John Beaton warned he was going to be sent off, reveals Craig Levein

[Rousseau 10,027]

12 minutes ago, craig said:

Whilst he clearly got that decision wrong the two instances are completely incomparable.

You and your logic. Leave me with my indignation!

[onevision 1,491]

1 hour ago, craig said:

It isn't handing them an unfair advantage, it is applying common sense.

 

You say Hearts could have had an unfair advantage - but what if they used all 3 subs including this one and then had a player stretchered off and finished with 10 men - would the ref have then handed us an unfair advantage, particularly if said player hadn't committed another foul in the 2nd half ?

Craig, I did say "possibly" hand Hearts an unfair advantage and it could have been to our advantage if he had stayed on the park long enough, so from that perspective it should be the manager's decision whether to replace him or not.

I don't disagree that it's applying common sense but one refs sense differs from the next and do you really think this is or will be applied evenly by all refs?

[Frankie 8,367]

I doubt anyone would oppose that it's a common sense approach.

 

However, one does wonder if Mr Beaton would have offered the same counsel to Murty or, say Docherty, if the midfielder had been booked early on.

[Uilleam 5,772]

Anybody who has any doubt, whatsoever, that The Cheats' Cheat intended his advice to advantage Hertz (ken) needs their head examined. 

[the gunslinger 3,366]

This isnt that unusual. But he would never do the same for us.

[Uilleam 5,772]

2 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

This isnt that unusual. But he would never do the same for us.

He would have dismissed our player, at his earliest opportunity, and with malign delight. 

[boabie 230]

4 hours ago, craig said:

Nonsense.  It isn't cheating at all.

The referee is there to apply the rules in a fair and impartial manner to both teams.

If he books a player and then watches him commit another two fouls and follows that up by having a sneaky word in a managers ear then I will ask you one easy question - would he have done the same with a Rangers player ?

Don't bother answering because anything other than "No"  would be a lie pure and simply.

[craig 5,199]

28 minutes ago, boabie said:

The referee is there to apply the rules in a fair and impartial manner to both teams.

If he books a player and then watches him commit another two fouls and follows that up by having a sneaky word in a managers ear then I will ask you one easy question - would he have done the same with a Rangers player ?

Don't bother answering because anything other than "No"  would be a lie pure and simply.

So now you can read into the mind of the referee ?  You have absolutely no way of knowing if he would have done the same thing to a Rangers player.  You can surmise and guess but you simply can't tell.

 

I also think that, at times, you post contrary to the spirit of the forum boabie - when you someone responds to you in a manner you don't like you respond and then tell them not to respond to you because they have nothing you want to hear.  This forum is about the spirit of debate.  Nothing wrong with having opposing positions - but passing your own judgements and then refusing to listen to others is not in the spirit of the forum.

 

As for it being a lie - that, too, is nonsense.  Given we simply don't know if he would have done the same for a Rangers player then it clearly isn't a lie - no matter how "simply" you wish to make it.  You don't know that he would, the same as I don't know he wouldn't.

 

The paranoia is oozing, and I say that as someone who basically called Beaton a cheat after the first Hibs game at Ibrox.

 

 

[ian1964 10,613]

I remember when playing in the Juniors the best refs were the ones who would have a word in your ear as the game was flowing, few and far between, but they were the ones that I respected

[boabie 230]

1 hour ago, craig said:

So now you can read into the mind of the referee ?  You have absolutely no way of knowing if he would have done the same thing to a Rangers player.  You can surmise and guess but you simply can't tell.

 

I also think that, at times, you post contrary to the spirit of the forum boabie - when you someone responds to you in a manner you don't like you respond and then tell them not to respond to you because they have nothing you want to hear.  This forum is about the spirit of debate.  Nothing wrong with having opposing positions - but passing your own judgements and then refusing to listen to others is not in the spirit of the forum.

 

As for it being a lie - that, too, is nonsense.  Given we simply don't know if he would have done the same for a Rangers player then it clearly isn't a lie - no matter how "simply" you wish to make it.  You don't know that he would, the same as I don't know he wouldn't.

 

The paranoia is oozing, and I say that as someone who basically called Beaton a cheat after the first Hibs game at Ibrox.

 

 

I don't need to read the mind of a referee Craig. I know a cheating bastard when I see one on a constant basis.

As to the spirit of the forum - I object to someone taking what I say and twisting it to suit their own trolling mind. Your warning is being handed out to the wrong poster here. The guy in question would have been thrown off many forums I've been on simply because his main aim is to sow discord.  I refuse to reply to the man as there is no debating with ignorance. This is my leisure time. I come here to relax not to be drawn into agruments where what I say is being deliberately misread.

I stand by my thoughts on Beaton. 99% of Rangers fans who have watched Beaton handle our games would agree with me, no question.

But you didn't answer the question, would Beaton have done the same for a Rangers player ?

No reading minds. Just experience.

Edited February 27, 2018 by boabie
spelling