Jump to content

Should have been a red


Vision

Recommended Posts

Just now, KeyserSoze said:

You want players to pick up avoidable bookings?

loony. 

You can bet Clancy would have had the card out, for a minute I thought he was going to give Barisic a second yellow, probly more surprised he didn’t tbh...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 301
  • Created
  • Last Reply
17 hours ago, AdzKyle said:

That doesn’t work in our favour. That works in favour of the team who he can’t play against. 
Putting his team down to ten men would have been in our favour. 

I agree completely, but felt if he did actually miss it then subsequently see the damage he may have issued a yellow to diffuse the situation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

People comparing Jacks red to that Scumdee player yesterday are really needing to look at both situations.

 

Jack was in possession of the ball and played a pass catching May on the follow through on the ankle. 
 

Yesterday Morelos was in possession of the football and got studded on the fucking knee. Yes the fucking knee and has a massive hole on it.

 

Dont even try and say they are similar ffs🤬

So you're responsible for your follow through for a tackle, but not a 'pass'? Don't worry if you end up on someone's shin if you've passed the ball, but if you tackle with similar force and end up the same it's bad? Would love the logic behind that one to be explained. The logic is you want one to be bad and the other good because of the colour of the strips. Same thing the referees are doing.

Bottom line is both actions resulted in a reckless disregard for the opponent's safety. Both are reds all day long. You can 100% guarantee the same folk excusing Jack would gave had stills posted of the foot on Jack's shin with his ankle buckling if May had done it.

This whole 'Jack had possession of the ball and just made a pass' thing is funny. People become naive as fuck when it suits their argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

So you're responsible for your follow through for a tackle, but not a 'pass'? Don't worry if you end up on someone's shin if you've passed the ball, but if you tackle with similar force and end up the same it's bad? Would love the logic behind that one to be explained. The logic is you want one to be bad and the other good because of the colour of the strips. Same thing the referees are doing.

Bottom line is both actions resulted in a reckless disregard for the opponent's safety. Both are reds all day long. You can 100% guarantee the same folk excusing Jack would gave had stills posted of the foot on Jack's shin with his ankle buckling if May had done it.

This whole 'Jack had possession of the ball and just made a pass' thing is funny. People become naive as fuck when it suits their argument.

Naive as fuck when it suits an argument? 
 

I stated a fact that both tackles are completely different.

 

Whether you agree about reds or no reds is not my point.  My point is both are different and the one yesterday was far worse. Fuck me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Naive as fuck when it suits an argument? 
 

I stated a fact that both tackles are completely different.

 

Whether you agree about reds or no reds is not my point.  My point is both are different and the one yesterday was far worse. Fuck me.

They're not different in the important part that both endangered the opponent. No amount of 'fuck me's changes that. You can't go through a ball, 'pass' (that's one of the naive bit btw. Feel free to let me know who he was passing it to, because the direction he was going through the ball towards didn't have a receiving Rangers player) or not, knowing your opponent is coming towards you and follow through onto his shin half way up his lower leg or his knee. You simply can't. You're deluding yourself suggesting otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

They're not different in the important part that both endangered the opponent. No amount of 'fuck me's changes that. You can't go through a ball, 'pass' (that's one of the naive bit btw. Feel free to let me know who he was passing it to, because the direction he was going through the ball towards didn't have a receiving Rangers player) or not, knowing your opponent is coming towards you and follow through onto his shin half way up his lower leg or his knee. You simply can't. You're deluding yourself suggesting otherwise.

Fuck me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BLUEDIGNITY said:

clancy is a cunt end of.

100% cunts cunt.
Every report i've read or heard has said it was a "bit nasty" and that prick saw it,and the damage it did to AM.
ffs we had one ref saying he didn't give us a penalty last season because of the windy conditions.
Surely if you saw where the damage was and how far the ball was away at the moment of impact,then you have to card the bastard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Librarian said:

I certainly hope you're right but we've seen the compliance officer busy using celtic's under the carpet brush a few times.

I think the amount of stuff in the media about it will pressure them to do it as its only Dundee and can make them try and hide their bias. Wouldnt be confident if it was a scum player who done it of action though 

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, scottyscott1963 said:

100% cunts cunt.
Every report i've read or heard has said it was a "bit nasty" and that prick saw it,and the damage it did to AM.
ffs we had one ref saying he didn't give us a penalty last season because of the windy conditions.
Surely if you saw where the damage was and how far the ball was away at the moment of impact,then you have to card the bastard.

Wears his hate for us on his sleeve and getting away with it. He’s aiding and abetting assaults on Rangers players with glee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Inigo said:

So you're responsible for your follow through for a tackle, but not a 'pass'? Don't worry if you end up on someone's shin if you've passed the ball, but if you tackle with similar force and end up the same it's bad? Would love the logic behind that one to be explained. The logic is you want one to be bad and the other good because of the colour of the strips. Same thing the referees are doing.

Bottom line is both actions resulted in a reckless disregard for the opponent's safety. Both are reds all day long. You can 100% guarantee the same folk excusing Jack would gave had stills posted of the foot on Jack's shin with his ankle buckling if May had done it.

This whole 'Jack had possession of the ball and just made a pass' thing is funny. People become naive as fuck when it suits their argument.

It's actually naive to try to pass them off as the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Dave Hedgehog said:

Ryan Jack passed the ball and followed through in a reckless manner. He was sent off and banned. 
 

In the first pic he is side footing a pass and the second is the contact.

 

Not the same as that boy yesterday who received no card, not even a foul. 

6343A13A-76C2-4A27-8B95-1CA2D7639539.jpeg

2E5DCA49-DA90-495C-8514-0580A80DD3F9.jpeg

9D1C7C43-7083-4665-8749-F11781AF04F2.png

As with many stills, they dont show the full picture. The video is there, yet you post stills. Strange.

Look at the video and let me know who he's passing to.

Like I say, naive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 28 April 2024 11:30 Until 13:30
      0  
      St Mirren v Rangers
      The SMiSA Stadium
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Football

×
×
  • Create New...