Rangers fans putting their view across about this and that to justify a draw at home a draw mind you not a win just emphasising how desperate and low they have sunk in ambition, celebrating a draw like a win, that’s the mentality of losers and why Celtic will win the league
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
comment by Lexballielegend (U22945)
posted 2 seconds ago
Rangers fans putting their view across about this and that to justify a draw at home a draw mind you not a win just emphasising how desperate and low they have sunk in ambition, celebrating a draw like a win, that’s the mentality of losers and why Celtic will win the league
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want a tissue for your tears mate?
So basically what Celtic fans are saying is that the rules don’t matter
No tears I would have taken a draw all day, Rangers win it’s out of our hands we need favours from other teams win or draw it’s ours to lose, just thought the celebrations of a draw were pathetic tbh
comment by System-Addict ••• ••&... (U9239)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by super phoenix rangers - comments on this forum are not mine but a fictionalised version loosely based on someone similar to me (U14864)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 40 seconds ago
if they are fouls then they should be given as such no?
its never a foul man, this is a tribalism penalty shout tbh, flip the switch and attitudes change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The issue appears to be that there’s contact in the AJ challenge and the foul on Iwata. The difference is in the force used. It was a clear foul on Iwata with the force that was used-AJ having contact with Silva’s right knee seemed to cause his left leg to decide not to continue making contact with the ground.
There’s little similarity in the challenges. AJ didn’t ‘foul’ Silva. He didn’t impede his progress. Silva deciding to fall when he felt contact was the issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He kicked his knee, how does that not impede him?
I agree Silva was rolling about a lot but that one wasn't a dive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn’t kick his knee though. He did lift his leg up and there was contact, but he didn’t kick his knee. To justify the decision, folk are resorting to hyperbole over what happened. There was contact on his right knee-why did that make his left foot not make contact with the ground?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what your saying is that Johnston just ‘dangled’ his leg at knee level, rather than it being the follow through of his kick?
If you dangle a leg at knee level, make contact and trip someone up it’s a foul.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In all of my responses to you I have accepted in the modern game it’s soft, but it can be given as a foul. And I fully accept that is getting given at Ibrox.
My challenge is not whether it’s a foul, but the systematic upgrading of the offence (currently “reckless kicking&rdquoand selective mis-quoting of sources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've mentioned those as two potential reasons in the comment previous to that. For me it's probably more that the contact with the ball wouldn't have dispossesed Silva so it's a foul.
I could certainly see the argument for catching a player in the knee with a reckless kick out at the ball.
At no point have I suggested it was violent or trying to kick the player, which you seem to have inferred. So glad to clear up any confusion
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
Its not violent hence why it was right not to give Johnston a second booking.
Ref shouldn't be the focus. A good game and both teams can be happy with the outcome. Just read the first time Rangers have come back from a 2 goal deficit in an OF game since 1987 when Roberts ended up in goals.
Big Sima being back for us is huge now, maybe see Danilo again before the end of the season as well and hopefully give us the chance to freshen up the front 3. Wright shouldn't play a part from here on in, an empty jersey yesterday.
Clement post match interview about having to jump with your arms up was also an embarrassment tbh, unless of course we all jump with our elbows out 🤣🤣
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
comment by Lexballielegend (U22945)
posted 1 minute ago
Clement post match interview about having to jump with your arms up was also an embarrassment tbh, unless of course we all jump with our elbows out 🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Defenders jump like that all the time, mainly to protect themselves from challenges. If that's all Goldson did (we have had a few given against us recently where that was the case) then fair enough but for me Goldson clearly moves his arm to the ball after he has jumped.
Clement probably still annoyed about the previous ones
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
do we think Silva is a wee diver ?
he looks a sturdy no nonsense type player that just gets on with things if you ask me
he wasnt an embarrassment at all
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
comment by CelticTornado (U4316)
posted 28 seconds ago
do we think Silva is a wee diver ?
he looks a sturdy no nonsense type player that just gets on with things if you ask me
he wasnt an embarrassment at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was at it and his antics after the incident that got jonstone booked were a joke.
That's probably why people doubt the penalty I guess, Beaton included as he booked him for diving.
However we have var and it's a clear foul. I get how people can think it's a dive in real time but not after replays
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't tell you what individual refs take in to account when making individual calls but level of force isn't a thing so I'd like to think they weren't making things up when reviewing incidents. If they were making up their own rules we would have a problem.
But look if it was given the other way I think in real time I'd be upset and think it was harsh. If several other referees reviewed the incident and explained why the ref got it right I'd reluctantly accept that harsh or otherwise his decision is justified.
But we could spend the rest of the day debating it and I sense we're unlikely to come to the same conclusion so will agree to disagree on this one.
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 16 seconds ago
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they look at level of contact not force perhaps?
comment by super phoenix rangers - comments on this forum are not mine but a fictionalised version loosely based on someone similar to me (U14864)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 16 seconds ago
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they look at level of contact not force perhaps?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, we’re now saying it’s where he made contact? The contact on his right knee?? How did the contact on his right knee cause his left leg (where there’s no contact at all from either himself or AJ) cause him to go to ground and stop him from running?
We’re doing some mental gymnastics here now in addition to the hyperbole.
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't tell you what individual refs take in to account when making individual calls but level of force isn't a thing so I'd like to think they weren't making things up when reviewing incidents. If they were making up their own rules we would have a problem.
But look if it was given the other way I think in real time I'd be upset and think it was harsh. If several other referees reviewed the incident and explained why the ref got it right I'd reluctantly accept that harsh or otherwise his decision is justified.
But we could spend the rest of the day debating it and I sense we're unlikely to come to the same conclusion so will agree to disagree on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re being somewhat disingenuous with your points initially there, and I seriously doubt having seen the incident initially and after replay you’d agree with anyone that it was worthy of the fall he made the penalty he got. But hey ho-you’re a better man than me. I’d like to think I’d say as a minimum he bought that, and it wasn’t a penalty.
There is a lot of mental gymnastics going on here for what is clearly a penalty
Unless you’ve not watched football in ten years
well clement thinks they won yesterday so less said about that lunatic the better.
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 55 seconds ago
well clement thinks they won yesterday so less said about that lunatic the better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd actually very much like to talk more about Philippe Clement.
Whats Scott Wright got on him
I don't like being critical of players but Scott Wright must be one of the luckiest guys ever. He's been at Rangers over 3 years now and has never been a first choice and we have tried to move him on yet somehow ends up finding his way in to these big games through default.
Yesterday should be the last we see him though, he's miles off the level. It's a shame because he has got some ability and loads of pace but just can't put any of it together in a game.
Sign in if you want to comment
Advantage?
Page 4 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 8/4/24
Rangers fans putting their view across about this and that to justify a draw at home a draw mind you not a win just emphasising how desperate and low they have sunk in ambition, celebrating a draw like a win, that’s the mentality of losers and why Celtic will win the league
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Lexballielegend (U22945)
posted 2 seconds ago
Rangers fans putting their view across about this and that to justify a draw at home a draw mind you not a win just emphasising how desperate and low they have sunk in ambition, celebrating a draw like a win, that’s the mentality of losers and why Celtic will win the league
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Want a tissue for your tears mate?
posted on 8/4/24
So basically what Celtic fans are saying is that the rules don’t matter
posted on 8/4/24
No tears I would have taken a draw all day, Rangers win it’s out of our hands we need favours from other teams win or draw it’s ours to lose, just thought the celebrations of a draw were pathetic tbh
posted on 8/4/24
comment by System-Addict ••• ••&... (U9239)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by super phoenix rangers - comments on this forum are not mine but a fictionalised version loosely based on someone similar to me (U14864)
posted 27 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 40 seconds ago
if they are fouls then they should be given as such no?
its never a foul man, this is a tribalism penalty shout tbh, flip the switch and attitudes change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The issue appears to be that there’s contact in the AJ challenge and the foul on Iwata. The difference is in the force used. It was a clear foul on Iwata with the force that was used-AJ having contact with Silva’s right knee seemed to cause his left leg to decide not to continue making contact with the ground.
There’s little similarity in the challenges. AJ didn’t ‘foul’ Silva. He didn’t impede his progress. Silva deciding to fall when he felt contact was the issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He kicked his knee, how does that not impede him?
I agree Silva was rolling about a lot but that one wasn't a dive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He didn’t kick his knee though. He did lift his leg up and there was contact, but he didn’t kick his knee. To justify the decision, folk are resorting to hyperbole over what happened. There was contact on his right knee-why did that make his left foot not make contact with the ground?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what your saying is that Johnston just ‘dangled’ his leg at knee level, rather than it being the follow through of his kick?
If you dangle a leg at knee level, make contact and trip someone up it’s a foul.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In all of my responses to you I have accepted in the modern game it’s soft, but it can be given as a foul. And I fully accept that is getting given at Ibrox.
My challenge is not whether it’s a foul, but the systematic upgrading of the offence (currently “reckless kicking&rdquoand selective mis-quoting of sources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've mentioned those as two potential reasons in the comment previous to that. For me it's probably more that the contact with the ball wouldn't have dispossesed Silva so it's a foul.
I could certainly see the argument for catching a player in the knee with a reckless kick out at the ball.
At no point have I suggested it was violent or trying to kick the player, which you seem to have inferred. So glad to clear up any confusion
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
posted on 8/4/24
Its not violent hence why it was right not to give Johnston a second booking.
Ref shouldn't be the focus. A good game and both teams can be happy with the outcome. Just read the first time Rangers have come back from a 2 goal deficit in an OF game since 1987 when Roberts ended up in goals.
Big Sima being back for us is huge now, maybe see Danilo again before the end of the season as well and hopefully give us the chance to freshen up the front 3. Wright shouldn't play a part from here on in, an empty jersey yesterday.
posted on 8/4/24
Clement post match interview about having to jump with your arms up was also an embarrassment tbh, unless of course we all jump with our elbows out 🤣🤣
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Lexballielegend (U22945)
posted 1 minute ago
Clement post match interview about having to jump with your arms up was also an embarrassment tbh, unless of course we all jump with our elbows out 🤣🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Defenders jump like that all the time, mainly to protect themselves from challenges. If that's all Goldson did (we have had a few given against us recently where that was the case) then fair enough but for me Goldson clearly moves his arm to the ball after he has jumped.
Clement probably still annoyed about the previous ones
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
posted on 8/4/24
do we think Silva is a wee diver ?
he looks a sturdy no nonsense type player that just gets on with things if you ask me
he wasnt an embarrassment at all
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.
posted on 8/4/24
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by CelticTornado (U4316)
posted 28 seconds ago
do we think Silva is a wee diver ?
he looks a sturdy no nonsense type player that just gets on with things if you ask me
he wasnt an embarrassment at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He was at it and his antics after the incident that got jonstone booked were a joke.
That's probably why people doubt the penalty I guess, Beaton included as he booked him for diving.
However we have var and it's a clear foul. I get how people can think it's a dive in real time but not after replays
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't tell you what individual refs take in to account when making individual calls but level of force isn't a thing so I'd like to think they weren't making things up when reviewing incidents. If they were making up their own rules we would have a problem.
But look if it was given the other way I think in real time I'd be upset and think it was harsh. If several other referees reviewed the incident and explained why the ref got it right I'd reluctantly accept that harsh or otherwise his decision is justified.
But we could spend the rest of the day debating it and I sense we're unlikely to come to the same conclusion so will agree to disagree on this one.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 16 seconds ago
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they look at level of contact not force perhaps?
posted on 8/4/24
comment by super phoenix rangers - comments on this forum are not mine but a fictionalised version loosely based on someone similar to me (U14864)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided... (U10636)
posted 16 seconds ago
‘ Yes a decision would be made on how much contact was made with the player.
In this case the ref (and every other ref and pundit except Stewart and Sutton) say yes enough contact was made with the player.’
Define ‘force’ without using the word ‘force’. See above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because they look at level of contact not force perhaps?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, we’re now saying it’s where he made contact? The contact on his right knee?? How did the contact on his right knee cause his left leg (where there’s no contact at all from either himself or AJ) cause him to go to ground and stop him from running?
We’re doing some mental gymnastics here now in addition to the hyperbole.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 54 seconds ago
comment by Gersmid (U22273)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Changing my name from My POV - but not decided what to change it to yet (U10636)
posted 30 seconds ago
‘ There is no such thing as enough contact or force. You can't make up rules for individual games.’
I don’t get this-so any contact at all is a foul?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Clearly not. But there doesn't need to be a level of contact for something to be classed as a foul. In this case is did the contact impede Silva and every referee who has commented on it along with every neutral pundit has agreed it did. A small select few who happen to support Celtic appear to disagree which is absolutely fine.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s contradictory then in the case of what we’re talking about. Silva went to ground because he lifted his left leg up to make sure he fell. That’s nothing to do with anything that happened to his right knee.
There wasn’t anywhere near enough force from a guy lying on the ground with he’s leg stretched back the way to cause what happened to his left leg and foot-especially when the contact was on his right knee.
In this case, the issue is did it impede Silva and it didn’t. What stopped Silva was the fact he dived. He could have kept going if he had put his left foot on the ground and kept running. The contact on his right knee had nothing to do with that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not contradictory at all. Once again there is no rule that mentions anything about a level of force being necessary. Was there contact? Yes. Does that give the referee a decision to make? Yes.
Ultimately even after the penalty Celtic had a lead and were unable to hold on to it twice. Its incredible how many people seem to have overlooked that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So surely then at that point the level of force comes in?! Does a ref not look at the contact and say ‘yeah-that’s a foul because he impedes him’ or ‘there’s nothing in that?!’
Just because it’s not written down, are you saying it’s not taken into account?!
As for the other part, I’m happy enough. It seems to be forgotten that rangers were at home, with no away fans and under the stewardship of big Phil!
Yeah, bit disappointing that after taking the lead we couldn’t hold onto it, but there’s a bigger picture and I would gladly have taken a draw beforehand, which I did say before the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I couldn't tell you what individual refs take in to account when making individual calls but level of force isn't a thing so I'd like to think they weren't making things up when reviewing incidents. If they were making up their own rules we would have a problem.
But look if it was given the other way I think in real time I'd be upset and think it was harsh. If several other referees reviewed the incident and explained why the ref got it right I'd reluctantly accept that harsh or otherwise his decision is justified.
But we could spend the rest of the day debating it and I sense we're unlikely to come to the same conclusion so will agree to disagree on this one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you’re being somewhat disingenuous with your points initially there, and I seriously doubt having seen the incident initially and after replay you’d agree with anyone that it was worthy of the fall he made the penalty he got. But hey ho-you’re a better man than me. I’d like to think I’d say as a minimum he bought that, and it wasn’t a penalty.
posted on 8/4/24
There is a lot of mental gymnastics going on here for what is clearly a penalty
Unless you’ve not watched football in ten years
posted on 8/4/24
well clement thinks they won yesterday so less said about that lunatic the better.
posted on 8/4/24
comment by JFK (U8919)
posted 55 seconds ago
well clement thinks they won yesterday so less said about that lunatic the better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd actually very much like to talk more about Philippe Clement.
posted on 8/4/24
Whats Scott Wright got on him
posted on 8/4/24
I don't like being critical of players but Scott Wright must be one of the luckiest guys ever. He's been at Rangers over 3 years now and has never been a first choice and we have tried to move him on yet somehow ends up finding his way in to these big games through default.
Yesterday should be the last we see him though, he's miles off the level. It's a shame because he has got some ability and loads of pace but just can't put any of it together in a game.
Page 4 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10