Jump to content

SFA issue notice of complaint to Alfredo Morelos - tribunal


CR3

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 278
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Sweetheart said:

 It's about proving it, there's evidence of bias.

For me it's about parity and accountability when decisions are not consistent. I think the refs match report and CO reports should be published for public viewing so as to understand the reasons for decisions.

Every man and his dog know that the bbc and sportscene in particular st the agenda for who is cited on a Monday and who isn’t,how can this be a fair system?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Dude said:

If there's so much evidence of bias, it should surely be a winnable fight.

We all know the Dundee vote to end the league early was corrupt and yet we lost that fight. I find it strange that you only come on here to protect either the spfl or sfa and I’ve yet to see you agree with anything said criticising them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, plymouthranger said:

Let’s be honest, it’s a deserved ban and we should accept the 2 games considering he’s out of form. 
 

I imagine Itten or Defoe would’ve played tonight regardless. 

So we should just ignore the fact he got a yellow and no further action can be taken?  Or at least, that was the case for fucking years up until this farce.  Now Morelos has been yellowed for fuck knows what and a red thrown in on top of it.  We’ve not to question the process at all despite the incompetence, inconsistency, or corruption.  We probably wouldn’t play him anyway so it’s fine.  Wake up, man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dickie said:

We all know the Dundee vote to end the league early was corrupt and yet we lost that fight. I find it strange that you only come on here to protect either the spfl or sfa and I’ve yet to see you agree with anything said criticising them. 

Literally in this thread. You really don't need to look hard man. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TMB said:

So we should just ignore the fact he got a yellow and no further action can be taken?  Or at least, that was the case for fucking years up until this farce.  Now Morelos has been yellowed for fuck knows what and a red thrown in on top of it?  We’ve not to question the process at all despite the incompetence, inconsistency, or corruption.  We probably wouldn’t play him anyway so it’s fine.  Wake up, man.

Players have been cited after being booked before now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Players have been cited after being booked before now. 

It was my understanding that if a player received a yellow the compliance officer could not go back and change that decision.  It seems, as a way to get around that, a whole new method has been created whereby the SFA pretend the yellow was for something else then all the referees looked away.  Now they can just hit the player with a red on top of the yellow.  Brilliant work by the SFA.  I wonder if we’ll see this consistently used moving forward or will Morelos be the only guy who is ever victim to this shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TMB said:

So we should just ignore the fact he got a yellow and no further action can be taken?  Or at least, that was the case for fucking years up until this farce.  Now Morelos has been yellowed for fuck knows what and a red thrown in on top of it.  We’ve not to question the process at all despite the incompetence, inconsistency, or corruption.  We probably wouldn’t play him anyway so it’s fine.  Wake up, man.

I agree it’s not a very good rule, but Morelos is not the only player this has happened to. 
 

It’s the SFA/SPFL being unclear over what the rules are, rather than an anti Rangers bias. It is a blatant red card, that cannot be argued. 
 

 I’m not arguing they don’t miss other red card offences, but they’re inept rather than biased. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TMB said:

It was my understanding that if a player received a yellow the compliance officer could not go back and change that decision.  It seems, as a way to get around that, a whole new method has been created whereby the SFA pretend the yellow was for something else then all the referees looked away.  Now they can just hit the player with a red on top of the yellow.  Brilliant work by the SFA.  I wonder if we’ll see this consistently used moving forward or will Morelos be the only guy who is ever victim to this shit.

Its always been that way. If the official doesn't mention it in their report and didn't see it, the CO can take action. Morelos won't be the only one to have it happen as its already happened to others. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Its always been that way. If the official doesn't mention it in their report and didn't see it, the CO can take action. Morelos won't be the only one to have it happen as its already happened to others. 

And what platforms does the CO have to allow them to take action? 
Is it appropriate to have BBC sportscene who our club are still in a disagreement with are the adjudicators on what areas of the game shall or shall not be seen?

Kilmarnock last Sunday had a big call for a penalty after their player got elbowed in the box and was injured by one of their players, due to it not being deemed as a situation requiring broadcasting the CO won’t act. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Howsitgoing said:

And what platforms does the CO have to allow them to take action? 
Is it appropriate to have BBC sportscene who our club are still in a disagreement with are the adjudicators on what areas of the game shall or shall not be seen?

Kilmarnock last Sunday had a big call for a penalty after their player got elbowed in the box and was injured by one of their players, due to it not being deemed as a situation requiring broadcasting the CO won’t act. 

The CO has access to full match footage and referees reports. Jason Holt was cited a few weeks ago for something that afaik, wasn't broadcast on Sportscene.

Sky Sports can also show highlights (as can club media channels). Sportscene are far from the 'adjudicator' on what can be seen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The CO has access to full match footage and referees reports. Jason Holt was cited a few weeks ago for something that afaik, wasn't broadcast on Sportscene.

Sky Sports can also show highlights (as can club media channels). Sportscene are far from the 'adjudicator' on what can be seen.

The CO is influenced by perceived public opinion. The media was a major influence in this seasons incident with Morelos as well as last seasons which incidentally happened at almost the same time. 

You will find it impossible to find a clip showing the off the ball elbow into the neck of the Kilmarnock player(unless you’ve celtic tv) let alone find any mention of it in the media yet in my opinion it was every bit as much an incident as Morelos’’s one was. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

The CO is influenced by perceived public opinion. The media was a major influence in this seasons incident with Morelos as well as last seasons which incidentally happened at almost the same time. 

You will find it impossible to find a clip showing the off the ball elbow into the neck of the Kilmarnock player(unless you’ve celtic tv) let alone find any mention of it in the media yet in my opinion it was every bit as much an incident as Morelos’’s one was. 
 

It's not the CO who decides if there's been a rule breach though. She identifies a potential incident (based on video/refs report etc) and three ex-refs decide whether it should have been a red or not. If all three agree, player is offered a ban, if not then it is dropped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

The CO is influenced by perceived public opinion. The media was a major influence in this seasons incident with Morelos as well as last seasons which incidentally happened at almost the same time. 

You will find it impossible to find a clip showing the off the ball elbow into the neck of the Kilmarnock player(unless you’ve celtic tv) let alone find any mention of it in the media yet in my opinion it was every bit as much an incident as Morelos’’s one was. 
 

Thats the point. The CO will look at nothing that hasnt been highlighted by someone. You can guarantee that the BBC in particular will always be helpful  regards highlighting in any "offence" committed by certain players while deliberately ignoring those committed by others. The system is open to bias clearly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, The Dude said:

It's not the CO who decides if there's been a rule breach though. She identifies a potential incident (based on video/refs report etc) and three ex-refs decide whether it should have been a red or not. If all three agree, player is offered a ban, if not then it is dropped.

She decides what goes to the panel, she does that on the basis of the media which sportscene has probably the biggest influence.

 
Id add if it was a Ranger player that elbowed the Kilmarnock player off the ball which could of resulted in a penalty against us then sportscene would of shown that clip and analysed it. That isn’t speculative! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

She decides what goes to the panel, she does that on the basis of the media which sportscene has probably the biggest influence.

 
Id add if it was a Ranger player that elbowed the Kilmarnock player off the ball which could of resulted in a penalty against us then sportscene would of shown that clip and analysed it. That isn’t speculative! 

It aint speculative, its a pretty near certain fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Its always been that way. If the official doesn't mention it in their report and didn't see it, the CO can take action. Morelos won't be the only one to have it happen as its already happened to others. 

See this is the contentious part for me, as I mentioned above, at the time of the incident at least 3 officials missed it, they are all miked up so surely one of them should have drawn the ref's attention to the incident if they thought it was a red or are they all blind as well, instead their incompetence is covered up and tv evidence is applied in a haphazard manner. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, slimjim1690 said:

See this is the contentious part for me, as I mentioned above, at the time of the incident at least 3 officials missed it, they are all miked up so surely one of them should have drawn the ref's attention to the incident if they thought it was a red or are they all blind as well, instead their incompetence is covered up and tv evidence is applied in a haphazard manner. 

Tbf, I'm nut sure the flick of the arm is *that* easy to spot from a distance - and assistants will also have other things to be paying attention to. They may well have felt it wasnt anything (they could still think that now tbh). Their incompetence isn't really covered up by Morelos being banned - if anything its highlighted more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, slimjim1690 said:

See this is the contentious part for me, as I mentioned above, at the time of the incident at least 3 officials missed it, they are all miked up so surely one of them should have drawn the ref's attention to the incident if they thought it was a red or are they all blind as well, instead their incompetence is covered up and tv evidence is applied in a haphazard manner. 

And thats the point. The officials missed it and tv evidence used. Some instances get referred to the CO because of media  outcry and tv evidence used. And in other sometimes pretty much identical situations there is no media outcry,  and therefor the CO doesnt get involved. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Tbf, I'm nut sure the flick of the arm is *that* easy to spot from a distance - and assistants will also have other things to be paying attention to. They may well have felt it wasnt anything (they could still think that now tbh). Their incompetence isn't really covered up by Morelos being banned - if anything its highlighted more.

I find that very hard to believe but I will give you it might be a possibility, though I also find it hard to believe that this is the case in all the previous instances where a yellow has been upgraded to a red.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, slimjim1690 said:

I find that very hard to believe but I will give you it might be a possibility, though I also find it hard to believe that this is the case in all the previous instances where a yellow has been upgraded to a red.

they'll often be looking across the line, be conversing with managers in the dugouts, interacting with players etc. They aren't just standing there watching the ball constantly

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MurrayWilson said:

And thats the point. The officials missed it and tv evidence used. Some instances get referred to the CO because of media  outcry and tv evidence used. And in other sometimes pretty much identical situations there is no media outcry,  and therefor the CO doesnt get involved. 

The fact that the complainant is kept anonymous is wrong on so many levels, and that's what makes this system so open to corruption, surely any club affected has the right to know who has made the complaint.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Upcoming Events

    • 30 March 2024 15:00 Until 17:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hibernian
      Ibrox Stadium
      Scottish Premiership

×
×
  • Create New...