Another honest mistake

[Tarzan Trombone]

If you watch videos of the Jack incidents I cannot understand how you come to the conclusion that he is not guilty of trying to "do" his opponents. Get away from using only still images - in conjunction with the videos they highlight exactly what his intentions were to anyone who has played football at any level.

what videos?

i have seen none? i cant find them

its only still photos i see with he is evil?

 

[DILLIGAF]

Quite possibly, this may become the longest running thread, in the history of the noise
Have a great weekend everyone, and COYBIG

 

[John nó]

jack off tackle?

I never said once that tackle was allowed

I said isolated still photographs of any incident is not proof in itself

No idea where you get i am defending such tackles

itseasy to frame a picture to suit a particular agenda and without proper context its easy to cast blame. its exactly what sevco have done with anything they want, perpective is needed. A framed single photo is not enough.

As for gg

incedent i dont think it was a penalty i think gg played for penalty and it didnt get awarded

that said it is given quite often at other grounds for other teams.


The whatabout this then is a hun diversion tactic


Im telling you straight, refs are inherrently bent against Celtic
It needs sorted, selection process is clandestine and tigged imo


highlighting genuine mib bentness might help solve problem
highlighting not so clear cut incedents or contrived still (if they are not contextual photos) is not evidense, in fact it muddies the water. And it helps with conclusion of unproven and does not help fix the clandestine nature of referee selections or fairly leveling any inherrent bias

So Tet, are you looking for a level of force in the GG incident to determine weather its worthy of a penalty?
When the arm or shoulder is used to impede a player without any intention of playing the ball, it's a foul, simple as that imo.
If GG has highlighted it, then so be it, as I don't think he actually asked the defender to give him the clatter.
As for Jack off (wanker) non tackle, I stated earlier you don't go in that high when you are intending to go for the ball.
You also done the same last season with roofe about photo evidence last season when the video evidence only backed up the claims.
I still haven't seen any video evidence still but I will also back the version many made in regards the incident.
Yet the photos on show, and the ball nowhere to be seen only confirms how late the challenge was, backed up by how high it was and with no intention whatsoever to actually play the ball.
How that can't be deemed as reckless and dangerous is beyond me still, and only confirms Scottish football has no intention of wanting to clean its act up whatsoever still.
No video evidence on offer still tells its own story imo.

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

So Tet, are you looking for a level of force in the GG incident to determine weather its worthy of a penalty?
When the arm or shoulder is used to impede a player without any intention of playing the ball, it's a foul, simple as that imo.
If GG has highlighted it, then so be it, as I don't think he actually asked the defender to give him the clatter.
As for Jack off (wanker) non tackle, I stated earlier you don't go in that high when you are intending to go for the ball.
You also done the same last season with roofe about photo evidence last season when the video evidence only backed up the claims.
I still haven't seen any video evidence still but I will also back the version many made in regards the incident.
Yet the photos on show, and the ball nowhere to be seen only confirms how late the challenge was, backed up by how high it was and with no intention whatsoever to actually play the ball.
How that can't be deemed as reckless and dangerous is beyond me still, and only confirms Scottish football has no intention of wanting to clean its act up whatsoever still.
No video evidence on offer still tells its own story imo.

imo its not a penalty

they are often given
But i would not have given a penalty for that if i was ref

still photography is easily manipulated and imo should never be used to build an argument without contextual video evidence


its the very thing msm do currently

its framing someone into an agenda and quite often if you look at contetual video without predudice or passion the still photo becomes artwork rather than evidence in a fast moving sport


referee must make split second decisions

and if they are inherrently biased they will create an unjust platform of arbitration

pointing out slow motion or still photographs are NOT evidense of cheating

they can be doctored in post production

Real time decisions with inherently biased referees will overtime create a large bias of honest mistakes

but individual referre errors are not evidense of cheating

but looking deeper at the selection criteria
who selects refs
who selects referrees as high enough grade
what the back ground of refs are that have been selected
who they support who they dont like

Is there a bias in the selection process
is there conflicts of interest in any particular match for ref selected

Still photos of ryan jack might be truthful account of MIB turning blind eye, but i suspect they cinfirmation bias stills and maybe be out of context

And muddying the agenda to fix the referee problems in scottish football


hack may well be an animal

i just have never seen him do these things claimed in any video

iv have seen him be very agressive in tackles but ive never seen him break leg and ive never heard any player claim he a leg breaker

And i cant remember last time he broke any legs or caused major injury through reckless tackles

the case against jack imo from still photos is inconclusiive

brown was hard tackling player i bet you could provide a whole collection of stills that suggest he was a cheat but he wasnt

he was a just a cheeky hard bastard who had good timing mostly

 

[Bridie Bhoy]

I think everyone agrees you can't use only still photos for evidence. This has to be backed up by video evidence too.

But what is this? "Someone' posted this just this afternoon on the Euro Predictor Thread:

"is it possible the weird angle afterthought was contrived by expert video team? the time it takes ref to go over watch it gives experts enough time to jiggery the result if they wanted a certain outcome."

Yes, the tv could have fabricated the video last night immediately following the incident to manipulate it so that it appeared as though sevco were cheated. So clearly we cannot believe video evidence either. So did sevco even win last week? I was relying on the tv evidence so maybe some tv jiggery pokery changed a 6-0 humping into a famous away victory?!?

Who knows? Who cares any more? Not me anyway.

 

[DILLIGAF]

"The wheels on the bus go round and round"
Ryan Jack Appreciation thread anyone ?
And down the wormhole we go...

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

I think everyone agrees you can't use only still photos for evidence. This has to be backed up by video evidence too.

But what is this? "Someone' posted this just this afternoon on the Euro Predictor Thread:

"is it possible the weird angle afterthought was contrived by expert video team? the time it takes ref to go over watch it gives experts enough time to jiggery the result if they wanted a certain outcome."

Yes, the tv could have fabricated the video last night immediately following the incident to manipulate it so that it appeared as though sevco were cheated. So clearly we cannot believe video evidence either. So did sevco even win last week? I was relying on the tv evidence so maybe some tv jiggery pokery changed a 6-0 humping into a famous away victory?!?

Who knows? Who cares any more? Not me anyway.

i agree fully that tv evidense can be manipulated

short video clips are easier to bend

and still photos easiest of all


When i watched live footage of morelos v dortmund defender
it looked like defender made arse of it.

thats the same as ref decision until it went to wonky var where it looks like hard call even microscopic

but he overturned without conclusive proof but the a video clup appears where it was alfie who was fouled

hence video replays are not good enough evidense but they at least can give yuou some context to make some kind of decision

still photographs on their todd should never be used as evidense of proof because the angle covers 1 potentially messleading view and worse it might even be easily doctored to build up a potentially false argument

the problem with referees is not they can make mistakes

the problem is are those mistakes biased by passion or predudice and i think in scotland with its clandestine selection and secret agreements and secret societies its deliberately skewed to produce a bias in honest mistakes

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

"The wheels on the bus go round and round"
Ryan Jack Appreciation thread anyone ?
And down the wormhole we go...

what a load of shite?

i havent said appreciate ryan jack

ive said the evidense from still photos are not conclusive that he is trying to harm people

your the wormhole dude wouldnt you say?

its a football forum and a discussion on football is wormhole to you?

iv e been told the videos are available but still not been provided yet i should check em out

 

[John nó]

imo its not a penalty

they are often given
But i would not have given a penalty for that if i was ref

still photography is easily manipulated and imo should never be used to build an argument without contextual video evidence


its the very thing msm do currently

its framing someone into an agenda and quite often if you look at contetual video without predudice or passion the still photo becomes artwork rather than evidence in a fast moving sport


referee must make split second decisions

and if they are inherrently biased they will create an unjust platform of arbitration

pointing out slow motion or still photographs are NOT evidense of cheating

they can be doctored in post production

Real time decisions with inherently biased referees will overtime create a large bias of honest mistakes

but individual referre errors are not evidense of cheating

but looking deeper at the selection criteria
who selects refs
who selects referrees as high enough grade
what the back ground of refs are that have been selected
who they support who they dont like

Is there a bias in the selection process
is there conflicts of interest in any particular match for ref selected

Still photos of ryan jack might be truthful account of MIB turning blind eye, but i suspect they cinfirmation bias stills and maybe be out of context

And muddying the agenda to fix the referee problems in scottish football


hack may well be an animal

i just have never seen him do these things claimed in any video

iv have seen him be very agressive in tackles but ive never seen him break leg and ive never heard any player claim he a leg breaker

And i cant remember last time he broke any legs or caused major injury through reckless tackles

the case against jack imo from still photos is inconclusiive

brown was hard tackling player i bet you could provide a whole collection of stills that suggest he was a cheat but he wasnt

he was a just a cheeky hard bastard who had good timing mostly

I know we aren't going to find any compromise upon the 2 issues and that's fair enough.
As I could see both sides of good and bad about VAR within Scottish football, this debate has finally made me see sense that it can't be introduced within Scottish football all the while the current criteria exists within the game still.
Never agreed with the term "honest mistakes" and never will all the while blatant cheating decisions are still been awarded, even worse when the simple and easy decisions can't be got right, nothing honest in that assessment.
But out of curiosity Tet, should a penalty have been given against us with the potential handball of Jota?
As I've seen nothing to prove it was, yet plenty of moon howling was done to say it was, without any evidence as such to the best of my knowledge to prove such a case?

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

I know we aren't going to find any compromise upon the 2 issues and that's fair enough.
As I could see both sides of good and bad about VAR within Scottish football, this debate has finally made me see sense that it can't be introduced within Scottish football all the while the current criteria exists within the game still.
Never agreed with the term "honest mistakes" and never will all the while blatant cheating decisions are still been awarded, even worse when the simple and easy decisions can't be got right, nothing honest in that assessment.
But out of curiosity Tet, should a penalty have been given against us with the potential handball of Jota?
As I've seen nothing to prove it was, yet plenty of moon howling was done to say it was, without any evidence as such to the best of my knowledge to prove such a case?

no it wasnt apenalty imo
i wouldnt give most of the penalties that are given at ibrox either

Are the refs bent

i think they are

but thats because i think they a selected from cultural bias to provide inherrent bias by a secret society that has a superiority complex to endorse

 

[kelly]

it's












































































































a






















































































Penalty

 

[boab1916]

It appears most of us have been wrong all along! The FIBs (not MIBs) have been cruelly cheating sevco as they favoured their beloved Sellick!

Ibrox Researcher reveals that Celtic have benefitted by 25 points this season due to honest mistakes!

Close research by an Ibrox Twitter account has revealed how Celtic have benefitted by 25 points due to honest mistakes this season.

videocelts.com

Jesus man Ibrox researcher, theres a new word for anonymious. So wonder if this Ibrox researcher would like to explain liquidation and the reasons as to why it killed Ibroxs fromer club that played there.

 

[Bridie Bhoy]

Jesus man Ibrox researcher, theres a new word for anonymious. So wonder if this Ibrox researcher would like to explain liquidation and the reasons as to why it killed Ibroxs fromer club that played there.

You maybe need to check your spell checker there boab. It changed the phrase "financial issues and unfair relegation" to the word "liquidation"!

 

[boab1916]

You maybe need to check your spell checker there boab. It changed the phrase "financial issues and unfair relegation" to the word "liquidation"!

Predictive text

 

[DILLIGAF]

what a load of shite?

i havent said appreciate ryan jack

ive said the evidense from still photos are not conclusive that he is trying to harm people

your the wormhole dude wouldnt you say?

its a football forum and a discussion on football is wormhole to you?

iv e been told the videos are available but still not been provided yet i should check em out

Anybody ?
Makes no sense, but hey, I'm a wormhole (or words to that effect) whatever that means
There's an ignore button, I suggest you use it, you wordsmith
HH

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

Anybody ?
Makes no sense, but hey, I'm a wormhole (or words to that effect) whatever that means
There's an ignore button, I suggest you use it, you wordsmith
HH

your word dude

you use no me

therefore your the wormhole dude.

down another wormhole...

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

 

[DILLIGAF]

Well, seeing as you are unable to cease and desist, with your delusional, dribblewittery, I'll shine a light on the point I was trying to make

WORMHOLE

'Wormhole, is used when referring to a situation that is strange, confusing, or illogical, and often hard to escape from. Quoting from the people themselves is the easiest way of showing just how far down the wormhole we are going here'

It is not a person, but a 'thing' a form of expression, when someone (that would be you) continually harps on about the same thing, and attempts to drag others down...the aforementioned...WORMHOLE

Now, please just hit the ignore button, I will do the same, and you can carry on talking the same pish, to your hearts content

 

[Tarzan Trombone]

Well, seeing as you are unable to cease and desist, with your delusional, dribblewittery, I'll shine a light on the point I was trying to make

WORMHOLE

'Wormhole, is used when referring to a situation that is strange, confusing, or illogical, and often hard to escape from. Quoting from the people themselves is the easiest way of showing just how far down the wormhole we are going here'

It is not a person, but a 'thing' a form of expression, when someone (that would be you) continually harps on about the same thing, and attempts to drag others down...the aforementioned...WORMHOLE

Now, please just hit the ignore button, I will do the same, and you can carry on talking the same pish, to your hearts content

What pish are you refering to?

I think maybe your away down your narcisistic wormholee again

maybe stick up some of your pictures of yourself to admire

I dont ignore people.

f you find my opinion a load of pish then no need to respond. But if you find it pish then at least be able to coherrently epress the specifics rather than get insulting.

Its a football forum

Most of your posts are political drivel or narcissistic delusional self important and im a wormhole ccreator

no pal

I expressed an opinion on a football topic

I also explained specifically why i hold those opinions when questioned

But you say you dont understand.

Gonna share some pictures of your amazing life in Canada please, how you went from poverty to a mansion by the sea., And copious pictures of yourself

oh thats right im taking you down a wormhole


Now if you have an opinion feels free to express it

But if it doesnt make any sense and you refuse to go deeper into your pathological self importance then so be it.



Did bridie go down a wormhole?

No he didnt he expressed his opinion which just so differed to mine.

But you did. the only person on this site that ever refers to wormhole ever is you. That makes you the wormhole dude imo.

You ever noticed that YOU force feed your illogical opinions on other people like your other stazi pals as if thats normal

And despite the paralels you have with trump you claim you detest him but he doesnt give a fuck either for opinions that make sense

its just his way or ignore button

good wan

rememer the greatest moments in life thread way way back

the one that had exploded concrete as a happiestr moment in life

weird how you think that dude is brand new now

What about your wealth and riches and how you made it in life. gonna share some more photos of your face on a football thread

im pretty sure you wanted maria banned for sharing her personal information and starting threads on her non footballing topics

But its ok for you to share your life experiences and how you are such a top human being living in the most amazing country in the world with a running commentary on your magnificent existence.

 

[DILLIGAF]

Well, in an effort to defuse this obviously emotionally, upsetting (for TET) thread, I will offer an olive branch
Sorry you're upset, I hope you have a good weekend, but rather than continue to read your posts, I have you on ignore, works for me
Now, how about those honest mistakes Bhoys & Ghirls ?
Clancy on Sunday you say, that should be 'interesting'
HH