Perth to Paisley Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 According to the Metro (must be true) Bougherra behaviour was not included in ref's report .......... Move on Sir. Prize on offer for the person who uses the best other words for ?Rules for them us and different rules for them!" Amd "Miko" in the one sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boof Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I don't know whether it's accurate or not but surely, in these technological times, the SFA can act on events that aren't necessarily in the referee's report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 I don't know whether it's accurate or not but surely, in these technological times, the SFA can act on events that aren't necessarily in the referee's report? i could be wrong but i think the report is the be-all-and-end-all criteria for retrospective actions. it's one of those convenient types of rules that enable governing bodies such as the SFA & SPL to hide behind. not in the referee's report eh? did the referee have a free hand in compiling his own report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 i could be wrong but i think the report is the be-all-and-end-all criteria for retrospective actions. it's one of those convenient types of rules that enable governing bodies such as the SFA & SPL to hide behind. not in the referee's report eh? did the referee have a free hand in compiling his own report? Difficult match for Murray but you do have to ask what he was thinking by not including it...Affects his credibility IMO. Only possible excuse is that he has a box to fill and didn't have enough space to get everything he ought to report down on paper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge21 Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 One rule for Miko one rule for the Glasgow, GFA teams. Scottish football is corrupt. Not even included in the referee's report. Callum Murray had a stinker and as said above his credibility IMO has gone right out the window. Chance to do the right think but he was just scared. Mind you have to referee the old firm differently. Level playing field and all that. Corrupt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eckauskas Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 That's incredibly disappointing. Good to see the GFA admit that Bougherra is above the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Difficult match for Murray but you do have to ask what he was thinking by not including it...Affects his credibility IMO. Only possible excuse is that he has a box to fill and didn't have enough space to get everything he ought to report down on paper! i go back to my wondering about whether or not the referee had a free hand in compiling the report. given what we now know about what the likes of hugh dallas got up to, anything is possible with those corrupt swines. i say it's entirely possible that any given referee can sometimes be 'given a hand' to fill out his match report. it would be naive to think it's not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genghis Khan Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 i go back to my wondering about whether or not the referee had a free hand in compiling the report. given what we now know about what the likes of hugh dallas got up to, anything is possible with those corrupt swines. i say it's entirely possible that any given referee can sometimes be 'given a hand' to fill out his match report. it would be naive to think it's not possible. Maybe Bougherra had a hold of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagger Is Back Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Could be my memory but was Hartley not done for kicking a Celtic player up the deaf and dumb as a result of TV evidence? The ref must have missed it as I'm pretty sure he wasn't booked or sent off during the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankenstein Jambo. Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Think if violent conduct is not on the referees report further TV evidence can be used to punish a player, (I THINK) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Benoit Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Think if violent conduct is not on the referees report further TV evidence can be used to punish a player, (I THINK) That's right but how often do you see OF players get booked for something a player in another team would get sent off for? That's when you hear the comments about the referee dealing with it at the time, absolute joke. I have no doubt that if a player from another team had done what Boughera did there would have been a witch hunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Treasurer Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Could be my memory but was Hartley not done for kicking a Celtic player up the deaf and dumb as a result of TV evidence? The ref must have missed it as I'm pretty sure he wasn't booked or sent off during the match. You're quite correct. Nothing done at the time as the ref never saw it but TV evidence was used to "convict" Hartley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dipped Flake Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 You're quite correct. Nothing done at the time as the ref never saw it but TV evidence was used to "convict" Hartley. In this case though I think we can safely say the referee saw it, as Bougherra was holding his arm at the time!! If the referee says nothing about Bougherra in his report, apart from the fact he sent him off, then that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamhammer Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 The only surprising thing about this is that anybody is surprised by it at all anymore. In the English Prem, yes referees are swayed by the reputations of the bigger clubs into giving soft penalties etc but I don't believe the governing body itself favours any team. Up here it is, has and always will be the Fuglies and the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gizmo Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 One rule to rule them all One rule to fine them Another rule for the old firm And in the weegia blind them In the land of Glasgow where the shadows lie Apologies to JRR Tolkien. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It gets worse, according to the Herald today, Diouf won't face any investigation either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It gets worse, according to the Herald today, Diouf won't face any investigation either. Rangers duo in the clear ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 One rule to rule them all One rule to fine them Another rule for the old firm And in the weegia blind them In the land of Glasgow where the shadows lie Apologies to JRR Tolkien. Don't apologise. Tp work, JSW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 If a tree falls in a forest and no ones around to hear it, does it make a sound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CF11JamTart Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 If a tree falls in a forest and no ones around to hear it, does it make a sound? I like this analogy. Like Hartson-Webster. If something happens, but it's not in the ref's report,it didn't REALLY happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It's things like this that prove that the McLeish report needs to be implemented at the SFA now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Not at all surprised! But, hey ho, there's no brown envelopes involved, so it's not corruption! My great aunty's skiffle board it's not!!! On behalf of all the other Kickbackers who have had their eyes open, we told you so!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 Could be my memory but was Hartley not done for kicking a Celtic player up the deaf and dumb as a result of TV evidence? The ref must have missed it as I'm pretty sure he wasn't booked or sent off during the match. He was yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossthejambo Posted March 8, 2011 Share Posted March 8, 2011 It does say at the end of the Metro article that they could still face disciplinary action once the SFA have concluded their investigation...chances of that aren't very high admittedly but they're not out the woods yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.