Kemar Roofe charged by SFA (2 Match Ban Confirmed)

[hawkfalcons 2,297]

24 minutes ago, M-89 said:

No. Just get on with the game, stop all this re-refeering pish. It should have been a red at the time but it wasn’t so just get on with it. 
 

The only issue is when our players are refereed to a different standard both during and after the matches. 

Spot on 

[esquire8 42,336]

Have the SFA really done themselves over? The challenge was in the referees book and Roofe got a yellow for it then how the fuck can the SFA re-referee a game? That's completely against their own rule book. Get a hold of that referees book and hammer the fuck out the SFA for it.

They somehow got away with re-booking Morelos against Dundee, don't let them get away with this.

Start fucking fighting back Rangers! 

[Bad Robot 21,138]

Surely the process in all of this is that the refs should have a certain time window to watch a full game back and source other footage and at that point they decide whether something has been missed and if they believe it has it then goes to the CO?

this then gives the trial by tv less water albeit narratives can still be pushed from the likes of Walker, and other narratives will still fall silent from the likes of Walker.

[Lord Lockin 3,909]

5 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Endangering the safety of an opponent is deemed (A1) serious foul play in the rules, which is what he has been cited for.

I'd expect this to be upheld.

I agree with you it will get get upheld - it's how many serious foul play cases get completely ignored that angers me and most fans

[hammer93 15,056]

It is so blatantly biased against us now it stinks

[ExiledWeegie123 1,234]

23 minutes ago, CooperSF said:

 

for fuck sake!!

I most likely watched that game and cant remember that tackle, that is a career ender if it lands on the knee, a yellow card? ffs honestly this league is corrupt as fuck

[Bad Robot 21,138]

2 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

Have the SFA really done themselves over? The challenge was in the referees book and Roofe got a yellow for it then how the fuck can the SFA re-referee a game? That's completely against their own rule book. Get a hold of that referees book and hammer the fuck out the SFA for it.

They somehow got away with re-booking Morelos against Dundee, don't let them get away with this.

Start fucking fighting back Rangers! 

He’ll say the same that he missed it the whole tackle. We’re dealing with humans here who make mistakes and these clown refs are fkn hopeless.

[esquire8 42,336]

Just now, Bad Robot said:

Surely the process in all of this is that the refs should have a certain time window to watch a full game back and source other footage and at that point they decide whether something has been missed and if they believe it has it then goes to the CO?

this then gives the trial by tv less water albeit narratives can still be pushed from the likes of Walker and other narratives will still fall silence from the likes of Walker.

The challenge wasn't missed which is the big fucking issue here and why the SFA can't decide that a yellow wasn't enough. The ref saw it clear as day, says it was a yellow, that's it.

[hammer93 15,056]

Just now, Lord Lockin said:

I agree with you it will get get upheld - it's how many serious foul play cases get completely ignored that angers me and most fans

Curtis Main being the most recent against us....that challenge was conviently ignored 

[middli 1,579]

I'd have no problem with Roofe being cited if they'd also cited Main and Eduoard for their challenges in recent weeks.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

As incompetent and bias as some match officials are, the simple fact of the matter is the CO process is corrupt and we all know why. 

It needs binned and there are cunts in officialdom who need hounded out of the game. 

Let's hope our club steps up when the title is over the line. The stranglehold the cabal has over the game needs to fucking end. 

[Lord Lockin 3,909]

Just now, hammer93 said:

Curtis Main being the most recent against us....that challenge was conviently ignored 

no wae McGregor it wisnae - fuckin class 

[Boybluesy 3,693]

5 minutes ago, ThenNowForever said:

I just can’t get my head around the fact he was booked for what could only be the ‘lunge’ with the ref yards away. Surely he saw that. Do the club get the match report / ref comments? Probably only if they challenge it. Does the ref then look at all incidents after a game from 4 angles slowed down? Does he consult all match officials about it? Just how the fuck does it work?

 

anyone have any answers?

It works like this.  We're tried by television and taigs.

[shaka 1,669]

There's nothing we can do as fans, only the club can stand up to this nonsense from the SFA and media.  Until the club do this it won't matter who the player is.  If he plays for us, he will be targeted and punished differently from any other players in the country.

[Bad Robot 21,138]

Just now, ExilledWeegie123 said:

for fuck sake!!

I most likely watched that game and cant remember that tackle, that is a career ender if it lands on the knee, a yellow card? ffs honestly this league is corrupt as fuck

It could be argued that both when in pretty hard there and it was two yellows however it could also be argued both endangered each other or was one player worse than the other like being out of control, studs over the ball, two feet off the ground etc. 

 

[esquire8 42,336]

26 minutes ago, stevemac said:

why is it fast tracked? are all of these hearings fast tracked? 

Because it's us. 

That's it.

All it takes.

[surfsup2 1,535]

1 minute ago, hammer93 said:

It is so blatantly biased against us now it stinks

Because our games are on the tv more we will always be a target as it’s always about us.

It’s okay this season as were so far in front we can deal with it .

But if it was only a few points it could be the difference on who could win the league .

[MaddistonKnight 1,567]

1 hour ago, ScottBF2 said:

I went to try and find the SFA explanation of serious foul play, thinking you might be right and stumbled upon this:

 

 

 

“The sending off offence will be deemed to have been seen... where any part of the challenge for the ball by the party which caused the alleged Serious Foul Play has been seen by any of the match officials.”

 

”any match official will be deemed to have seen the alleged Sending Off Offence unless there is evidence to demonstrate that the Match Official’s view of the challenge for the ball was obscured or blocked”

This absolutely boils my piss.

Bougherra against Aberdeen. Ref doesn't make the call. Goes to his linesman and asks him if Bougherra kicks the goalie. Aye, he did, ref sends off Bougherra.

However, Linesman then sees the incident from another angle on TV later and realises that an Aberdeen defender was between Bougherra and the goalie, so incident is no longer clear cut. So Bougherra was incorrectly sent off because the official COULDN'T see that there was a player in between Bougherra and the goalie from his angle; if he had been aware of this at the time, the collision became accidental.

So you can get a player banned because of an obscured view, but there is no comeback when the officals feck it up!

[Bad Robot 21,138]

2 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

The challenge wasn't missed which is the big fucking issue here and why the SFA can't decide that a yellow wasn't enough. The ref saw it clear as day, says it was a yellow, that's it.

You’re now surmising the ref seen it fully on one look.

What about the process idea ? 

[esquire8 42,336]

5 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

He’ll say the same that he missed it the whole tackle. We’re dealing with humans here who make mistakes and these clown refs are fkn hopeless.

Then he'll be lying....

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

IFAB has serious foul play as a lunge that endangers opponents. If SFA want to use the rules for the objective of weakening us then they can and at this point there’s not a thing we can do about it. It’s well known that these rules are governed on intent and the rest of Scottish football will continue to be refereed with that reference but we won’t be. 

[esquire8 42,336]

3 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

You’re now surmising the ref seen it fully on one look.

What about the process idea ? 

See above

His view wasn't blocked. He seen all the challenge.

Appeal this till the cows come home.

[southcoastbear 1,639]

Thought this  might happen as soon as I saw that off form mhank striker get suspended they take this as demonstrating they are being even handed , aye right Noooot.

Just shows the levels they will sink to in order to narrow the gap a bit so as it's no quite so humiliating, coz they got no chance of catching us even though that deluded manager of theirs canny probably even admit it to himself given his level of hatred of our glorious club.

[McEwan's Lager 30,495]

3 minutes ago, ScottBF2 said:

I went to try and find the SFA explanation of serious foul play, thinking you might be right and stumbled upon this:

 

 

 

“The sending off offence will be deemed to have been seen... where any part of the challenge for the ball by the party which caused the alleged Serious Foul Play has been seen by any of the match officials.”

 

”any match official will be deemed to have seen the alleged Sending Off Offence unless there is evidence to demonstrate that the Match Official’s view of the challenge for the ball was obscured or blocked”

Think you are going off an old doc there. The 2020/21 Judicial Panel Protocol has changed wording. It's a lot looser than the above and the exceptional nature of reviewing things seen by the match officials offers a lot more leeway.

[Hadron Collider 30,780]

Any good refs are going to say fuck this. What am I doing out there when every decision I make gets scrutinized afterwards? Fuck Sky, fuck bbc and their reporters and minions. Also fuck the sfa and their process. Scottish football needs a fucking massive enema!