Bill 13,717 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 1 minute ago, Gaffer said: I agree, this wasn't really about having the decision overturned, it was more about exposing it. However, now that it has been exposed, what will be done? Nothing! The SFA was never going to admit fallibility by overturning this decision. Rescinding the red card would mean admitting the gross incompetence of at least one of their referees ... which would have opened the door to further such challenges and admissions. Much better to sweep it under the carpet and infer the referee must have seen something the rest of the world couldn't ... but they won't embarrass us by proving it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,194 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 Just now, Bill said: The SFA was never going to admit fallibility by overturning this decision. Rescinding the red card would mean admitting the gross incompetence of at least one of their referees ... which would have opened the door to further such challenges and admissions. Much better to sweep it under the carpet and infer the referee must have seen something the rest of the world couldn't ... but they won't embarrass us by proving it. Their rules didn't allow it. They've overturned many decisions over the years that pointed to officials making mistakes. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacK1950 2,376 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 Do we really think the little hobbit was going to admit his error----------NO CHANCE. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,194 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Gaffer said: I agree, this wasn't really about having the decision overturned, it was more about exposing it. However, now that it has been exposed, what will be done? Nothing! What has happened because of the appeal ? Extra headlines focusing on Collum and a ludicrous decision. One angle is that referees now know that Rangers will go out of their way to publicly focus on errors that go against the club. That type of general tactic has been one that has been used successfully by another club in Glasgow. ------------------- Another version of the same The SFA know that if they were to 'bend their rules' for Candeias/Rangers then they would have PQ loudly and doggedly on their case. Edited November 8, 2018 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 You can speculate all you like about the reasons for the SFA upholding Collum's decision but the upshot is everyone outwith Rangers will conclude the referee is vindicated and Candeias deserved to be sent off, which he clearly didn't. So the next referee who doesn't like Rangers is encouraged to take any daft decision he fancies. I don't believe there was no scope within the SFA's powers to rescind the yellow card and football would have been a whole lot better if they had. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,194 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Bill said: You can speculate all you like about the reasons for the SFA upholding Collum's decision but the upshot is everyone outwith Rangers will conclude the referee is vindicated and Candeias deserved to be sent off, which he clearly didn't. So the next referee who doesn't like Rangers is encouraged to take any daft decision he fancies. I don't believe there was no scope within the SFA's powers to rescind the yellow card and football would have been a whole lot better if they had. Employing the Rules isn't really wild speculation. In this particular case, nearly everyone (including most of them, PQ, etc) accepts Collum made a complete horlicks of it and anyone who doesn't is providing a rod for his own back. I doubt a referee will be looking to conciously make such a fool of himself as Collum has. What a referee will know is that we are prepared to maximise media focus on it. Edited November 8, 2018 by buster. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted November 8, 2018 Author Share Posted November 8, 2018 3 hours ago, buster. said: Their rules didn't allow it. They've overturned many decisions over the years that pointed to officials making mistakes. Not to mention causing a referees strike!!!. Rangers highlighted an embarrassing decision, they knew they wouldn't win it, but were right to highlight it. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,194 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 1 hour ago, ian1964 said: Not to mention causing a referees strike!!!. Rangers highlighted an embarrassing decision, they knew they wouldn't win it, but were right to highlight it. Agreed, that's exactly what I said. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted November 8, 2018 Share Posted November 8, 2018 An excellent statement from Rangers on the matter: https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/daniel-candeias/ Unfortunately, the usual commentators will prefer to lampoon Rangers' paranoia instead of looking for a more informed disciplinary process. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted November 8, 2018 Author Share Posted November 8, 2018 Good statement from the club!. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.