Not sure there has been any wrongs, just bads.

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 25 seconds ago
Not sure there has been any wrongs, just bads.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bernabei pen (Utd)
MOR pen (R.C)
Michael Smith Handball - No pen. (Hearts)
Craig Sibbald studs in GGs face - No card (Livi)
Turnbull studs up on keeper -VAR gives Red card
Ralston Diving header - No goal (Hearts)
Liel Abada goal - Offside apparently..(Hearts)
Goldson handball - Nothing to see there apparently
Goldson handball vs Sheep - Goal given for Rangers
GG hands around Killie player - No pen.
.
So it looks like it'll even itself out for Celtic, we just need a dodgy pen against Rangers and two or three against Hearts, RC and a couple of red cards for Livi and maybe Hearts.

I'm looking forward to it 'evening' out.

My point was more subtle. Not going through the list but the vast majority are bad interpretations rather than wrong ones.

I reserve the right to change my mind if we drop 9 points, however!

The number of poor/bad decisions against Celtic is quite remarkable. There are other teams that have not experienced any negative effects of VAR.

An objectively wrong decision was the red card given to Watt in our 1-0 defeat to Motherwell earlier this season.

John Beaton didn't give a free kick, but the VAR assistant asked him to review it on the monitor. After doing so Beaton sent him off.

United appealed the red card and it was downgraded to a yellow card.

Given that VAR shouldn't intervene on a yellow card offence, it was objectively wrong.

comment by IvanGolacIsMagic (U5291)
posted 25 minutes ago
An objectively wrong decision was the red card given to Watt in our 1-0 defeat to Motherwell earlier this season.

John Beaton didn't give a free kick, but the VAR assistant asked him to review it on the monitor. After doing so Beaton sent him off.

United appealed the red card and it was downgraded to a yellow card.

Given that VAR shouldn't intervene on a yellow card offence, it was objectively wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you rather the red card stood?

So Zico creates an article, an instead of listing all the incidents he feels VAR got it wrong in the OP, which was clearly the whole point of the thing...he waits for one comment to come in....then posts his list

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by IvanGolacIsMagic (U5291)
posted 25 minutes ago
An objectively wrong decision was the red card given to Watt in our 1-0 defeat to Motherwell earlier this season.

John Beaton didn't give a free kick, but the VAR assistant asked him to review it on the monitor. After doing so Beaton sent him off.

United appealed the red card and it was downgraded to a yellow card.

Given that VAR shouldn't intervene on a yellow card offence, it was objectively wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would you rather the red card stood?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd rather the VAR hadn't interfered, and I'd rather the ref had made the correct decision once it had.

comment by St3vie (U11028)
posted 32 minutes ago
So Zico creates an article, an instead of listing all the incidents he feels VAR got it wrong in the OP, which was clearly the whole point of the thing...he waits for one comment to come in....then posts his list



----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see anything wrong with me commenting on what I think is wrong.

I'll make a complete list when there are more comments.

What about YOUR list of Rangers grievances...?

comment by Zico 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 (U21900)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by St3vie (U11028)
posted 32 minutes ago
So Zico creates an article, an instead of listing all the incidents he feels VAR got it wrong in the OP, which was clearly the whole point of the thing...he waits for one comment to come in....then posts his list



----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see anything wrong with me commenting on what I think is wrong.

I'll make a complete list when there are more comments.

What about YOUR list of Rangers grievances...?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't keep lists of everything that goes against us...and forget everything that goes for us....bloody pointless

comment by St3vie (U11028)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Zico 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 (U21900)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by St3vie (U11028)
posted 32 minutes ago
So Zico creates an article, an instead of listing all the incidents he feels VAR got it wrong in the OP, which was clearly the whole point of the thing...he waits for one comment to come in....then posts his list



----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't see anything wrong with me commenting on what I think is wrong.

I'll make a complete list when there are more comments.

What about YOUR list of Rangers grievances...?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't keep lists of everything that goes against us...and forget everything that goes for us....bloody pointless
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pointless for Rangers obviously..

comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 4 hours, 49 minutes ago
My point was more subtle. Not going through the list but the vast majority are bad interpretations rather than wrong ones.

I reserve the right to change my mind if we drop 9 points, however!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yip, the entire establishment is out ot get Celtic it explains why they are in the first cup final and god knows how many points clear at the top of the table

pure lanacy FFS

The offside with the camera 6 postcodes away from Fir Park. Given it was followed by some absolute garbage of “it’s automatic” “Hawkeye” from the powers that be jus exacerbated it.

comment by bmcl1987 - the M stands for meltdown 🤓 (U14177)
posted 34 minutes ago
The offside with the camera 6 postcodes away from Fir Park. Given it was followed by some absolute garbage of “it’s automatic” “Hawkeye” from the powers that be jus exacerbated it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That wasn’t the issue in that decision..

comment by Zico 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 (U21900)
posted 19 hours, 34 minutes ago
comment by Silver (U6112)
posted 25 seconds ago
Not sure there has been any wrongs, just bads.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bernabei pen (Utd)
MOR pen (R.C)
Michael Smith Handball - No pen. (Hearts)
Craig Sibbald studs in GGs face - No card (Livi)
Turnbull studs up on keeper -VAR gives Red card
Ralston Diving header - No goal (Hearts)
Liel Abada goal - Offside apparently..(Hearts)
Goldson handball - Nothing to see there apparently
Goldson handball vs Sheep - Goal given for Rangers
GG hands around Killie player - No pen.
.
So it looks like it'll even itself out for Celtic, we just need a dodgy pen against Rangers and two or three against Hearts, RC and a couple of red cards for Livi and maybe Hearts.

I'm looking forward to it 'evening' out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The decision that cost us this season was before VAR against Hibs, started to go wrong for us then. Similar story in league cup final last year where Celtic scored an offside goal.

Thankfully VAR has managed to ensure most big Rangers game decisions are correct since coming in.

Laughable folk are still trying to claim Goldson handballs. Never mind how Turnbull studs into face can go down as a VAR mistake.

Why is it laughable that other peoples opinions differ from yours?

And are you really suggesting that “most” of the big decisions for or against Rangers since the introduction have been correct?

Seriously?

The issue with VAR and indeed all refereeing is simple interpretation. Nothing else. And that’s where everyone’s views will be different.

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
Why is it laughable that other peoples opinions differ from yours?

And are you really suggesting that “most” of the big decisions for or against Rangers since the introduction have been correct?

Seriously?

The issue with VAR and indeed all refereeing is simple interpretation. Nothing else. And that’s where everyone’s views will be different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 hours, 50 minutes ago
Why is it laughable that other peoples opinions differ from yours?

And are you really suggesting that “most” of the big decisions for or against Rangers since the introduction have been correct?

Seriously?

The issue with VAR and indeed all refereeing is simple interpretation. Nothing else. And that’s where everyone’s views will be different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Laughable as there is literally IFAB guidance stating why that handball was the right decision. There’s even a clip of an English ref from last year stating why this is exact example is not a pen, Chris Sutton is standing next to him yet he’s still saying it’s wrong now.

The other one in build up to goal also isn’t a handball going by the rules.

Can call out consistency. But calling out decisions that are correct in line with the rules is laughable. Not clear how the Turnbull one could be questioned either.

Turnbull one I have no problem with. The two offside ‘goals’ against Kilmarnock, I have no problem with. However, Zico’s list is quite concerting re the understanding of the rules and the inconsistency of decisions.

*concerning

comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 hours, 50 minutes ago
Why is it laughable that other peoples opinions differ from yours?

And are you really suggesting that “most” of the big decisions for or against Rangers since the introduction have been correct?

Seriously?

The issue with VAR and indeed all refereeing is simple interpretation. Nothing else. And that’s where everyone’s views will be different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Laughable as there is literally IFAB guidance stating why that handball was the right decision. There’s even a clip of an English ref from last year stating why this is exact example is not a pen, Chris Sutton is standing next to him yet he’s still saying it’s wrong now.

The other one in build up to goal also isn’t a handball going by the rules.

Can call out consistency. But calling out decisions that are correct in line with the rules is laughable. Not clear how the Turnbull one could be questioned either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

IFAB can rule all they like and set them out in their books. Bottom line is that interpretation is what decides.

In other words did the referee and VAR officials in full knowledge of the rules decide the rule was broken or not. In this instance they believed they weren’t broken.

As is quite clearly the case, other referees may easily think otherwise and would have awarded a penalty.

It’s always about interpreting by the official as to whether a rule has been breached or not.

Hiding behind “it’s in IFAB rule book” is nothing more than a get out clause.

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 hours, 50 minutes ago
Why is it laughable that other peoples opinions differ from yours?

And are you really suggesting that “most” of the big decisions for or against Rangers since the introduction have been correct?

Seriously?

The issue with VAR and indeed all refereeing is simple interpretation. Nothing else. And that’s where everyone’s views will be different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Laughable as there is literally IFAB guidance stating why that handball was the right decision. There’s even a clip of an English ref from last year stating why this is exact example is not a pen, Chris Sutton is standing next to him yet he’s still saying it’s wrong now.

The other one in build up to goal also isn’t a handball going by the rules.

Can call out consistency. But calling out decisions that are correct in line with the rules is laughable. Not clear how the Turnbull one could be questioned either.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

IFAB can rule all they like and set them out in their books. Bottom line is that interpretation is what decides.

In other words did the referee and VAR officials in full knowledge of the rules decide the rule was broken or not. In this instance they believed they weren’t broken.

As is quite clearly the case, other referees may easily think otherwise and would have awarded a penalty.

It’s always about interpreting by the official as to whether a rule has been breached or not.

Hiding behind “it’s in IFAB rule book” is nothing more than a get out clause.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hiding behind guidance? What other guidance are they meant to go by?

Surely the whole point of guidance is to remove those inconsistencies and remove that element of interpretation.

Suggesting such guidance is behind his behind and referees should instead just use their own judgement is laughable and will only exacerbate issues with inconsistencies.

If anything we need more guidance to remove such inconsistencies.

Hiding behind “it’s in IFAB rule book” is nothing more than a get out clause.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely priceless!

Referring to the rules when having a debate about whether a rule has been broken will never catch on.

Not sure what the issue is? There will always be interpretations applied on marginal cases.

- whether the ball really was heading for the face
- what speed it was doing
- how far away it was hit
- whether it looked more like a deliberate action than a reflex one
- whether the player had an alternative
- whether that player has been 'at it' the whole game
- colour of his shirt

Now, I doubt the refs are considering ALL these in the second(s) they make their decision. The VAR guy might and the ref may get a 2nd chance at the monitor but all are possible. It is not always an exact science.