Roy Hobbs

That's a disgrace. Motherwell should refuse to play on safety grounds.

The SPFL aren't exactly known for common sense though.

This isn't going ahead

The spfl want the pre split games done by the 14th.

Sima needs to start

I still think he'll play.

I don't agree. No matter the result the outcome is still in our hands. I'd much rather be in our position than theirs right now. I just want it over and done with though.

If we win they need to win every game and hope we drop points elsewhere. They can't afford to lose.

We will need to play much better

I'm not sure he's suited to the way we play even if we could get him on the cheap.

That's the way it should be to honest. I posted earlier that's how it's approached in England so it might actually be the case up here. Somebody should come out and explain it though.

That's not the rule. It's immaterial whether there was a goal or not. If both players encroach it should be a retake.

That's not the rule. If both attacking and defending players are encroaching it should be a retake.

He hadn't started back full training before the weekend. Middle of this week going by Kennedy's interview after the game. I'll be shocked if he doesn't start though.

He's only due back in full training this week.

I think Marshalls position looks different depending on what angle you look at.

Calf/Achilles. Need to be testing them both.

Does the summary table not suggest the penalty should have been retaken regardless of the Hibs players encroaching?

For what it is worth the English premier league rules are that it is only encroachment if there player is physically touching the box. So the Hibs players leaning ahead of Wright are not infringing. They also say that you have to materially impact the outcome which contradicts the IFAB rule. VideoFantasy Show: Experts' GW31 captain picks VAR: Penalty kicks explained 30 Jul 2019 Video Assistant Referees (VAR): Penalties Alan Shearer outlines when penalty decisions can be reviewed or overturned in the Premier League The VAR can intervene in one of the following instances: - A clear and obvious error by the on-field match officials relating to goalkeeper movement - A double touch by the penalty-taker - Feigning at the point of the kick by the taker - Encroachment by players that has a direct impact on the outcome of the kick The 2020/21 protocol does not allow for tolerance levels, so if the goalkeeper saves a penalty and his foot is over the goalline then VAR will advise it is retaken. If the goalkeeper is off his line and the ball hits the post or goes over, it won’t be retaken unless the 'keeper has a material impact on the kick being missed. For player encroachment in the box, it is now judged on any part of a player’s body that is on the ground when the kick is taken. Therefore, if any part of the foot is on the penalty area or arc line it is encroachment. The player must still have a material impact on the outcome of the kick.

Gordon hasn't read the rules then.

I don't think it was ever 8 unless it was when we had games in hand. We were 7 behind after the Aberdeen game.

Likely to be Beaton, Clancy or Collum.

Limited sizes... https://www.kitbag.com/en/scottish-premiership/Rangers-fc/glasgow-Rangers-third-shirt-2023-24/o-10751474+t-65440317+p-9092438585+z-9-568827225?_ref=p-TLP:m-GRID:i-r0c1:po-1&irclickid=WqLUtQS0AxyPRCnTgCXpz0ADUkHR2OzAC18m3s0&irgwc=1&_s=afl_impact%3D&utm_source=Impact&utm_medium=affiliates&SSAID=121977

The law should be completely rewritten. It should only be encroachment if you're interfering with play. In that case the decision would have been correct but that's not how the rule is written.

The story will be bullshit but those type of deals happen regularly.