Kemar Roofe charged by SFA (2 Match Ban Confirmed)

[Bad Robot 21,150]

12 hours ago, ianb1547 said:

still sticking my neck out saying Roofe will be found not proven

same as Ajeti

Roofe’s one is a difficult one to call as on one hand he looks as if he’s protecting the ball but on the other hand the way his foot comes down with all his weight and no option to pull out the tackle may be interpreted as endangering an opponent. The only positive I can see is the speed in which the ball moved and a decision on the tackle needs to come from the real time view and not any still or slo-mo, both of which should also be viewed.

I agree with others that the Ajeti is just one big squirrel to say they get cited as well which gives the illusion of a balanced CO process which we all know has massive glaring inconsistencies all over it dependent on the colour of your jersey, and some individuals.

[Dickie1963 2,352]

The fact that Roofe could or maybe should have been given a red card isn't the point.

If thats the level at which players get cited there should be citations every week, or far more red cards. 

[Amokachi 3,010]

What time we expecting the Proved or Not Proved verdict ? 

[Bill8972 479]

Good read from Vital Football

Rangers wait to find out if Kemar Roofe’s two-game suspension for his challenge on Murray Davidson has been extended but one former Ger feels that it shouldn’t even be up for debate.

Speaking to Football Insider, Alan Hutton is worried that it will set a trend for every tackle – even if the referee has seen it – to be analysed by the disciplinary panel, the complete opposite to why the process was brought in.

SO WHAT HAS HUTTON SAID?

When asked to reflect on Roofe being cited despite being yellow card by the match referee, he said:

“It’s very worrying, for me, moving forward, because the referee is basically saying I’ve seen the incident and I gave him a yellow card, which he thought it was worth.

“There was no malice, I’ve seen a million times with strikers, they try and step over the ball to get their body between the player and ultimately the ball – a striker’s tackle, whatever you want to call it – and he has caught him, there’s no doubt about that.

“The worrying thing is if he does get banned for this, moving forward, that’s going to have to mean that there’s going to have to be consistency with that moving forward. Everybody, if it’s a tackle we judge to be a little bit more than a yellow, the panel’s going to have to look at them all.

“It’s very worrying where they’re going with this at the moment. Everybody’s going to want every single tackle, every single weekend, looked at. I don’t know, how are they going to cope with this?

“The way they’re going at the moment this panel who are judging every other tackle, they’re going to be snowed under with complaints moving forward because it’s tackles that have been dealt with on the pitch already.

“It’s totally different if the ref doesn’t see it. If he doesn’t see it then there’s an opportunity for them to step in but if the referee’s made his decision, let him ref the game.”

SO IS HUTTON CORRECT?

Absolutely, the Compliance Officer shambles was first introduced to pick up foul play or cheating that had been missed by officials on the day, however, we are now seeing – particularly with Rangers players – that even if the referee sees it, they could still face further retrospective action.

The goalposts have been moved, plain and simple, and only one club seems to be worse off as a result and it certainly isn’t celtic, despite their claims of conspiracies and agendas.

Rangers have tried before to invoke change in a deeply flawed system only to be met with resistance – almost as if somebody doesn’t want to be treated the same way as everyone else.

 

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

7 minutes ago, Bill8972 said:

Good read from Vital Football

Rangers wait to find out if Kemar Roofe’s two-game suspension for his challenge on Murray Davidson has been extended but one former Ger feels that it shouldn’t even be up for debate.

Speaking to Football Insider, Alan Hutton is worried that it will set a trend for every tackle – even if the referee has seen it – to be analysed by the disciplinary panel, the complete opposite to why the process was brought in.

SO WHAT HAS HUTTON SAID?

When asked to reflect on Roofe being cited despite being yellow card by the match referee, he said:

“It’s very worrying, for me, moving forward, because the referee is basically saying I’ve seen the incident and I gave him a yellow card, which he thought it was worth.

“There was no malice, I’ve seen a million times with strikers, they try and step over the ball to get their body between the player and ultimately the ball – a striker’s tackle, whatever you want to call it – and he has caught him, there’s no doubt about that.

“The worrying thing is if he does get banned for this, moving forward, that’s going to have to mean that there’s going to have to be consistency with that moving forward. Everybody, if it’s a tackle we judge to be a little bit more than a yellow, the panel’s going to have to look at them all.

“It’s very worrying where they’re going with this at the moment. Everybody’s going to want every single tackle, every single weekend, looked at. I don’t know, how are they going to cope with this?

“The way they’re going at the moment this panel who are judging every other tackle, they’re going to be snowed under with complaints moving forward because it’s tackles that have been dealt with on the pitch already.

“It’s totally different if the ref doesn’t see it. If he doesn’t see it then there’s an opportunity for them to step in but if the referee’s made his decision, let him ref the game.”

SO IS HUTTON CORRECT?

Absolutely, the Compliance Officer shambles was first introduced to pick up foul play or cheating that had been missed by officials on the day, however, we are now seeing – particularly with Rangers players – that even if the referee sees it, they could still face further retrospective action.

The goalposts have been moved, plain and simple, and only one club seems to be worse off as a result and it certainly isn’t celtic, despite their claims of conspiracies and agendas.

Rangers have tried before to invoke change in a deeply flawed system only to be met with resistance – almost as if somebody doesn’t want to be treated the same way as everyone else.

 

“O'Connor chose to contest the decision, which was referred to a fast-track tribunal, who upheld the referee's original decision and McCoist said the rules were not being applied fairly or evenly.”

 

McCoist said relatively the same thing 10 years ago, if we being punished to a different standard does indeed force an issue where all are held to the same standards then they are taking their time to implement it. 

[magic8ball 27,901]

23 minutes ago, Bill8972 said:

Good read from Vital Football

Rangers wait to find out if Kemar Roofe’s two-game suspension for his challenge on Murray Davidson has been extended but one former Ger feels that it shouldn’t even be up for debate.

Speaking to Football Insider, Alan Hutton is worried that it will set a trend for every tackle – even if the referee has seen it – to be analysed by the disciplinary panel, the complete opposite to why the process was brought in.

SO WHAT HAS HUTTON SAID?

When asked to reflect on Roofe being cited despite being yellow card by the match referee, he said:

“It’s very worrying, for me, moving forward, because the referee is basically saying I’ve seen the incident and I gave him a yellow card, which he thought it was worth.

“There was no malice, I’ve seen a million times with strikers, they try and step over the ball to get their body between the player and ultimately the ball – a striker’s tackle, whatever you want to call it – and he has caught him, there’s no doubt about that.

“The worrying thing is if he does get banned for this, moving forward, that’s going to have to mean that there’s going to have to be consistency with that moving forward. Everybody, if it’s a tackle we judge to be a little bit more than a yellow, the panel’s going to have to look at them all.

“It’s very worrying where they’re going with this at the moment. Everybody’s going to want every single tackle, every single weekend, looked at. I don’t know, how are they going to cope with this?

“The way they’re going at the moment this panel who are judging every other tackle, they’re going to be snowed under with complaints moving forward because it’s tackles that have been dealt with on the pitch already.

“It’s totally different if the ref doesn’t see it. If he doesn’t see it then there’s an opportunity for them to step in but if the referee’s made his decision, let him ref the game.”

SO IS HUTTON CORRECT?

Absolutely, the Compliance Officer shambles was first introduced to pick up foul play or cheating that had been missed by officials on the day, however, we are now seeing – particularly with Rangers players – that even if the referee sees it, they could still face further retrospective action.

The goalposts have been moved, plain and simple, and only one club seems to be worse off as a result and it certainly isn’t celtic, despite their claims of conspiracies and agendas.

Rangers have tried before to invoke change in a deeply flawed system only to be met with resistance – almost as if somebody doesn’t want to be treated the same way as everyone else.

 

Hutton is correct in a sense .He hasn’t however factored in the driving force for the CO to actually step in and have a look .Live TV which isn’t happening on every game and of course the media outrage whenever it’s one of our players .Maybe he needed to go one further and talking about previous incidents that nothing has happened with .

[Brackley Bluenose 4,479]

To add fuel to the fire did you notice the boy from Motherwell has escaped punishment for his kick out on the tarrier player. Now I’m not one for having games re-refereed retrospectively but how does that action not fall into the same category for incidents our players have been involved in. 

[The Blue 413]

7 minutes ago, Brackley Bluenose said:

To add fuel to the fire did you notice the boy from Motherwell has escaped punishment for his kick out on the tarried player. Now I’m not one for having games re-refereed retrospectively but how does that action not fall into the same category for incidents our players have been involved in. 

I saw this and was convinced it was a red, could not give 2 fucks if thier players are kicked but this is the whole issue with consistency. Our player goes for a lose ball, does catch the player and if was given a red at the time we would have been pissed but lets be honest, we have all seen them given. Going back and punishing our player for a tackle that could have been a red or yellow depending on your luck that day is ridiculous however not punishing a blatant kick at an opposition player which is a red card is just ignored. I have came to the conclusion that its not the colour of the card that is the issue its the colour of the Jersey the player is in.

[Leeds_Bear 8,110]

19 minutes ago, Brackley Bluenose said:

To add fuel to the fire did you notice the boy from Motherwell has escaped punishment for his kick out on the tarrier player. Now I’m not one for having games re-refereed retrospectively but how does that action not fall into the same category for incidents our players have been involved in. 

I can't believe he wasn't cited for this but Roofe was. Literally karate kicks Soro. 

[AdzKyle 7,836]

18 minutes ago, The Blue said:

I saw this and was convinced it was a red, could not give 2 fucks if thier players are kicked but this is the whole issue with consistency. Our player goes for a lose ball, does catch the player and if was given a red at the time we would have been pissed but lets be honest, we have all seen them given. Going back and punishing our player for a tackle that could have been a red or yellow depending on your luck that day is ridiculous however not punishing a blatant kick at an opposition player which is a red card is just ignored. I have came to the conclusion that its not the colour of the card that is the issue its the colour of the Jersey the player is in.

They cannot continue to ignore “smaller clubs” and refusing to take action against their players. How difficult is it to be consistent across ALL teams?!
 

I sometimes wish UEFA/FIFA would look at the muppets running our game. Then again they are even more corrupt at that level. 

[Tiger Shaw 30,470]

All this shite is part of the reason I hate football 

[Hadron Collider 30,883]

11 minutes ago, AdzKyle said:

They cannot continue to ignore “smaller clubs” and refusing to take action against their players. How difficult is it to be consistent across ALL teams?!
 

I sometimes wish UEFA/FIFA would look at the muppets running our game. Then again they are even more corrupt at that level. 

Couldn’t be worse mate if UEFA came in. No fucking way. Just less corrupt. 

[CooperSF 5,792]

I presume it will be another 17:00 job?

[Smile 26,609]

16 hours ago, bluenoz said:

Everyone knows you have been on the anti-Morelos campaign for 3 years but I must give you credit, you are now subliminally getting digs in without mentioning his name. lol

This is not subliminal as you say you know my position on Morelos you would have a point if you didn't.

I judge Morelos game by game and have praised him when he's played well and slated him when he's been poor I wish other posters like yourself could be more honest.

Roofe is head and shoulders above Morelos in every department for me, an honest opinion if you cannot accept them forums are not for you.

 

 

 

 

[RFC55 108,930]

2 minutes ago, Smile said:

This is not subliminal as you say you know my position on Morelos you would have a point if you didn't.

I judge Morelos game by game and have praised him when he's played well and slated him when he's been poor I wish other posters like yourself could be more honest.

Roofe is head and shoulders above Morelos in every department for me, an honest opinion if you cannot accept them forums are not for you.

 

 

 

 

Wtf

[Smile 26,609]

23 minutes ago, Tiger Shaw said:

All this shite is part of the reason I hate football 

Think of the positives imagine waking up and being one of them dreaming off a ten that's never going to happen.

[Smile 26,609]

Just now, RfcSevco said:

Wtf

You would have to be a bit more expansive than that if you want to make a point.

[BlueAvenger 10,240]

6 minutes ago, CooperSF said:

I presume it will be another 17:00 job?

Or when Lawwell can be arsed....

[Brackley Bluenose 4,479]

56 minutes ago, Leeds_Bear said:

I can't believe he wasn't cited for this but Roofe was. Literally karate kicks Soro. 

Absolute joke isn’t it 🤣 I’ve only seen it the once mate the other day but from what I remember he full on boots him in the midrift after they tangled! 

[Hadron Collider 30,883]

1 hour ago, Tiger Shaw said:

All this shite is part of the reason I hate football 

You now hate football because your team aren’t getting the 10. 🤣

[Tiger Shaw 30,470]

7 minutes ago, Hadron Collider said:

You now hate football because your team aren’t getting the 10. 🤣

It’s a catastrophe, it’s a conspiracy,  fucked over by operation stop the ten. Lawwell and Dermot where in on it, fucking Masonic referees Hun loving SFA, fuck modern football and fuck neil Lennon aw I want is Brendon Rodgers back and a bag ah cans fs 😭 

 

[Hadron Collider 30,883]

17 minutes ago, Tiger Shaw said:

It’s a catastrophe, it’s a conspiracy,  fucked over by operation stop the ten. Lawwell and Dermot where in on it, fucking Masonic referees Hun loving SFA, fuck modern football and fuck neil Lennon aw I want is Brendon Rodgers back and a bag ah cans fs 😭 

 

You lot underestimated us. The signs were there after all that money yees pished away when yees could’ve been so far ahead of us. Just face it, yees have fucked it, and now with the court cases coming up, we are going for the ultimate 10 where we will sell more t- shirts and get trips to Santa Ponsa before yees! We’ll be tying Rangers scarfs tae yer goalposts next and wiping snotters  on yer corner flags. Yer fucked and you know it! 🤣

[Leeds_Bear 8,110]

1 hour ago, Brackley Bluenose said:

Absolute joke isn’t it 🤣 I’ve only seen it the once mate the other day but from what I remember he full on boots him in the midrift after they tangled! 

Fucking round house kicks him! Mad. 

[Leeds_Bear 8,110]

Time do we find out anyway?

[CooperSF 5,792]

2 minutes ago, Leeds_Bear said:

Time do we find out anyway?

Presume by 17:00