Jump to content

Roofe challenge


Virtuoso

Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Mate why is it you think intention plays such a part in what the outcome should/ will be?

If intention wasn't relevant to outcome but the potential to hurt an opponent was, would it be a red card?

Intent is mentioned regularly, so is potential to injure which is all very well.  But there was a time when cards were dished out for what you actually did not what people thought you intended to do or could have potentially done.  He was given a Yellow which was adequate by a referee who was less than 10 yards away.  Trial by TV has yet again allowed events to be re-refereed.  Even if I disagree with the decision, which I don’t,  the takeaway from this and the Morelos ban is clearly that our Referees are not up to standard as both incidents were seen during the games and no Red issued.  Just my opinion though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 256
  • Created
  • Last Reply
23 hours ago, Brackley Bluenose said:

He’s endangered the safety of an opponent by the letter of the law, hence why we wouldn’t have argued with a red card IMO. 

McGregor endangered the safety of our player when he stood on him in the Hibs game mate if that’s the case and had a Yellow given.  That’s where the system fails regularly in my opinion.  Another example was when our CB (whose name escapes me) had his nose broken by the arm of a Motherwell player.  Yellow card only. Clearly the ref thought he had done wrong to card him and he caused actual damage, but no Red..

Too many inconsistencies to just roll over and accept a ban on this occasion in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, DMax399 said:

Intent is mentioned regularly, so is potential to injure which is all very well.  But there was a time when cards were dished out for what you actually did not what people thought you intended to do or could have potentially done.  He was given a Yellow which was adequate by a referee who was less than 10 yards away.  Trial by TV has yet again allowed events to be re-refereed.  Even if I disagree with the decision, which I don’t,  the takeaway from this and the Morelos ban is clearly that our Referees are not up to standard as both incidents were seen during the games and no Red issued.  Just my opinion though.

Endangerment of an opponent doesn't mention it at all. Intent is a red herring for those who are unaware, live in the past, or are simply providing a wrong defence to a charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Endangerment of an opponent doesn't mention it at all. Intent is a red herring for those who are unaware, live in the past, or are simply providing a wrong defence to a charge.

Sometimes the past is better.  The game now has been diluted and is regularly re-refereed to impose unnecessary punishments.  Not for me.  But each to their own.

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...