Halliday

comment by Magnum. (U22391)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 33 minutes ago
Gerrard charges by the SFA. Being honest, the charge seems fairly petty, but the rangers statement is decent.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/54268691
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The defence that we have Covid so Gerrard can say what he likes is an interesting approach. Not sure it will work.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s as good as the defence that he didn’t answer the question when he was asked about it a few times, before then going ahead and answering it.

I think he’s been cited as he’s implying bias, rather than any criticism of the ref.

He’s inferring bias as he has since day one.

Yes, mags, didn’t hear rangers or their fans on here dispute our fine for Boli on the basis of unprecedented times.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/54270865

comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 7 hours, 17 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 34 minutes ago
Madonna sang a song about him
----------------------------------------------------------------------


I shouldn't laugh but years of torturous dad jokes have broken my spirit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Happy Halliday...proper Belfast, like.

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 27 minutes ago
He’s inferring bias as he has since day one.

Yes, mags, didn’t hear rangers or their fans on here dispute our fine for Boli on the basis of unprecedented times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was going to, but could not be ersed.

comment by Call Sign: JA606 Liaison Manager (U3627)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
It may be petty but for once it is consistent. Plenty other managers have been cited for questioning decisions made by the ref

I am against it as a rule as I believe refs should be accountable not just in private but rules are rules at present

Gerrard spent his first few games complaining about refs being against Rangers for years with no repercussion so karma is more apt in this case
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most managers do this.....even celtic wans.

For shame

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by Call Sign: JA606 Liaison Manager (U3627)
posted 1 hour, 4 minutes ago
It may be petty but for once it is consistent. Plenty other managers have been cited for questioning decisions made by the ref

I am against it as a rule as I believe refs should be accountable not just in private but rules are rules at present

Gerrard spent his first few games complaining about refs being against Rangers for years with no repercussion so karma is more apt in this case
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Most managers do this.....even celtic wans.

For shame
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SG 🎼Nobody does it better eeeeeee!

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 5 hours ago
He’s inferring bias as he has since day one.

Yes, mags, didn’t hear rangers or their fans on here dispute our fine for Boli on the basis of unprecedented times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may shock you but I don't pay that much attention to Celtic.

Most of my football related attention is spent on rangers. Much like your average Celtic fan

I think they will really struggle to make the charge stick with SG.

All he said was it would be 'interesting' to see the decision if the shoe was on the other foot. He never speculated on what the outcome might be in that situation.

All he said was it would be interesting to see.

Maybe SG would have found it interesting either way - it certainly owuld have been interesting if Morelos hadnt been sent off for that challenge. And we know this because it was interesting that the United player wasnt sent off - because of the debate and discussion it caused.

The Compliance Officer found the original decision interesting enough to put it to a panel for review.

Why are they allowed to find it interesting and SG isnt?

I get that SG fairly carefully worded his statement to make a point and to a degree its semantics.

But unfortunately the language is pretty critical in what he said.

No case to answer to

Ridiculous he is being looked at for those comments

Pretty sure loads of managers have said similar in the past

He's still a bell mind