comment by Zico 🏴 Fold like a ... (U21900)
posted 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
comment by WorkPermitPending (U1067)
posted 1 hour, 48 minutes ago
comment by Magnum (2 in a row easy) (U22391)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by WorkPermitPending (U1067)
posted 13 minutes ago
Obviously I'd expect the Aberdeen fans to call for a penalty, and I'd expect Rangers fans to call for a penalty if it were the other way around because that's what partisan fans do, and on first viewing it did look like a pull back from Goldson that may have continued into the box. Watching it back though, it's clearly not a foul (by Goldson), clearly not a penalty, clearly the right call by the ref, so as far as any "Rangers penalty anomaly" theories go, Rangers not getting a penalty against them because they didn't commit a foul in the box is a pretty weak argument and hints towards some deeper paranoia or at least desire for a conspiracy to be true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would suggest that the paranoia and conspiracy stuff is more based on the fact that you've had one penalty against in 95 domestic matches, yet managed to concede 4 in 10 games in Europe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A rational mind might consider that it might have something to do with having much more defending to do in those games against a far higher standard of attacker. But I guess sometimes it's more comforting to just howl at the moon instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An even more rational mind might say, then why haven't Celtic seen the same statistics, considering they are the most attacking successful club for the last few years.
Anyone thinking the stats ain't skewed is mental.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trying to claim you conspiracists are more rational
How do pens against Rangers/Celtic compare over a longer period then?
There was the season Celtic didn’t have any pens against them, was that 15 or 16.
Since rangers came back to the top division in 16/17, Celtic have conceded 24 penalties. Rangers have conceded 14.
Rangers have been awarded 51 to Celtic’s 46.
This is currently the second season since then that rangers have not had a penalty awarded against them so far.
I think any rational person would say considering how the leagues have played out since then that there’s an anomaly there.
One positive for Celtic fans is that both apophenia and confirmation bias are natural human responses and not necessarily signs of any deeper psychological issues.
Can you explain that difference, considering you dismissed we’re playing against the same defences and Celtic have been the dominant attacking force between the 2 teams during that period?
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 11 minutes ago
Can you explain that difference, considering you dismissed we’re playing against the same defences and Celtic have been the dominant attacking force between the 2 teams during that period?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Certainly. For a start, while we have in the main played the same teams, the games themselves have been different and so what happens against one opponent for one team will not necessarily happen against the same opponent for the other team. Additionally, our teams employ different attacking and defensive tactics.
In terms of penalties conceded, while both Celtic and Rangers push their full-backs forward aggressively, Celtic tend to play a more pedal-to-the-metal attacking style which leaves the centre backs more exposed. This has been acknowledged by Big Ange himself. It makes sense that if the defence are more exposed then they are more likely to make mistakes leading to a penalty. Perhaps Rangers defenders are also more disciplined in these situations. Our bombscare defenders also tend to just allow the opposition to score rather than get close enough to challenge them never mind commit a foul.
In terms of penalties awarded, Celtic tend to attack far more efficiently than Rangers, with shots coming quickly after balls into the box. Rangers, on the other hand, spend an awful lot of time faffing around in the opposition box without creating clear scoring opportunities. This does, however, eventually increase the liklihood of a defender making a mistake and conceding a penalty in the tedious war of attrition.
Or hey, maybe it's all a conspiracy.
I don’t see why there’s a constant need to use the word ‘conspiracy’. It’s not a word I’ve ever used to explain the difference.
As Postecoglu has only been here since the start of last season, I don’t think your argument holds much weight.
Using your argument, you would expect us to have conceded penalties in more ‘one on one’ situations-and I can’t remember the last time that was the case. As there’s been 3 managers since rangers came back into the league-all with different styles-then that clearly doesn’t hold water.
I would also think that Celtic spend as much if not more time in the opposition box, which would-again using your argument-lead to as many if not more situations where opposing defenders would dive in and concede a foul. That’s not happened.
So, despite all the different managers and all the different styles, the most dominant team in the league doesn’t have similar stats to another team. Without checking and going from memory, this stands out when compared to other leagues.
I mean, it was you who said that penalty stats for rangers changed when they played against better teams. Here we have 2 teams in the same league, where one of them has been utterly dominant in recent years-yet they’re completely out of kilter.
Sometimes, it’s just as well to say ‘yeah, that looks a bit of an anomaly’ rather than tying yourself in knots trying to justify it.
Lot of nonsense here. Talking about more time in opposition box for example, quite clearly Celtic are more efficient in the opposition box while we have guys like Kent who almost refuse to shoot. Not clear cut and daft hypothesising, quite simply there have been different situations.
As for different managers, Beale sets up pretty much same as Gerrard. The players also haven’t changed. So don’t nonsense there.
Don’t think there’s any stonewall claims against us that have been missed. A lack of consistency for a couple handballs, but that’s obviously a wider issue and anyone rational would know that.
On big decisions this season that have mattered we had Lundstram wrongly sent off against Hibs. We dropped two points in that game. If anyone has been disadvantaged this season it’s us, as could have put more pressure on Celtic.
Biggest decision wrong on recent years I can remember is Celtic getting an offside goal against us in the cup final.
Can’t imagine what you conspiracists would spout if decisions had actually cost Celtic.
‘Lot of nonsense here. Talking about more time in opposition box for example, quite clearly Celtic are more efficient in the opposition box while we have guys like Kent who almost refuse to shoot. Not clear cut and daft hypothesising, quite simply there have been different situations.’
I’d think we’ve spent a lot more time in the opposition box than rangers in that period. Without checking, the goals scored would show that. That just means we’re better-it doesn’t negate the point about opposition defenders diving in to tackles.
‘As for different managers, Beale sets up pretty much same as Gerrard. The players also haven’t changed. So don’t nonsense there.’
I wish you guys would make your mind up about this. I was debating this point with Smid the other week about how it was much the same players that took you to the final of the Europa-and he told me the team was completely different! Irrespective-the point being made was that Celtic have played the same way during that period, when clearly we haven’t under the 3 different managers we’ve had. That was more the point-not about how rangers set up.
‘Don’t think there’s any stonewall claims against us that have been missed. A lack of consistency for a couple handballs, but that’s obviously a wider issue and anyone rational would know that.’
If you’re expecting me to look back at every season, then sorry, I’m not doing it. But, I’m pretty confident you’re talking bollox here.
‘On big decisions this season that have mattered we had Lundstram wrongly sent off against Hibs. We dropped two points in that game. If anyone has been disadvantaged this season it’s us, as could have put more pressure on Celtic.’
The introduction of VAR in the game we played Hearts at tynecastle. We were denied a stonewall penalty. Know the difference? We just went on and won. That’s the reason why decisions haven’t affected the outcome.
‘Biggest decision wrong on recent years I can remember is Celtic getting an offside goal against us in the cup final.’
He was actually onside.
Again, I’ve not put any of this down to a conspiracy. It’s a lazy retort when you can’t genuinely explain why this is such an incredibly anomaly. Like I said, I’m pretty sure if you look round the European leagues, the difference between Celtic and rangers stands out a mile. All these teams play with different styles and have had different managers, but there’s a general degree of consistency.
Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.
I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.
Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.
Was clearly offside that goal.
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
‘Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.’
They don’t give any kind of evidence as to how attacking a team is?! In our league?? Ok…
‘I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.’
I wasn’t. I was showing the difference over a sustained period of time-that’s a far better measure than 1 season and 1 type of offence. And btw-Tavernier had an outrageous handball not given against him at Pittodrie earlier in the season. He actually pushed it on to his own post.
‘Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.’
Rangers disadvantaged themselves. Lundstrum, by his actions, made the referee have to take a decision. All you had to do was not concede another goal-which you did. Celtic, more recently under Postecoglu, try not to let unfavourable decisions alter their target. We’ve had an incredible amount of decisions go against us during games-fouls given against us for nothing, fouls not given, etc-on top of what you’d probably class as major decisions. Rangers just haven’t been able to cope with any set backs.
And he was onside. Think it was Helander that was playing him on.
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Against who? If that was the agenda then it didn't even come close to working. Celtic have been superb this season so where is the disadvantage at play?
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Against who? If that was the agenda then it didn't even come close to working. Celtic have been superb this season so where is the disadvantage at play?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I’ve not limited this to this season alone-and neither have I said it’s an agenda.
It’s probably more a reflection on your team that there’s still such a gap.
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Celtic having such a successful season playing attacking football matched with Rangers playing poorly is a basic understanding of whatever discrepancies you may find
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 11 minutes ago
‘Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.’
They don’t give any kind of evidence as to how attacking a team is?! In our league?? Ok…
‘I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.’
I wasn’t. I was showing the difference over a sustained period of time-that’s a far better measure than 1 season and 1 type of offence. And btw-Tavernier had an outrageous handball not given against him at Pittodrie earlier in the season. He actually pushed it on to his own post.
‘Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.’
Rangers disadvantaged themselves. Lundstrum, by his actions, made the referee have to take a decision. All you had to do was not concede another goal-which you did. Celtic, more recently under Postecoglu, try not to let unfavourable decisions alter their target. We’ve had an incredible amount of decisions go against us during games-fouls given against us for nothing, fouls not given, etc-on top of what you’d probably class as major decisions. Rangers just haven’t been able to cope with any set backs.
And he was onside. Think it was Helander that was playing him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re clearly new to Scottish football if you think both Rangers and Celtic don’t face the same tactics, and the park the bus most teams employ.
It’s a daft point to start by looking at goals. There will be charts I’m sure that state percentages in final third.
Shots wouldn’t Show it either, given as most will know main criticism of Kent is he doesn’t because he doesn’t shoot.
But you continue to jump to conclusions. That’s all this debate is really, Celtic fans jumping to conclusions without actually considering the relevant circumstances.
You could similarly look at stats as evidence that refs are far more lenient with Celtic, given that a far higher number of fouls to yellow cards. It’s an anomaly as you say in comparison to the rest of the league. So clearly Celtic get it easy from refs when they should have more yellow cards given against them.
Don’t think it was conclusive that Tav actually handled it when you looked at other angles. But I’m not a mentalist so I don’t keep a note of these things, or gutted worked up about things enough to build incidents into my conspiracy theories.
Your point on us not dealing with setbacks is daft. Clearly there have been other setbacks Rangers have faced. Clearly Celtic have been better than us.
Offside is offside. It was clearly offside. Mad you can try argue that yet when considering if Duk clamping hold of Goldson could have had an impact you are dismissive.
The Goldson handball is the only obvious one I can think of off the top of my head. What penalties should Rangers have conceded and I'm happy to have a look
And similarly on goals Rangers fans will be aware McGregor has worst record in league for shots faced to goals conceded. It’s simply daft to simply conclude goals show how attacking a team is.
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Celtic having such a successful season playing attacking football matched with Rangers playing poorly is a basic understanding of whatever discrepancies you may find
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet with all our attack minded football, we receive fewer penalties?
Sign in if you want to comment
VAR Bad decisions..?
Page 7 of 13
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Zico 🏴 Fold like a ... (U21900)
posted 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
comment by WorkPermitPending (U1067)
posted 1 hour, 48 minutes ago
comment by Magnum (2 in a row easy) (U22391)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by WorkPermitPending (U1067)
posted 13 minutes ago
Obviously I'd expect the Aberdeen fans to call for a penalty, and I'd expect Rangers fans to call for a penalty if it were the other way around because that's what partisan fans do, and on first viewing it did look like a pull back from Goldson that may have continued into the box. Watching it back though, it's clearly not a foul (by Goldson), clearly not a penalty, clearly the right call by the ref, so as far as any "Rangers penalty anomaly" theories go, Rangers not getting a penalty against them because they didn't commit a foul in the box is a pretty weak argument and hints towards some deeper paranoia or at least desire for a conspiracy to be true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would suggest that the paranoia and conspiracy stuff is more based on the fact that you've had one penalty against in 95 domestic matches, yet managed to concede 4 in 10 games in Europe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A rational mind might consider that it might have something to do with having much more defending to do in those games against a far higher standard of attacker. But I guess sometimes it's more comforting to just howl at the moon instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An even more rational mind might say, then why haven't Celtic seen the same statistics, considering they are the most attacking successful club for the last few years.
Anyone thinking the stats ain't skewed is mental.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trying to claim you conspiracists are more rational
How do pens against Rangers/Celtic compare over a longer period then?
There was the season Celtic didn’t have any pens against them, was that 15 or 16.
posted on 9/5/23
Since rangers came back to the top division in 16/17, Celtic have conceded 24 penalties. Rangers have conceded 14.
Rangers have been awarded 51 to Celtic’s 46.
This is currently the second season since then that rangers have not had a penalty awarded against them so far.
I think any rational person would say considering how the leagues have played out since then that there’s an anomaly there.
posted on 9/5/23
One positive for Celtic fans is that both apophenia and confirmation bias are natural human responses and not necessarily signs of any deeper psychological issues.
posted on 9/5/23
Can you explain that difference, considering you dismissed we’re playing against the same defences and Celtic have been the dominant attacking force between the 2 teams during that period?
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 11 minutes ago
Can you explain that difference, considering you dismissed we’re playing against the same defences and Celtic have been the dominant attacking force between the 2 teams during that period?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Certainly. For a start, while we have in the main played the same teams, the games themselves have been different and so what happens against one opponent for one team will not necessarily happen against the same opponent for the other team. Additionally, our teams employ different attacking and defensive tactics.
In terms of penalties conceded, while both Celtic and Rangers push their full-backs forward aggressively, Celtic tend to play a more pedal-to-the-metal attacking style which leaves the centre backs more exposed. This has been acknowledged by Big Ange himself. It makes sense that if the defence are more exposed then they are more likely to make mistakes leading to a penalty. Perhaps Rangers defenders are also more disciplined in these situations. Our bombscare defenders also tend to just allow the opposition to score rather than get close enough to challenge them never mind commit a foul.
In terms of penalties awarded, Celtic tend to attack far more efficiently than Rangers, with shots coming quickly after balls into the box. Rangers, on the other hand, spend an awful lot of time faffing around in the opposition box without creating clear scoring opportunities. This does, however, eventually increase the liklihood of a defender making a mistake and conceding a penalty in the tedious war of attrition.
Or hey, maybe it's all a conspiracy.
posted on 9/5/23
I don’t see why there’s a constant need to use the word ‘conspiracy’. It’s not a word I’ve ever used to explain the difference.
As Postecoglu has only been here since the start of last season, I don’t think your argument holds much weight.
Using your argument, you would expect us to have conceded penalties in more ‘one on one’ situations-and I can’t remember the last time that was the case. As there’s been 3 managers since rangers came back into the league-all with different styles-then that clearly doesn’t hold water.
I would also think that Celtic spend as much if not more time in the opposition box, which would-again using your argument-lead to as many if not more situations where opposing defenders would dive in and concede a foul. That’s not happened.
So, despite all the different managers and all the different styles, the most dominant team in the league doesn’t have similar stats to another team. Without checking and going from memory, this stands out when compared to other leagues.
I mean, it was you who said that penalty stats for rangers changed when they played against better teams. Here we have 2 teams in the same league, where one of them has been utterly dominant in recent years-yet they’re completely out of kilter.
Sometimes, it’s just as well to say ‘yeah, that looks a bit of an anomaly’ rather than tying yourself in knots trying to justify it.
posted on 9/5/23
Lot of nonsense here. Talking about more time in opposition box for example, quite clearly Celtic are more efficient in the opposition box while we have guys like Kent who almost refuse to shoot. Not clear cut and daft hypothesising, quite simply there have been different situations.
As for different managers, Beale sets up pretty much same as Gerrard. The players also haven’t changed. So don’t nonsense there.
Don’t think there’s any stonewall claims against us that have been missed. A lack of consistency for a couple handballs, but that’s obviously a wider issue and anyone rational would know that.
On big decisions this season that have mattered we had Lundstram wrongly sent off against Hibs. We dropped two points in that game. If anyone has been disadvantaged this season it’s us, as could have put more pressure on Celtic.
Biggest decision wrong on recent years I can remember is Celtic getting an offside goal against us in the cup final.
Can’t imagine what you conspiracists would spout if decisions had actually cost Celtic.
posted on 9/5/23
‘Lot of nonsense here. Talking about more time in opposition box for example, quite clearly Celtic are more efficient in the opposition box while we have guys like Kent who almost refuse to shoot. Not clear cut and daft hypothesising, quite simply there have been different situations.’
I’d think we’ve spent a lot more time in the opposition box than rangers in that period. Without checking, the goals scored would show that. That just means we’re better-it doesn’t negate the point about opposition defenders diving in to tackles.
‘As for different managers, Beale sets up pretty much same as Gerrard. The players also haven’t changed. So don’t nonsense there.’
I wish you guys would make your mind up about this. I was debating this point with Smid the other week about how it was much the same players that took you to the final of the Europa-and he told me the team was completely different! Irrespective-the point being made was that Celtic have played the same way during that period, when clearly we haven’t under the 3 different managers we’ve had. That was more the point-not about how rangers set up.
‘Don’t think there’s any stonewall claims against us that have been missed. A lack of consistency for a couple handballs, but that’s obviously a wider issue and anyone rational would know that.’
If you’re expecting me to look back at every season, then sorry, I’m not doing it. But, I’m pretty confident you’re talking bollox here.
‘On big decisions this season that have mattered we had Lundstram wrongly sent off against Hibs. We dropped two points in that game. If anyone has been disadvantaged this season it’s us, as could have put more pressure on Celtic.’
The introduction of VAR in the game we played Hearts at tynecastle. We were denied a stonewall penalty. Know the difference? We just went on and won. That’s the reason why decisions haven’t affected the outcome.
‘Biggest decision wrong on recent years I can remember is Celtic getting an offside goal against us in the cup final.’
He was actually onside.
Again, I’ve not put any of this down to a conspiracy. It’s a lazy retort when you can’t genuinely explain why this is such an incredibly anomaly. Like I said, I’m pretty sure if you look round the European leagues, the difference between Celtic and rangers stands out a mile. All these teams play with different styles and have had different managers, but there’s a general degree of consistency.
posted on 9/5/23
Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.
I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.
Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.
Was clearly offside that goal.
posted on 9/5/23
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
posted on 9/5/23
‘Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.’
They don’t give any kind of evidence as to how attacking a team is?! In our league?? Ok…
‘I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.’
I wasn’t. I was showing the difference over a sustained period of time-that’s a far better measure than 1 season and 1 type of offence. And btw-Tavernier had an outrageous handball not given against him at Pittodrie earlier in the season. He actually pushed it on to his own post.
‘Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.’
Rangers disadvantaged themselves. Lundstrum, by his actions, made the referee have to take a decision. All you had to do was not concede another goal-which you did. Celtic, more recently under Postecoglu, try not to let unfavourable decisions alter their target. We’ve had an incredible amount of decisions go against us during games-fouls given against us for nothing, fouls not given, etc-on top of what you’d probably class as major decisions. Rangers just haven’t been able to cope with any set backs.
And he was onside. Think it was Helander that was playing him on.
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
posted on 9/5/23
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Against who? If that was the agenda then it didn't even come close to working. Celtic have been superb this season so where is the disadvantage at play?
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
Rangers lost more games than Celtic this year. Surely if there was a conspiracy then that's the stat to start with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is saying there’s a conspiracy though.
If anything, it just shows that even with all the additional ‘help’ you’ve had, rangers have just been pretty poor.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But if we were helped then we'd win more games otherwise what's the point in doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s the thing-you probably have won more games than you should have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Against who? If that was the agenda then it didn't even come close to working. Celtic have been superb this season so where is the disadvantage at play?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I’ve not limited this to this season alone-and neither have I said it’s an agenda.
It’s probably more a reflection on your team that there’s still such a gap.
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Celtic having such a successful season playing attacking football matched with Rangers playing poorly is a basic understanding of whatever discrepancies you may find
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 11 minutes ago
‘Goals scored don’t show anything. Nonsense hypothesising to suit your opinion.’
They don’t give any kind of evidence as to how attacking a team is?! In our league?? Ok…
‘I was talking about this season in terms of the handballs, and possible handballs against us.’
I wasn’t. I was showing the difference over a sustained period of time-that’s a far better measure than 1 season and 1 type of offence. And btw-Tavernier had an outrageous handball not given against him at Pittodrie earlier in the season. He actually pushed it on to his own post.
‘Yes so agreed we have been disadvantaged by a decision but Celtic haven’t. Never mind the goal ruled out in the recent old firm.’
Rangers disadvantaged themselves. Lundstrum, by his actions, made the referee have to take a decision. All you had to do was not concede another goal-which you did. Celtic, more recently under Postecoglu, try not to let unfavourable decisions alter their target. We’ve had an incredible amount of decisions go against us during games-fouls given against us for nothing, fouls not given, etc-on top of what you’d probably class as major decisions. Rangers just haven’t been able to cope with any set backs.
And he was onside. Think it was Helander that was playing him on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re clearly new to Scottish football if you think both Rangers and Celtic don’t face the same tactics, and the park the bus most teams employ.
It’s a daft point to start by looking at goals. There will be charts I’m sure that state percentages in final third.
Shots wouldn’t Show it either, given as most will know main criticism of Kent is he doesn’t because he doesn’t shoot.
But you continue to jump to conclusions. That’s all this debate is really, Celtic fans jumping to conclusions without actually considering the relevant circumstances.
You could similarly look at stats as evidence that refs are far more lenient with Celtic, given that a far higher number of fouls to yellow cards. It’s an anomaly as you say in comparison to the rest of the league. So clearly Celtic get it easy from refs when they should have more yellow cards given against them.
Don’t think it was conclusive that Tav actually handled it when you looked at other angles. But I’m not a mentalist so I don’t keep a note of these things, or gutted worked up about things enough to build incidents into my conspiracy theories.
Your point on us not dealing with setbacks is daft. Clearly there have been other setbacks Rangers have faced. Clearly Celtic have been better than us.
Offside is offside. It was clearly offside. Mad you can try argue that yet when considering if Duk clamping hold of Goldson could have had an impact you are dismissive.
posted on 9/5/23
The Goldson handball is the only obvious one I can think of off the top of my head. What penalties should Rangers have conceded and I'm happy to have a look
posted on 9/5/23
And similarly on goals Rangers fans will be aware McGregor has worst record in league for shots faced to goals conceded. It’s simply daft to simply conclude goals show how attacking a team is.
posted on 9/5/23
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Mummy's Hairy Growler (U10045)
posted 2 minutes ago
If someone was trying to give unfavourable decisions against celtic then they wouldn't be able to be successful.
You'd have players sent off left right and centre for simple things like unsporting behaviour. You don't need var to punish a team
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry-genuinely don’t know what you mean here?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its easier for a ref to disadvantage Celtic by carding players for descent than dodgy var. Rangers can't have been helped because they didn't win anything
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we’re going to an extreme, but there has to be actual dissent for that to happen. Our referees are poor, and my point being is that there are-in my eyes-statistical anomalies in penalties awarded and conceded.
You’re trying to drive this down the road of a conspiracy, and it’s not something I subscribe to.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Celtic having such a successful season playing attacking football matched with Rangers playing poorly is a basic understanding of whatever discrepancies you may find
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet with all our attack minded football, we receive fewer penalties?
Page 7 of 13
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12