comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
To me it looks like collum decided it wasn't a handball and said play on.
He then went back and checked it at half time and seen that even if it was a pen it wasn't due to the offside.
So it all was a moot point.
I dont see any cover up or that but merely rangers trying to generate an issue to hide from their own poor performance.
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We don't even know for sure that's the truth mate.
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted about a minute ago
comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who said they changed their reason?
They didn't change their reason they could have just shown it was a moot point regardless.
comment by Blue Heaven (U20912)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nah. It's about how it was dealt with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do not agree with that one single bit. This has morphed into excuse making, pandering to the lunatic fringes in the support, intimation that somehow Rangers are cheated and intimidation of officials.
No matter what was this is looked at, there was never going to be a penalty for that incident. Christ; some are trying to suggest that a “goal” was disallowed.
It’s bizarre mentalist behaviour and is quite frankly now laughable.
No referee or panel awarded an offside. That’s just nonsense.
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
“does it ?? there was a ref saying that they shouldnt have been able to use VAR to decide if it was offside in this incident?”
Then that ref is wrong. Offside is looked at for any “incident” that results in a penalty or a goal. It’s automatic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, I asked if anyone has a source for it and it was provided.
hence why the goal should have been ruled as offside and why the VAR team changed their decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m confused. There was no “goal”. There could have been a penalty awarded (matter of opinion) which everyone (more or less) agrees would have been rescinded as Sima was offside. Indirect free kick to Celtic.
The referee gave a bye kick which backs up the view that he didn’t believe it was deliberate or “unnatural” enough to award a penalty and for some reason didn’t award a corner. The VAR panel didn’t believe that the referee had made a clear and obvious error so didn’t know intervene. The referee never claimed it as being offside.
That was presented by Sky who “drew the lines” indicating simply that had a penalty been given, then it would have been ruled out.
I haven’t seen any sign of the referee indicating it was brushed aside because Sima was offside. It was simply his opinion that it wasn’t a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
thats not the correct procedure however.
If Collum and Walsh thought the hand ball wasnt a pen and awarded either a goal kick (or the correct corner) and there was no offside then thats fine we might disagree but it would be correct.
what seem to have happened here is that they gave that decision, got the feedback from just about everyone who had seen it as a stonewaller and decided to change the reason for it being not awarded hence why SKY confirmed the reason as being offside and as Smid said displayed the lines to show that.
we know they didnt originally give it as offside as a goal kick was awarded. So when and why did they change their mind, and has been said if you dont see the problem that can arise from that there isnt much more to say.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sky made the allegations and gave the reasons. The referee and VAR panel between them decided that it want handball.
Can anyone show anything that demonstrates that the referee gave the reason as offside? Anywhere?
Remember Celtic going after the same thing, us being told ultimately the right decision was made so feck up. Strange that 🤣
I said during the game - it was another SPFL VAR ballzup - whether that’s Comms and/or decision making. But other teams experience these contentious decisions more frequently and move on.
Maybe as newbees you are right to go on the rampage about this one and fight the fight for the rest of us? 😉
Clement has played a blinder and got your fans ranting about a pen that could never have been rather talk about his tactics.
For the second old firm game in a row you have let callum macgregor dictate the midfield. Thats not down to the sfa but your managers.
SFA confirms that the VAR panel weren’t even involved and that there was no mention of offside by the referee.
Also confirm that the offside issue was mentioned to the broadcaster (Sky) who in turn fed it to a watching audience. They’ll be reviewing how information is released to the broadcasters in future.
Issue closed
Sign in if you want to comment
Tuesday's football - live
Page 17 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 4/1/24
comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
posted on 4/1/24
To me it looks like collum decided it wasn't a handball and said play on.
He then went back and checked it at half time and seen that even if it was a pen it wasn't due to the offside.
So it all was a moot point.
I dont see any cover up or that but merely rangers trying to generate an issue to hide from their own poor performance.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We don't even know for sure that's the truth mate.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted about a minute ago
comment by System-Addict ••• ••••• •• (U9239)
posted 11 minutes ago
Wow! Of all the contentious refereeing decisions (particularly since VAR was introduced) This is the ONE we (SPFL) are going shine a light on and make sure heads roll? Really?
Even in this OP it’s morphed into some kind title deciding disallowed “goal”.
It was a mid season, first half, cross field pass that was going out for a goal kick. At least 2 (two) referees in an official capacity have deemed it not a clear and obvious penalty. And it was offside anyway 😳
There are a dozen better examples every week. It seems more about Rangers lack of familiarity with the circumstances than the credibility of the argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
again your missing the point the issue isnt that VAR dissalowed the goal the issue is that the refs changed the reason mid way through the game presumably on the back of the feedback of the handball not being given.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who said they changed their reason?
They didn't change their reason they could have just shown it was a moot point regardless.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Blue Heaven (U20912)
posted 3 minutes ago
Nah. It's about how it was dealt with.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Do not agree with that one single bit. This has morphed into excuse making, pandering to the lunatic fringes in the support, intimation that somehow Rangers are cheated and intimidation of officials.
No matter what was this is looked at, there was never going to be a penalty for that incident. Christ; some are trying to suggest that a “goal” was disallowed.
It’s bizarre mentalist behaviour and is quite frankly now laughable.
No referee or panel awarded an offside. That’s just nonsense.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 56 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 2 minutes ago
“does it ?? there was a ref saying that they shouldnt have been able to use VAR to decide if it was offside in this incident?”
Then that ref is wrong. Offside is looked at for any “incident” that results in a penalty or a goal. It’s automatic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, I asked if anyone has a source for it and it was provided.
hence why the goal should have been ruled as offside and why the VAR team changed their decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m confused. There was no “goal”. There could have been a penalty awarded (matter of opinion) which everyone (more or less) agrees would have been rescinded as Sima was offside. Indirect free kick to Celtic.
The referee gave a bye kick which backs up the view that he didn’t believe it was deliberate or “unnatural” enough to award a penalty and for some reason didn’t award a corner. The VAR panel didn’t believe that the referee had made a clear and obvious error so didn’t know intervene. The referee never claimed it as being offside.
That was presented by Sky who “drew the lines” indicating simply that had a penalty been given, then it would have been ruled out.
I haven’t seen any sign of the referee indicating it was brushed aside because Sima was offside. It was simply his opinion that it wasn’t a penalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
thats not the correct procedure however.
If Collum and Walsh thought the hand ball wasnt a pen and awarded either a goal kick (or the correct corner) and there was no offside then thats fine we might disagree but it would be correct.
what seem to have happened here is that they gave that decision, got the feedback from just about everyone who had seen it as a stonewaller and decided to change the reason for it being not awarded hence why SKY confirmed the reason as being offside and as Smid said displayed the lines to show that.
we know they didnt originally give it as offside as a goal kick was awarded. So when and why did they change their mind, and has been said if you dont see the problem that can arise from that there isnt much more to say.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sky made the allegations and gave the reasons. The referee and VAR panel between them decided that it want handball.
Can anyone show anything that demonstrates that the referee gave the reason as offside? Anywhere?
posted on 4/1/24
Remember Celtic going after the same thing, us being told ultimately the right decision was made so feck up. Strange that 🤣
posted on 4/1/24
I said during the game - it was another SPFL VAR ballzup - whether that’s Comms and/or decision making. But other teams experience these contentious decisions more frequently and move on.
Maybe as newbees you are right to go on the rampage about this one and fight the fight for the rest of us? 😉
posted on 4/1/24
Clement has played a blinder and got your fans ranting about a pen that could never have been rather talk about his tactics.
posted on 4/1/24
For the second old firm game in a row you have let callum macgregor dictate the midfield. Thats not down to the sfa but your managers.
posted on 5/1/24
SFA confirms that the VAR panel weren’t even involved and that there was no mention of offside by the referee.
Also confirm that the offside issue was mentioned to the broadcaster (Sky) who in turn fed it to a watching audience. They’ll be reviewing how information is released to the broadcasters in future.
Issue closed
Page 17 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17