07 Mar 2026 21:11:58
Hi
If we fail to beat Celtic tomorrow, I would be very very disappointed!
We should be beating most teams in our league, especially at Ibrox.
We let them off the hook last time, by sitting back in the 2nd half, thinking the game was over.
Any win will do, even if we play poorly, its all about going through, this is our big chance to lay a marker for future games in the league!
We need this!
SPFL Posts 5
07 Mar 2026 17:56:49
I have seen a lot of talk about wanting Jens Berthel Askou due to him enjoying a good season in charge of Motherwell.
At Vendsyssel JBA precided over relegation and was dismissed.
Moved to HB Torshavn and won league and cup double.
Comparable standard of league to Northern Ireland and David Healy has won far more titles.
Moved to AC Horsens and precided over relegation.
Moved to Gøteborg and quit to become an assistant.
Moved to Motherwell, enjoying first successful period since HB Torshavn in 20/21.
07 Mar 2026 19:01:06
So, what you're saying is, as a head coach/manager, he has won more than Rohl has?
07 Mar 2026 19:02:08
It's how he has improved those poor players, like O'Donnell and McGinn. You wouldn't think they could play football that way, but here we are.
07 Mar 2026 19:12:10
Yes, he has won more trophies than Danny Rohl.
He also has presided over 2 relegations as a head coach.
I have always praised his performances this year, and no one can say he has not done fantastically well.
Truth still remains that, after a full preseason, his Motherwell side were above Rangers prior to Danny Rohl, and are now below.
07 Mar 2026 20:13:10
Aph, I'm not sure why you have such an issue with Jens. You think because Rohl is now above him, then it's something to celebrate?
The fact is we should be miles above Motherwell simply based on resources.
But we're not, even with our vastly more valuable squad. They were put together on a shoestring and play a style of football that most teams can't deal with or handle, and they have one of the best defensive records in the UK without a recognised CB of their own.
He has got Motherwell punching way above their weight, and, incredibly, are being talked about as potential title contenders when they should be fighting relegation.
He is MOTY so far, and, unless McInnes wins the league, he will take the awards, and quite rightly so.
07 Mar 2026 20:21:17
Zikos, I have no issues with him at all.
I have praised his performances, and I also believe he should be Manager of the Year.
What I do not believe is that he should be replacing Danny Rohl at Rangers in the summer.
07 Mar 2026 20:29:21
Tbh, it's like comparing oranges and apples. The Motherwell manager has no expectation on him, zero pressure, patient fans, and has been given time to implement his style. Danny Rohl has the exact opposite, and for fans to be questioning him in such a short space of time with what he was handed is astonishing to me.
We need to look inwards, and be careful for what we wish for.
08 Mar 2026 08:59:47
I'm going to be honest with you, Aphe, and I hope I'm wrong, and I don't want to get rid of him, but Rohl will not be Rangers manager come the end of next season.
08 Mar 2026 10:17:58
Nothing I can do to change your beliefs, Strom, and I would never try.
Personally, I believe he will, and I believe that he is capable of successfully accomplishing the objectives of the project.
08 Mar 2026 11:44:41
I hope he is, because I understand you can't keep changing managers. But it's a feeling I have, and it's a big if. If we get beat today, I see it turning toxic again.
mcmillst you have also forgotten that we have spent many millions more than Motherwell, and they aren't that far behind us in the league.
👍 Expectations come at a big club, but let's get one thing straight: we and Celtic are only big clubs in Scotland.
07 Mar 2026 17:15:10
That's Motherwell now 10 points behind Hearts and probably out of the title race. Slightly bothers me as they've still to play Celtic twice with maybe not the same level of effort. Its always the case where we have to do it ourselves.
07 Mar 2026 19:02:55
They will still put in the same effort, as they could still be 2nd or 3rd. They can't win the league now.
07 Mar 2026 19:49:22
They have Europe to think about.
07 Mar 2026 15:10:37
I've heard it being thrown about how much of a freak season this has been. But for me, if Hearts win the league this year and make the champions league. With an extra £30-40M, they could be the team to beat next year and possibly for the foreseeable future.
There is a thought that next year, normal service will resume. Motherwell will lose their star manager and Hearts will go down a level or 2.
For me, Motherwell will lose their star manager (hopefully to us) but Hearts will go up another level or 2 and we need to be ready to catch them.
07 Mar 2026 17:47:21
Hardly a star manager, because he has managed to get Motherwell into the top 4.
This is the best he has done in his career to date.
Why would we get rid of a young, progressive coach who has turned our season around, to replace him with the Motherwell manager?
07 Mar 2026 18:44:16
I think the bigger concern for next season is our loss of a European place.
We go from having 5 places to 4.
Dropping from 2 Champions League, 1 Europa and 2 Conference League places.
To 1 Champions League, 1 Europa and 2 Conference League places.
With the Europa spot going to the winner of the cup, second place in the league is a Conference League qualifier.
This creates a huge budget risk for the club.
07 Mar 2026 19:05:10
Aphe, because he has done a great job with Motherwell, has poorer players and plays the best football in Scotland. Remember, we have spent a hell of a lot more money than Motherwell. So, he is a star manager for them.
07 Mar 2026 20:15:10
Agreed EHL, that is a big concern. Maybe with Hearts now investing a bit more resource, they will also add to the coefficient in the years ahead.
08 Mar 2026 12:45:01
Zikos, if Hearts win the league, I still believe they won't; there is not a chance of them making the Champions League.
I honestly think it'll still come down to us and Celtic, and the last league game at Park Head will pretty much decide who wins.
05 Mar 2026 09:18:28
Think they've lifted that diddy with the phone who was pictured at the weekend, few papers say a further arrest of 28 Yr old following an incident at the game. Hope its him.
05 Mar 2026 15:30:59
Just seen that Fork. Hopefully, this will deter others, but we thought that the last time. Got to question the mentality of some.
05 Mar 2026 18:36:26
It's the fact that people lost their lives and they couldn't care less, sad indictment tbh.
05 Mar 2026 22:41:13
Fork, it is more about hating us than anything about that event, I think. Look, on here it is all about Celtic and what they are doing at times; if we just stuck to us, and they stuck to them, it would be better even then.
That doesn't excuse that rubbish, but they weren't thinking about the lost 66, imo, more about getting a reaction from our fans. Sad people with nothing better in their lives.
06 Mar 2026 06:07:46
100% Bud. 👍
06 Mar 2026 14:15:42
I'm still in shock that a Celtic fan had a job and a phone!!
Next you'll be telling me he showers.
06 Mar 2026 16:46:58
That's too far, Athole. 😉👍
07 Mar 2026 14:39:37
"They weren't thinking about the lost 66"?! Eh?! Boak! 😫
05 Mar 2026 02:33:38
Just watched the Celtic winner and I'm absolutely scunnered that's been given.
He's clearly offside n every angle u see it.
Sometimes I do wonder if the referees and var mob are on their side I genuinely wonder.
05 Mar 2026 08:25:15
Stevie, I was convinced he was as well and was waiting for the ref's arm to go up. When it didn't, I was cursing. The angle we see is from a TV camera and isn't directly in line. However, I am not 100% sure that there are enough VAR cameras to give that direct line across either. So they use technology to try and help with the line. A bit haphazard if that is the case.
I always try to see why they would or wouldn't give something - what do the laws say; what are the limitations of VAR.
I don't truly believe there is any conspiracy, but they are hampered by a lot of other things.
It always annoys me when you see the line and the ball is blurred. That means the ball has already been struck, so they are looking a micro-second after that point. If it is offside by a toenail, then he wouldn't have been offside when that ball is blurred. Well, I know what I mean anyway.
05 Mar 2026 10:26:55
Angus, I understand our tech is of the standard of most in Europe, but sometimes the naked eye is enough, and I felt that was one.
Of course, when in doubt, the attacker gets the benefit, but again, I thought there was not any doubt.
I don't believe there is a conspiracy, as that involves more than one person being aware of and actively participating in something.
I do, however, believe that on an individual basis there are decisions being made that should be going the other way, and it's happened way too much to be coincidence now. I think some refs and VAR mob are choosing to side with them when it's a close call; sometimes it's not even close.
05 Mar 2026 10:58:28
Agreed. I don't believe there is a conspiracy, but it does make you wonder, because how many times do these sorts of things happen? For example, the penalty they got against us. The rules state close contact. How close does a player need to be, as players were nearly touching each other.
05 Mar 2026 11:02:20
Stevie, as I say, the blur of the ball actually gives the defender the advantage, I think. I had to check, but our VAR uses Hawkeye technology, which maps every pitch into a 3d format before every game. So, even with fewer camera angles, it should get it fairly accurate. It will be down to the user of the tech, but I'm not sure how they can use that unfairly when the end result is given out to show offside.
As I say, by the naked eye and the angle we saw it with, I thought he was off. But Hawkeye must have shown differently.
I do think that being offside by such small margins, anyway, isn't fair on the attacker, defender, and especially the fans. The linesman never gave it, so in the old days it would have stood anyway. At least we would have been just discussing that bit.
05 Mar 2026 13:08:59
Angus, in your honest opp, if that's a Gers player at Parkhead at one each, would that be given as offside? I'm not saying there is a conspiracy, but referees are only human, and external pressures do have an influence in their decision making, and we all know what those external pressures are.
05 Mar 2026 13:28:46
And what are those external pressures, Stewart?
I have not been on here much recently, but some posters who do know me know I am generally fair and honest. I have to say, after almost every game now, there seems to be some thread about referees and officials.
Recently it was added on time till it was proven that Celtic actually had less time added on than most clubs, including Rangers, who were second, and suddenly that chat disappeared.
Then it was the penalty on Sunday, which almost everyone said was 100% a penalty, and now it's the offside. If you guys keep this up, you will drive yourselves mad!
You can no longer take the moral high ground on paranoia about officials. Celtic fans are at it as well, and I think what it shows is that both sets of fans know their teams aren't good enough at the moment, and are looking for excuses.
05 Mar 2026 13:33:42
I'm going to throw this curveball.
See, when titles are at stake, I think the benefit of the doubt should be with the defending team.
Or perhaps an indirect free kick from where the rubbish was taken?
05 Mar 2026 13:57:13
So, Mr Mojo, you think 1 red card in nearly 2 years is correct?
05 Mar 2026 13:58:56
Stevie, I always believed it should be with the attacker.
05 Mar 2026 14:21:44
Mr Mojo. I have attended various events that were also attended by current and ex Grade 1 referees in Scotland.
Having spoken to these referees, I was informed by them that they have had their cars scratched, spray paint, green in colour, sprayed on cars, homes and fences, regularly had eggs thrown at their windows, and had windows smashed. When out, they are regularly called "orange masonic bs"; this includes when taking their kids to school on the school run. They have faced media spotlight, integrity called into question, and social media attacks on their families.
These attacks and abuses are greatly increased when they have made a decision against Celtic FC.
So, when I say they are only human, keep that in mind. When a decision is to be made regarding Celtic FC, if that decision is 50/50, which side do you think they will choose?
Regarding external pressures, why did Lawell leave, and why did 2 of the 3 Celtic staff members leave after being assaulted by your fans?
05 Mar 2026 15:09:56
Celtic second goal was onside.
05 Mar 2026 15:36:16
You have got to laugh. A Celtic fan thinking he is balanced whilst on a Rangers site after another subjective one goes their way, not for the first time.
That's not balanced in any way, shape or form.
As for moral high ground, again your take is hilarious. Your whole club, managers, players, the board, as well as fans, have been hassling referees for over 2 decades.
Now, you think that because we question referees, we do not hassle or intimidate them, and that we've lost the high ground.
Your entitlement is almost as embarrassing as your own view of yourself as balanced.
05 Mar 2026 16:35:28
Tommy, offside isn't subjective, though it is a fact - it is either offside or onside, no interpretation needed.
It is impossible for both sets of theories to be correct because they rely on mutually exclusive claims of institutional bias, where each side asserts the governing authorities are systematically working to favour their rival at their own expense. So, Mr Mojo is right in that both sets of fans have those conspiracy theories, and normally they depend on who is on top at any one time.
Stewarty, if the scenario you paint were to happen, I think that, like last night, the referee and VAR would come to the right decision, as it was a fact-based decision and not subjective.
Is there an element of larger crowds swaying a referee one way or the other - possibly, but we both benefit from it, and the bias is subconscious.
But that bias doesn't prove premeditated corruption or organised cheating as OF fans think. Instead, the evidence points to a subconscious, psychological, and social reaction to intense, localised pressure.
Referees are only human, and it is abhorrent that there is an element in both fan groups who would go to those depths with a referee. However, I think they would realise that giving in to intimidation would destroy their credibility, create anarchy, and validate that threats and violence are acceptable tools to influence results. Like blackmail, psychologists would argue that giving in to such threats would make them more likely to happen in future.
05 Mar 2026 16:50:49
We don't have the cameras to say offside is definitive, Angus. If we had EPL level VAR, it's factual, with our version, it's not, especially marginal calls.
I have not even seen the incident, tbh.
My problem is the arrogance of a Celtic fan coming on a Rangers site to lecture on the moral high ground of intimidating referees. You have to see the hypocrisy and entitlement in doing that.
05 Mar 2026 18:41:51
Ref gave the goal. VAR intervened, but there was not really a clear view of the ball being struck (HD cameras anyone. 🤔). Is it possible that VAR couldn't definitively call it one way or the other, and just stuck with the on-field decision of the ref?
05 Mar 2026 18:45:47
Tommy, I agree the system isn't as high tech as down south, but the system is factual, and cameras are only a small part of it, as it involves a virtual 3d mapping and Hawkeye drawing the lines. VAR officials still do some manual bits, but the end result gets shown on TV, so I don't see much room to cheat in it.
I can see what you mean, but he does have a point about both fan groups being the same and claiming there is a conspiracy.
Does that hypocrisy and entitlement not work both ways? It seems to always end up in an argument about who is the worst. 😁
I saw the incident and initially thought he was offside, but the TV camera is at an angle, which is what fans are judging it on. The lined photograph was shown on screen, and it was onside; as much as I hate to say that.
05 Mar 2026 19:34:16
I understand Hawkeye delivers the platform for our VAR, but I don't think it's the same as a Hawkeye system in other sports. I believe you need better and more cameras to do that. The outcome is only as good as the data put into it.
But, as I mentioned, I was not commenting on the actual incident. I have never seen it.
You can call me arrogant and entitled if you want, but I am not on a Celtic site giving moral lectures to Celtic fans after a decision went our way.
05 Mar 2026 19:45:51
Here is some light reading. Enjoy.
Here is how machine learning is used in VAR:
Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT):
Used at the 2022 World Cup and 2024 Euros, this system uses AI to track player movements and the ball in real time, reducing the time for offside decisions by an average of 31 seconds.
Computer Vision and 3D Modeling:
AI algorithms (specifically convolutional neural networks) analyze footage from dedicated cameras to create 3D models of the pitch, identifying body parts and tracking players' positions at a speed of 200 updates per second.
Connected Ball Technology:
A sensor inside the match ball works in tandem with cameras to detect the exact moment of a pass, which is then fed into machine learning models to determine offside violations.
Pattern Recognition for Fouls:
Research and development are ongoing to use machine learning to identify potential fouls or violent conduct by analyzing patterns in player behavior, helping referees focus on crucial, high-impact moments.
Key Takeaways:
Speed and Accuracy:
Machine Learning helps to reduce human error and speed up the review process.
Human Oversight:
Despite AI involvement, the final decision still rests with human officials, with AI serving as a decision-support system.
Future Trends:
The technology is shifting from simple replay analysis to "AI-driven" analysis, moving towards faster, more objective decision-making.
While the initial version of VAR relied solely on human review of video footage, the technology has evolved to include AI-driven tools, most notably for offside decisions.
05 Mar 2026 19:50:10
It was onside, but you will still have people greeting about it.
05 Mar 2026 20:09:11
We don't do anything like that, Fork. That's EPL stuff. We can't afford it. There is a bit of tech in our lite version, but it's limited by the type and quantity of camera used.
You're probably right, Storm, and, if it's marginal, how do you know it's wrong, because offside can be very surprising, even in replays.
Probably the decision most of us get wrong in real time.
My issue isn't with the decision, but with the gumption of a Celtic fan on a Rangers site lecturing about referees and talking about moral high ground. I can't be the only one who thinks that's entitled and arrogant.
05 Mar 2026 20:13:04
Hi Tommy, allow me to reply.
I am not on this site giving moral lectures, and if you read my post, you will see I say both sides are at it with their views on officials. I am saying that previous Rangers fans would laugh at Celtic fans about their paranoia, but now you guys are indulging in the same behaviour.
As I said earlier, there was lots of chat about Celtic getting more extra time than all the other teams. When that was proven to be inaccurate, the chat dried up. So, if the officials were biased towards Celtic based on that stat, and then it was shown they were near the bottom of time added on and Rangers were second, does that argument hold true and that they are actually favouring Rangers? Or is that no longer relevant. Perhaps they added the correct time for all teams, and it only became an issue because Celtic scored some last-minute goals.
You say I am giving lectures about intimidation of officials, and again, at no point did I mention intimidation.
I talked about fans questioning refs' impartiality. I could play whataboutery and list all the borderline decisions that have gone Rangers' way, but there is no point in that.
You clearly don't think Celtic fans should comment on your site, but if that's the case, how can you have a balanced discussion? Perhaps you are happy just to talk to people that agree with you, and if that's the case, crack on.
@Stewarty, whilst I don't deny or condone the fact that some stupid Celtic fans have tried to intimidate or harass refs, I don't think every time a car is scratched or a window is egg'd we can assume it was Celtic fans. On your point about board members, I think you will find there was zero evidence of this ever happening other than a comment made by a man under immense pressure. However, I did see two Rangers board members harassed in a hotel reception, so let's not play the whiter-than-white game.
05 Mar 2026 20:25:26
It is the way forward, and we are using elements of it. You spoke about data input only being as gd as what's put in. That's how machine learning works. The more you put in, the better it gets.
For your info:
Scottish Football Association (SFA) utilises VAR systems powered by technology that incorporates elements of machine learning, particularly through their provider.
It is definitely using it, but not as encompassing as you say, as in the elite leagues.
05 Mar 2026 20:25:36
Tommy, again, I get your point. Just a question. Do you think Rangers fans on a Rangers site saying the same things show the same entitlement and arrogance?
My point is both fans argue the same conspiracy, so I personally don't have a problem with any football fan saying how that can't be the case and we are as bad as one another.
Correct about SAOT. I looked and this is the Hawk-Eye description for offside.
How the Technology Actually Works
The process relies on several advanced components acting together:
Calibration & Modeling: Before each season, Hawk-Eye maps the 3D structure of the pitch (including camber) to ensure the virtual line accurately reflects the ground.
Tracking Cameras: At least six (and up to 10-14 in more advanced setups) cameras are used to capture high-fidelity motion data.
Skeletal/Limb Tracking: The system tracks up to 29 points on each player, 50 times a second.
"Kick-Point" Detection: The software identifies the exact frame in which the ball is played (the "kick-point") by synchronizing all cameras.
3D Visualization: The system then creates a 3D graphic showing the exact position of the attacker's relevant body part and the second-last defender.
Human Verification: Although the system is "semi-automated", the VAR operator confirms the automatically generated lines and the "kick-point" before alerting the on-field referee.
05 Mar 2026 20:32:45
SFA uses machine-learning-based software to track and analyze game incidents, but does not currently use the most advanced, fully automated AI officiating tools found in some other elite leagues.
So, as you see, we do use some of the technology listed above, but fall short of using the officiating technologies, which is where we seem to fall down on decisions made by the weak link in the system - humans.
05 Mar 2026 20:41:07
I said all that up there ⬆️ in a similar fashion. A lot is currently in use, and Hawkeye does use ML, although not all aspects of AI officiating tools are in use.
05 Mar 2026 20:55:30
Dude, you came on a Rangers site to slag Rangers fans. Saying your the most honest and balanced fan ever.
Your club, from Top to bottom on this issue have been a disgrace. It's not been a fringe element of fans. It's managers, players, board, ex players, media pundits and fans. Not one opportunity has been missed in over 20 years to pressurised and intimidate referees in the country.
I am a Rangers fan and am biased for my club but I try to be reasonably balanced on any subject. But there is no balance coming on here giving Rangers fans lessons on morality on this subject. Which you absolutely did do, literally.
You can dress it up how you like, but it's arrogant, entitled and lacks any acknowledgement that because of your clubs behaviour Rangers fans are now in a position that we question the integrity of referees in this country.
05 Mar 2026 21:45:01
I was just saying the other day to Fork and Storm that I was trying to be less confrontational. 2 days later, phew!
It's not the same, Angus. Celtic's behaviour towards referees has caused all this. Rangers fans, for the most part, me included, want to say 'swings and roundabouts/all balances out' when it comes to refereeing decisions. But now we are questioning the integrity of the sport because it's hard to believe all that pressure amounts to nothing.
Then you look at some mad decisions that we rarely get ourselves, and you start to wonder. Then you see some refereeing statistics, and they are terribly imbalanced, which gives it more credence.
I don't know if the referees have been influenced by all the rhetoric, but I do know that the behaviour by Celtic has created a question mark over the possibility.
That's why a Celtic fan coming on, who should actually be apologising for his club's part in making us question referees, and talking about moral high ground, is not acceptable to me.
He even did the 'I'm honest, I'm balanced' thing, which is not something honest or balanced people do, because their honest and balanced views speak for themselves.
Apologies for being triggered. I really didn't want to, and for any offence, the last word will be left to you.
05 Mar 2026 22:15:49
"Does a man good to cut loose once in a while."
Tommy, although the quote was to Spud at breakfast 😉😇, make of that what you will. 🤣🤣
05 Mar 2026 22:51:43
Tommy, but their fans think that we get all the decisions. That is the point. I have lots of mates who are Aberdeen supporters, and if I were to show them this discussion, they would piss themselves laughing, as they all think that both sides of the Old Firm get every decision because of the West Coast bias. I just laugh at that tbh, and I think they do it to wind me up. But the size of the crowd, and the effect that has on a referee subconsciously, will have a bearing imo.
Tbh I enjoy the discussion, and don't feel that anyone speaking so emotionally has anything to apologise for. Contrary to opinion, whilst I think I am right in my argument (why wouldn't I say it if I wasn't), I can see others as well and even agree with it (not often). You make some good, well-argued points, but I just can't buy that referees are biased one way or the other as part of this grand conspiracy. Please say something else, as I really don't want to be last on again. 😉
05 Mar 2026 23:11:37
But at least over the last few weeks you can say to Celtic fans there's no bias from refs, because they're doing a pretty bad job of showing it. There have been plenty of opportunities to sneak in a marginal dodgy decision to stop them.
All fans do it. Did anyone else hear the Brighton fan on Talksport who spent hours phoning round the clubs and FA to find out who their ref would be? Absolute conspiracy nut. If u put in that much leg work you're bound to find something to be upset over.
06 Mar 2026 01:56:00
Tommy Gun, yup, I agree with you. 8.55 and 9.45, I agree with both your posts, mate.
06 Mar 2026 20:58:55
I blame you Angus, you sucked me in with another trigger word, plus I am kinda bored. I am a STEM guy to my core, if I am making theories they are not conspiratorial, they are scientific and held up against a rigorous scientific method.
This had a starting point, during the 90s there was a period where Celtic took a "politics of grievance" approach to Scottish referees. At that time they had a very vociferous and public war with referees.
Their message was consistent during that time, referees in Scotland did not have the integrity to officiate Celtic games and that any decision given against Celtic was not done in error but, by "one of them" and in malice. That is public record because they were very open about it, saying referees should be brought in from abroad etc.
That went on for a few seasons and I'd be surprised if older fans don't remember because it was quite explosive and very public. It culminated in them having a referee sacked for giving the right decision in a game, but the wrong way and lying about it.
At the time I did not put any real weight to it, I felt sorry for the referees because it was such a hostile environment and I felt it was bringing the game into disrepute. They were also saying, in essence, that Rangers fans cannot be referees, which I obviously did not like.
There is a serious debate to be had on why a politics of grievance was adopted. Potentially socio-political in nature, potentially deliberate in nature, but also just cause needs to be considered if we are being balanced.
But there is no debate that was the approach, and that is a very potent force, them and us, tribalism in effect, that has always been very attractive to people, never more so than in our modern politics.
The open warfare with referees settled down, became less public and less frequent, however the politics of grievance always remained. At every opportunity, which I could give endless examples of, that was the policy towards referees.
If you have any doubt about this you just need to look at current referee John Beaton's career. A Rangers fan who had the temerity to become a referee and has suffered direct attacks from Celtic, top to bottom.
When other fans label this as a conspiracy, its not, but it is something, and that is the politics of grievance that has been ever present from Celtic since that period.
So, why do I even care? , let them cry wolf! It's inconsequential!
Because I don't believe, for a second, that it is inconsequential. People are very ill informed on how human beings make decisions. We believe that decisions are conscious, well constructed and balanced actions that we take.
That's not true, our brains make decisions based on biases from experience and environment. It also makes impulsive, often rash but overwhelming selfish decisions. It all breaks down under analysis as zero sum gain. It's kinda bleak but comes from solid and well established science.
From my perspective, knowing how we actually make decisions, I don't see any way this does not impact referees I decision making.
Then when I see a stat that only 2 of 15 penalties awarded to Rangers were done so by on field referees, I remember multiple games where referees have stood 6 yards away from incidents and have been paralysed at the point of decision making. But not just those, there the others who in a similar position immediately turn their back, bypassing the decision making part altogether.
When this really got me pissed was when I seen another statistic, it was VAR errors, for and against. When you compared our record to Celtic it's was 19 goals of a difference. Nineteen goals, That was not a full season, 2 thirds/3 quarters only.
That is massively consequential and I could not ignore it. So that's why I started to talk about my opinion.
06 Mar 2026 23:00:48
Tommy, I am glad you are back and it is okay to blame me as everyone else seems to for everything. 😉
Don't ever, though, discuss the psychology of anything on this channel ever again, as it is always shot down. 😉
Joking aside, I agree 100% that there is that subconscious bias which leads people to make decisions, from the size of the crowd at Celtic Park and Ibrox, which sways a referee to give a decision the way of the home club.
However, any referee would realise that to be swayed by the threat of, or actual, violence by a fan group can only lead to more of the same, so why would they do that.
I am old enough to remember the 80s and the call for foreign referees. However, my memories are that it isn't that different from today, as the continued narrative of systemic bias was and still is largely a product of fan perception and intense media scrutiny rather than evidence of corruption.
The conspiracy theories, imo, cannot be true because both Rangers and Celtic fans constantly complain about being "cheated" by the same referees. That cannot be possible if you think it through, so does that suggest that officials are actually just making random, honest mistakes that upset both sides equally?
From a psychological and physiological perspective, the split-second reaction time required to blow a whistle means referees rely on automatic, trained responses rather than the slow, conscious thinking needed to deliberately "cheat" for one team.
So yes, one club may at times be more vocal, as you say, but we are both as bad. Both clubs write to the SFA every time they disagree, and yet neither club then go public with any evidence of this supposed conspiracy. Why? The outcry tends to come after the same said club has been beaten and want to divert attention from players, but probably the board as well.
Good discussion, btw, and what I come onto the forum for. Done with good humour, so thanks for that, as I find it happens less often these days. I know I am partly/mostly at fault for that, but good to have a poster who doesn't react badly. Thank you.
I am off-line for the next few days so won't be able to respond, but happy to pick it up again any time. Have a good weekend.
07 Mar 2026 05:51:14
Tommy, I agree with your post. I seem to remember them making a video with ex-players about refs, and also there was the story of them hiring a private investigator.