Graham Stack off the hook

[metlika 0]

Minimal contact should make no difference. If it did Naismith would have got off too as there was minimal contact there.

 

I would contend that there was a higher level of intent on the part of Stack than there was on Naismith. Naismith could at least argue that he was using his arm for balance whilst going up for the ball (not saying it is a GOOD defence, but one he could have used). Stack has absolutely NO defence for his actions.

 

This new, fairer system is already a crock of....

I'm not defending him there is intent even with limited footage available, how this fast track team think there is no case is quite frankly unbelievable and already as you say its a crock of shit .

[craig 5,199]

Yeah, wasnt having a go at you metlika, just pointing out the minimal contact makes no difference, or shouldnt.

[craig 5,199]

This is an instance where the club should show some spine and come out with an official statement at their shock and disappointment that one week after the system was used for the first time that it is already not being applied fairly.

[ian1964 10,858]

This is an instance where the club should show some spine and come out with an official statement at their shock and disappointment that one week after the system was used for the first time that it is already not being applied fairly.

 

They're too busy instructing the stewards on the next assault on the BF1 to be worried about a wee thing like that Craig:smile:

[calscot 0]

I think it's good to keep a record of these things as it gives allows us to consult a more accurate picture when the accusations come flying. The main thing to remember is to be as objective as possible if you want it to mean anything.

[craig 5,199]

I think it's good to keep a record of these things as it gives allows us to consult a more accurate picture when the accusations come flying. The main thing to remember is to be as objective as possible if you want it to mean anything.

 

Agreed. Perhaps we could start that list again. We can always rank incidents as a "stonewaller", "marginal", "easy to miss" type incident as well as the effect it actually has on the game.

 

Not just the panel but games as well.

 

For instance, Lafferty's goal against Celtic wasnt offside. Stonewaller.

Hooper's elbow in the Motherwell game. Marginal.

 

Would be interesting. Shame we are 10 games into the season. We wouldnt need to look at too many previous Rangers games as we have only dropped points the once. Wonder if the Tims would have dropped more points due to incorrect reffing decisions.

[Zappa 0]

I dont think it is a whine, more a keeping of records so as to be able to refute the inevitable "we were cheated by Rangers, the SFA, SPL" from the Tims.

 

I can compile a video file and keep updating it with new footage. Just tell me what incidents to put in it for the season so far.

[craig 5,199]

I can compile a video file and keep updating it with new footage. Just tell me what incidents to put in it for the season so far.

 

Unfortunately I can only give you Rangers ones - I dont even get highlights of the SPL games out here

[Zappa 0]

Unfortunately I can only give you Rangers ones - I dont even get highlights of the SPL games out here

 

Rangers ones will do fine. We can just compile dodgy decisions like wrongly called offsides etc and missed incidents like the Stack one for our own games.

[GovanAllan 0]

Well the Ness goal was never offside and Agogo was offside by a couple of yards.