shotstopper 770 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Having read through the diversity of opinions on this thread, it is obviously not very clear if it was a stamp or not, only Morelos will know the truth. What about this...what about that, it does not matter a jot to those judging Morelos. They do not go into fine detail,was he looking at the ball? was his leg bent or straight? etc. We know the decisions are biased and unfair but there isn't much we can do about it now. We have tried in the past and been shot down at every turn and fined for our audacity to speak up. Looking at the incident another way, what would your reaction be if any other player done the exact same thing to Goldson. I'm quite sure you would say it was a red card all day long. We shall have the last laugh come 55.....WATP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,622 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 We should be talking about the team how well we are doing and how consistent they have been not this constant circus that surrounds one player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 18 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: Where in the rules does it state this? Please don't offer opinion or be ambiguous, which rule? The rule that will need to be reached to allow the foul to be in anyway, serious foul play or violent conduct. If it was a situation where Morelos couldn’t be prevented from standing on the player and he had no intention to do so then how can it be regarded as a red card? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: The rule that will need to be reached to allow the foul to be in anyway, serious foul play or violent conduct. If it was a situation where Morelos couldn’t be prevented from standing on the player and he had no intention to do so then how can it be regarded as a red card? I'm asking you to quote the rule, not tell me what you think it is / must be / should be. Which rule stipulates intent? Either the exact wording or a link to it please. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ger4life_1872 29,744 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 1 hour ago, BlueEdu said: Should stick this in the wrestling thread in the ot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: I'm asking you to quote the rule, not tell me what you think it is / must be / should be. Which rule stipulates intent? Either the exact wording or a link to it please. Sorry I’m not explaining it. The rules he broke according to the charge is serious foul play or violent conduct. My point is if he couldn’t have prevented standing on the player as it wasn’t deliberate or intentional then how could he be guilty of breaking that rules? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaka 1,705 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Don't know if this has been said already but the club really needs to consider the bigger picture. If we roll over and keep accepting different standards for officiating our players, this will not end when they force Morelos to leave. After Morelos the media, refs, etc will just anoint a new target, whether it's Itten, Roofe or whoever happens to be an important player for us. We need to fight back against the bias treatment or somehow find a way out of Scottish football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Just now, shaka said: Don't know if this has been said already but the club really needs to consider the bigger picture. If we roll over and keep accepting different standards for officiating our players, this will not end when they force Morelos to leave. After Morelos the media, refs, etc will just anoint a new target, whether it's Itten, Roofe or whoever happens to be an important player for us. We need to fight back against the bias treatment or somehow find a way out of Scottish football. There’s already been a newspaper article stating the value of any transfer we get from Morelos will be affected because he’s a hothead and can’t be trusted. It is a network that’s in play here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 4 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: Sorry I’m not explaining it. The rules he broke according to the charge is serious foul play or violent conduct. My point is if he couldn’t have prevented standing on the player as it wasn’t deliberate or intentional then how could he be guilty of breaking that rules? So where in the rules re serious foul play or violent conduct does it state intent needs to be established? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said: So where in the rules re serious foul play or violent conduct does it state intent needs to be established? Where in the rules does it state that accidentally standing on a player is an automatic red card? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaka 1,705 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 16 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: There’s already been a newspaper article stating the value of any transfer we get from Morelos will be affected because he’s a hothead and can’t be trusted. It is a network that’s in play here. They are desperate for him to leave and the value attached drops with every article written. I think I saw the article you mention and the claim was he's valued at £10 million. A terrible right back just allegedly got sold for £11 million by them and we would rate Morelos at less than that... madness! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluedart1952 1,356 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 13 minutes ago, shotstopper said: Having read through the diversity of opinions on this thread, it is obviously not very clear if it was a stamp or not, only Morelos will know the truth. What about this...what about that, it does not matter a jot to those judging Morelos. They do not go into fine detail,was he looking at the ball? was his leg bent or straight? etc. We know the decisions are biased and unfair but there isn't much we can do about it now. We have tried in the past and been shot down at every turn and fined for our audacity to speak up. Looking at the incident another way, what would your reaction be if any other player done the exact same thing to Goldson. I'm quite sure you would say it was a red card all day long. We shall have the last laugh come 55.....WATP. Never mind doing one on Goldson, what the fuck was that tackle on Kamara by Macgregor all about, which was worse in my opinion. Yes he got a yellow but it should still be raised to a red as the intent was there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Just now, shaka said: They are desperate for him to leave and the value attached drops with every article written. I think I saw the article you mention and the claim was he's valued at £10 million. A terrible right back just allegedly got sold for £11 million by them and we would rate Morelos at less than that... madness! Could be, I refuse to click on shite like that and determine the article via the headline. Daily record I think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 11 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: Where in the rules does it state that accidentally standing on a player is an automatic red card? When it says endangering the safety of an opponent is a red. It doesn't state with intention, the rule break is complete if the ref deems the action itself is sufficient. If intent had to be proven it would state that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shetland Bear 433 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 1 hour ago, Bill8972 said: Can't believe this is the first time I've seen that. That is the most clear and blatant out of all of the ones I've seen on this thread. McNulty completely goes against his momentum to land on Clare. If that doesn't get a retrospective ban then pretty much all stamps missed by the ref cannot be punished. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Avenger 22,567 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 Alfie has his faults, but there is no doubt he is singled out and targeted by many for different reasons, as we are as a whole, for simply being the Rangers. This lad has been abhorrently treated since his arrival. If it were only about double standards. This is what happens when the haters had their way in our demise in 2012. Liewell and his cabal are given free reign to run/ruin the game to the advantage of one, but hopefully their stranglehold is coming to an end with the end of Liewell. There is little balance or justice left within it. There is no level playing field, but make no mistake, there will be no let up in those cunts trying business as usual, with the new cabal King ready to slip in and continue the same narrative. It will be down to us to prevent that, but as I've said now is not the time to strike back. The first battle is yet to be won, in bringing that title home. After that we can go to war and win. Release the hounds at that point, because before this season is over, with us having the title in the bag, their PR onslaught will re emerge to again demonise us, to re establish the toxic landscape that WE will be accused of bringing to the game. Sectarianism, cheating, financial doping, referee bias and so on to make them the white knights of the game as they try to re emerge and reorganise from their current car crash. They are currently busy licking their wounds, but we will be naive to think it will not happen, so better we are preoared with our own pinzar movement and end those cunts stranglehold on the game, with a few pre emptive strikes of our own and keep the haters on the back foot, as we takeover the influential positions that Liewell has left vacant. It is now for us to take the lead to influence and shape the game and drive out the rodents from the swamp. Our continued survival and a level playing field is what they cannot live with and will see their own demise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 6 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: When it says endangering the safety of an opponent is a red. It doesn't state with intention, the action is complete id the ref deems the action itself is sufficient. If intent had to be proven it would state that. They might be corrupt but to try to claim that Morelos was endangering the safety of the opponent would be too far fetched for even them. I suspect serious foul play is where they feel they can fabricate a red card from. It will need to be shown that it was entirely Morelos fault and a player rolling about in front of him whist challenging for a ball played no part in the outcome on where Morelos ended up standing on him, can you honestly say he didn’t? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said: They might be corrupt but to try to claim that Morelos was endangering the safety of the opponent would be too far fetched for even them. I suspect serious foul play is where they feel they can fabricate a red card from. It will need to be shown that it was entirely Morelos fault that a player rolling about in front of him whist challenging for a ball played no part in the outcome on where Morelos ended up standing on him, can you honestly say he didn’t? Serious foul play IS the endangering of an opponent. It is that OR using excessive force OR brutality. It doesn't mention intent in the slightest. You are basing an argument against terms and straw arguments that don't exist. SERIOUS FOUL PLAY A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. VIOLENT CONDUCT Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made. In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nk89 1,289 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 He is only human, the amount of off the ball nudges, kicks, elbows etc.. he will get and numerous dodgy tackles plus every single time he commits a foul players are round the refs looking for him to get a card. Add the abuse from the crowd in other seasons and no wonder he is the way he is, it must be very frustrating for a young man.. And thats without mentioning the media..... Win the League and let Morelos leave for any offer we get and let him move on and improve his life and footballing career. Only fair to let him do that imo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howsitgoing 4,281 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 5 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: Serious foul play IS the endangering of an opponent. It is that OR using excessive force OR brutality. It doesn't mention intent in the slightest. You are basing an argument against terms and straw arguments that don't exist. SERIOUS FOUL PLAY A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. VIOLENT CONDUCT Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made. In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible. Can’t see why he’s guilty of any of that. He was challenging for the ball so that rules out violent conduct. The opposition player put himself in a compromising unusual position by challenging for the ball whilst rolling about on the ground, to say he had no influence whatsoever in what resulted is wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McEwan's Lager 30,802 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 15 hours ago, plumbGER said: Is it 19 league matches? Just went back and checked and its 16 League games, 1 League Cup match missed and he's missed 2 Europa League games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
McEwan's Lager 30,802 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 1 hour ago, Bill8972 said: McNulty got a 2 match ban for violent conduct for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 1 minute ago, Howsitgoing said: Can’t see why he’s guilty of any of that. He was challenging for the ball so that rules out violent conduct. The opposition player put himself in a compromising unusual position by challenging for the ball whilst rolling about in the ground, to say he had no influence whatsoever in what resulted is wrong. I agree it isn't violent conduct, nor will it be considered that. Porteous was rolling about on the ground now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 48 minutes ago, shotstopper said: Having read through the diversity of opinions on this thread, it is obviously not very clear if it was a stamp or not, only Morelos will know the truth. What about this...what about that, it does not matter a jot to those judging Morelos. They do not go into fine detail,was he looking at the ball? was his leg bent or straight? etc. We know the decisions are biased and unfair but there isn't much we can do about it now. We have tried in the past and been shot down at every turn and fined for our audacity to speak up. Looking at the incident another way, what would your reaction be if any other player done the exact same thing to Goldson. I'm quite sure you would say it was a red card all day long. We shall have the last laugh come 55.....WATP. Good post tbf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,064 Posted January 30, 2021 Share Posted January 30, 2021 3 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said: Just went back and checked and its 16 League games, 1 League Cup match missed and he's missed 2 Europa League games. There may be a trend emerging there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.