa player and said pretty much the same. Scottish refs are just not good enough.

[Sheepie]

I do not disagree with you 269miles. The bit I am having difficulty with is that there is some sort of conspiracy against us. My argument in this case is that if the ref's were corrupt cheats, which has been alluded to here, as opposed to merely incompetent buffoons then Willie Young would not have given us a penalty that day. The suggestion was that he (willie young) added on seven minutes to help Rangers score and I was pointing out that if that was the case surely he would not have given us a dubious penalty. It's getting a bit out of hand when people are suggesting that the referee in the Hamilton game had been instructed by the SFA to send of four Hearts players which was the reason he sent the guys off for fighting in the tunnel. Surely you see the obvious flaws in this logic? Furthermore it has even been suggested elsewhere that the BBC are now in on it by being selective with their editing of the highlights.

 

I am not alone as there appears to be plenty posters providing evidence to contradict the paranoia but it is, in general, being ignored. Opinions eh!

 

The SFA

The SPL

The BBC

The Press

UEFA

FIFA

[gorgie rd eh11]

I do not disagree with you 269miles. The bit I am having difficulty with is that there is some sort of conspiracy against us. My argument in this case is that if the ref's were corrupt cheats, which has been alluded to here, as opposed to merely incompetent buffoons then Willie Young would not have given us a penalty that day. The suggestion was that he (willie young) added on seven minutes to help Rangers score and I was pointing out that if that was the case surely he would not have given us a dubious penalty. It's getting a bit out of hand when people are suggesting that the referee in the Hamilton game had been instructed by the SFA to send of four Hearts players which was the reason he sent the guys off for fighting in the tunnel. Surely you see the obvious flaws in this logic? Furthermore it has even been suggested elsewhere that the BBC are now in on it by being selective with their editing of the highlights.

 

I am not alone as there appears to be plenty posters providing evidence to contradict the paranoia but it is, in general, being ignored. Opinions eh!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I love the "we got a 50/50 decision 12 years ago" thing. It always convinces me we get a fair crack of the whip.

[audrey65]

where did I say that?

 

I love the "we got a 50/50 decision 12 years ago" thing. It always convinces me we get a fair crack of the whip.

[Jam Tarts 1874]

Most officials just want an easy life, they are ball-free, chinless wonders. The majority of them are fans of either one of the old firm, their family and friends are fans of either one of the old firm, they live in areas where everyone around them are fans of either one of the old firm and they are employed by an organisation that has a vested interest in continuation of the old firm duopoly.

 

To suggest that none of the above influences the decisions of the officials is just fantasy.

[HMFC DkB]

I reckon CTs studs were horizontal (showing & waist high) as he made that challenge, he needs to nick it with the toe of his boot , and he was coming in at pace. thats a modern day foul.

 

 

would it of been giving the other way? would it ****!!!!!

[TheBigO]

I've just quickly run through this thread as I did't see the game on Sat (I will watch lots of games from now on, promise!).

 

A agree with most on here. I agree with the ones saying that refs are biased cheats who favour the OF and I agree with those saying we can't blame the refs for getting beaten all the time.

 

Just from the highlights, we defended their two goal badly.

 

BUT, again, just from highlights, I have to say, the ref called decisions differently for both teams. Noone has mentioned this much on this thread. What about early in the game when Boughera brings down Calum who has a clearish run at goal. Blatant as you like. Freekick and yellow....??? NOTHING.

 

The decision which led to their 1st goal was the correct decision - freekick and a yellow to Barr, but it was NO different to the incident with Calum and Boughera. After watching games v the OF for 30 years, it's these decisions which kill you (like for like - i.e. the "high feet" which led to their second: would it have been given the other way?). It isn't a fair playing field and I can't see it ever being so.

 

That said, you have to go out and defend properly. You can't break up if you're in the wall and you have to close players down on and off the ball - especially bloomin on it though!

[Malinga the Swinga]

I've just quickly run through this thread as I did't see the game on Sat (I will watch lots of games from now on, promise!).

 

A agree with most on here. I agree with the ones saying that refs are biased cheats who favour the OF and I agree with those saying we can't blame the refs for getting beaten all the time.

 

Just from the highlights, we defended their two goal badly.

 

BUT, again, just from highlights, I have to say, the ref called decisions differently for both teams. Noone has mentioned this much on this thread. What about early in the game when Boughera brings down Calum who has a clearish run at goal. Blatant as you like. Freekick and yellow....??? NOTHING.

 

The decision which led to their 1st goal was the correct decision - freekick and a yellow to Barr, but it was NO different to the incident with Calum and Boughera. After watching games v the OF for 30 years, it's these decisions which kill you (like for like - i.e. the "high feet" which led to their second: would it have been given the other way?). It isn't a fair playing field and I can't see it ever being so.

 

That said, you have to go out and defend properly. You can't break up if you're in the wall and you have to close players down on and off the ball - especially bloomin on it though!

 

There was a clear difference between Boughera on Elliott and Barr on Naismith. The first was by a beloved Rangers player on a Hearts player, therefore no foul and no booking. Under SFA law, this is almost correct although I believe that Elliott should technically have been booked for having the cheek to be fouled by a Rangers player. The second foul was Barr on Naismith, and this time, the ref again failed as he should have known that 1-0 down, the SFA correct process is to send off a player who fouls the new darling of the media and Rangers new great hope.