Discussion:
Refereeing conspiracy
(too old to reply)
Fish Supper
2010-03-21 18:51:17 UTC
Permalink
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.

Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.

And did they not score from just such a break?

Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
liam67
2010-03-22 18:19:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
bizenya
2010-03-22 18:52:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?

If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with his good
hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?

Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
liam67
2010-03-22 19:54:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by bizenya
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?
If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with his good
hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?
Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
Just a wee joke biz. Fish Supper suggested the gers werent lucky in
the last old firm game since they had ten corners. I was just
wondering how nonlinear suppers logic was...
Fish Supper
2010-03-22 23:43:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by liam67
Post by bizenya
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?
If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with his good
hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?
Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
Just a wee joke biz. Fish Supper suggested the gers werent lucky in
the last old firm game since they had ten corners. I was just
wondering how nonlinear suppers logic was...
I think you'll find that I said we weren't lucky because we played you off
the park, of which our ten corners to nil was merely a reflection.

We weren't lucky then and we weren't lucky yesterday.

We were, in fact, unlucky with refereeing decisions. In both cases the ref
had a choice to make and could have given a yellow card in both instances.
In fact, in most games I believe that's what would have been given. I also
think he was dead right with the first red and very harsh with the second.

The goal yesterday was a textbook piece, slickly played out, perfectly
flighted cross and a sublime finish. Not an inch of luck anywhere.
liam67
2010-03-23 02:29:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fish Supper
Post by liam67
Post by bizenya
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?
If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with his good
hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?
Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
Just a wee joke biz. Fish Supper suggested the gers werent lucky in
the last old firm game since they had ten corners. I was just
wondering how nonlinear suppers logic was...
I think you'll find that I said we weren't lucky because we played you off
the park, of which our ten corners to nil was merely a reflection.
With nine corners and 65% possession St Mirren must have played you
off the park...you were lucky...
Post by Fish Supper
We weren't lucky then and we weren't lucky yesterday.
We were, in fact, unlucky with refereeing decisions. In both cases the ref
had a choice to make and could have given a yellow card in both instances.
In fact, in most games I believe that's what would have been given. I also
think he was dead right with the first red and very harsh with the second.
It was a straight red for Thompson. No doubt about it. I suppose if
you're a rangers fan, then it's suprising that a foul was given
against you by any Scottish ref...so therefore it was a very harsh, if
not incredible, decision... ;0)
Fish Supper
2010-03-23 15:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
Post by liam67
Post by bizenya
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force
St
Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?
If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with
his
good
hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?
Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
Just a wee joke biz. Fish Supper suggested the gers werent lucky in
the last old firm game since they had ten corners. I was just
wondering how nonlinear suppers logic was...
I think you'll find that I said we weren't lucky because we played you off
the park, of which our ten corners to nil was merely a reflection.
With nine corners and 65% possession St Mirren must have played you
off the park...you were lucky...
Post by Fish Supper
We weren't lucky then and we weren't lucky yesterday.
We were, in fact, unlucky with refereeing decisions. In both cases the ref
had a choice to make and could have given a yellow card in both instances.
In fact, in most games I believe that's what would have been given. I also
think he was dead right with the first red and very harsh with the second.
It was a straight red for Thompson. No doubt about it. I suppose if
you're a rangers fan, then it's suprising that a foul was given
against you by any Scottish ref...so therefore it was a very harsh, if
not incredible, decision... ;0)
Not that surprising - it's happened before.

In the 2002 - 2003 season, Dundee Utd were awarded a throw in which clearly
hit their player last. Mind you, that was at Tannadice.

Fish Supper
2010-03-22 23:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by bizenya
Post by liam67
Post by Fish Supper
If there was any doubt there can be none now - the refs will do everything
in their power to ensure a Rangers victory.
Referee Thompson knew that by sending off two Gers he would force St Mirren
into the offensive and thus allow Rangers to play on the break.
And did they not score from just such a break?
Proof positive of hunnish corruption!
Ach you were lucky...you clearly didn't deserve to win...since, and I
know you like your stats, St Mirren got 9 corners to your 2 and saints
had 65% possession.... ;0)
Lucky in as much as they were shite and ineffectual against a team of nine
men?
If two boxers are hugely mis-matched so much so that X beats Y with his
good hand tied behind his back, is he lucky or is he just superior?
If the stats show that the weak boxer threw and landed many more punches
ineffectually does that mean he was unlucky to lose?
Your straws are looking rather ragged these days pal!
;o)
You're taking Harry carpenter's passing badly, Biz.
Loading...