http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/rangers/rangers-duo-in-the-clear-with-sfa-1.1089126 HERALD Sport understands that neither El-Hadji Diouf nor Madjid Bougherra have been reported to the Scottish Football Association for misconduct following their red cards in the ill-tempered Scottish Cup tie against Celtic. Bougherra, who has since apologised for his actions, was seen to hold down Calum Murrayââ¬â¢s hand as the referee administered his second yellow card to the Algerian. Diouf also received a second caution after the final whistle before ignoring the pleas of stewards and police to throw his shirt into the away end in an apparent act of defiance. Some reports have suggested Diouf had been issued with a second red card for his after-match antics and that further punishment was likely for the striker and Bougherra after Murray made reference to the incidents in his report to the SFA. But it appears that, with Murray reporting ââ¬Åno additional misconductââ¬Â in his paperwork, the referee, at least, is content that both players were dealt with sufficiently at the time. Neil Lennon, the Celtic manager, and Rangers assistant manager Ally McCoist, meanwhile, are to be given touchline bans following their confrontation at the end of the match. The pair have both been reported to the SFA by fourth official Iain Brines. With the incident occurring after full-time, both will be dealt with automatically as they would have been had they been sent to the stand during the game. As a result, Lennon, who began a four-match dugout suspension at the weekend, is now in line to receive a further four-match censure for his second offence, while McCoist faces a two-game penalty as a first offender.
I've never heard anyone claim that the refs were out to get Rangers. What is debatable, however, is if Celtic's disgraceful gamesmanship at the start of the season is paying dividends for them.
Martin Bain said that. If you believe him (which you seem to) then you think Refs are now punishing Rangers?
Is that rebel tune? I just thought it was a play on words but please do continue, you were saying "No he never" . No he never what?
Hmm, and to think just the other day you accused me of acting like a 14 year old? It's a pity you don't spread your condemnation of teenage type antics all over the boards like magic pixie dust. I have noticed that you are quite happy to ignore sectarian comments from "people" like Girvan but god forbid someone should take the mickey out of Rangers FC. Pfft, 14 year olds eh?
"There was indeed increased tension at last night's match between the clubs, mainly as a result of incidents at previous matches where two of our players were the subject of extreme verbal abuse in the tunnel and around the dug-out area at Ibrox. Translation: It's all Celtic's fault, they started it so they did but for some strange reason we never mention it until we got horsed. "The dismissal of three Rangers players and the extraordinary number of bookings we believe is a matter for the Scottish Football Association's disciplinary process. Wtf does that mean? "There has been extensive criticism of referees and the SFA this season and we are now questioning the impact of that criticism. Refereeing Old Firm matches is an extremely difficult task but the number of bookings last night compared with other recent Old Firm fixtures indicates the match was not controlled in the same way. Translation: Questioning the impact of that criticism = Refs are now favouring Celtic The match was not controlled in the same way= Refs are no longer favouring Rangers
I've never heard Bain claim that the refs were out to get Rangers. Post a link, or it never happened. I certainly don't think that they are, and I've no clue why you would think I did from what I wrote.
Since you provided a biased interpretation, let me add one in the interests of balance: Translation: Questioning the impact of that criticism = Refs are now too scared to give any decision at all against Celtic The match was not controlled in the same way= Refs are favouring Celtic even more than they used to A more sensible interpretation of what he said would be: Questioning the impact of that criticism = Refs are scared to give 50/50 decisions against Celtic The match was not controlled in the same way= Refs are no longer being objective and erring on Celtic's side
Do you seriously believe that? I have no reason to think you are a wum (unlike some) so that#'s why I ask.
If you're asking if I think that's what Bain meant by his remarks, yes I do. If you're asking if I think there's any truth in them, I couldn't say. I don't watch enough Celtic games to have an opinion.
I think Bain was trying to use it as an excuse for the number of cards and shift some of the blame from Rangers indiscipline. I don't think he believed any of it he just wanted to take some of the heat from the club.
Martin Bain clearly implied that due to Celtic bringing pressure on referees earlier in the season Old Firm games are being refereed differently and that Rangers are suffering as a consequence. It's a load of bullshit of course. The last few OF games have been generally well officiated and the fact that Celtic have been the best team in most if not all of them is what's really bugging Mr Bain.
Nail on the head ST. What also seem to have happened here is that Bougherra and Diouf have escaped further punishment for their "antics" last Wednesday night. I would have thought that a player grabbing hold of a Referees arm for a full 20 seconds, or a player who had been sent off and still runs onto the pitch would have merited further sanctions? Maybe Martin Bain's words have influenced the Referee in this case? Considering that Referees were on strike earlier this season (apparently because Celtic forced their hand (sic)) it seems astonishing that two players who totally disrespected a Referee, one who physically accosted a Referee, should get of Scot free? What other explnation is there than the words of Mr Bain have been taken on board by Refs and are are now directly influencing decisions to the benefit of Rangers. It certainly would appear so to even a casual observer.
