SFA farce continues and it’s not ‘whataboutery’ to defend our position

The word ‘whataboutery’ has become the throw away term to dismiss any claim that doesn’t suit a particular agenda

The agenda this week being that by Rangers defending the Jon Flanagan incident and pointing out a similar incident, which was not cited, is ‘whataboutery’

A clear attempt to discredit Rangers position by accusing them of being paranoid or losing the plot. We dare to ask why one similar incident can have no case to answer yet ours does, despite the fact that the referee dealt with it at the time

What chances do we have when idiot ex pros are openly questioning why it wasn’t a penalty and clearly don’t know the laws of the game then plastering their moronic stance all over social media

Let’s just make one thing clear, it’s not ‘whataboutery’ to defend your position and ask why our players are being subjected to different outcomes from similar positions

Can you imagine a judge dismissing a lawyers defence using precedent set as ‘whataboutery’?! It wouldn’t happen and rightly so because it’s a ridiculous stance to take to justify your position

Why does Scott Brown get away with elbowing Kenny Miller, Jason Holt and Alfredo Morelos in separate incidents?

Why does Daniel Backmann of Kilmarnock have his red card rescinded and every media hack tell us it was correct decision?

Why does Darren McGregor elbow Alfredo Morelos and it is only a yellow with no further action? It was live on Sky and every pundit said it was a red, there was various angles at slow motion so no excuses of only one angle at fast speed as we were told today in defence of another. McGregor’s is absolutely indefensible yet no action, he actually touched his face by the way

‘whataboutery’ is the term used as a defence when the point you are making is valid and doesn’t suit the agenda, the lowest most desperate form of defence of an argument

Let’s make no mistake here, Rangers discipline has let us down but there is absolutely no doubts that we are being refereed to a different standard

Take this for example

Just this week ICT were reduced to ten men for this high boot against Dundee Utd in a huge play off match.

Alan Powers leg was higher and clearly connects too Ryan Jacks face, but only a yellow and no case to answer?

How is that possible?

Rangers are being treated to a different standard than others and it’s not ‘Whataboutery’ to defend our position and ask why it’s happening

It’s an absolute nonsense to suggest the SFA’s disciplinary system is flawed and requires more clarity then suggest Rangers are losing the plot for questioning it

Even Steve Clarke thinks Rangers have a point and when that happens you really have to think maybe, just maybe, we have a point

Attempts to suggest that our manager doesn’t back the clubs position is also another poor way of trying to create a situation that doesn’t exist. The manager is as disgusted as the rest of us

Jon Flanagan might be guilty but on the evidence of several other incidents he can’t surely be guilty. A precedent has been set and several incidents prove that

If he is found guilty and forced to serve a two match ban then Rangers point has been proved all along, if it hasn’t already

The system is a farce and clarity is needed, no amount of ‘whataboutery’ claims will distort that fact

When claims of ‘whataboutery’ is all you have to defend the agenda you have set, then your argument is already lost

The SFA and Claire Whyte are turning our game into a national farce by their opportunist attempts to ignore some incidents and deal with ours. The fact that every incident they choose to deal with is for our team is also as suspicious as it is concerning

But that’s surely just paranoia, after all it’s not like Claire Whyte has direct links to our nearest rivals

Oh hold on, she does?

I’ll be getting accused of ‘whataboutery’ any minute

Ignore the nonsense, the irrelevant and the noise