The disallowed goal

[Negri's lovechild 14,263]

34 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Watched it a few times and changed my mind several times on it.

I don't think the Butland incident was a penalty. Butland draws back, and the attacker clips his own heels do make it look like there is greater contact.

The other one, i think some referees give that, but as has been said before, they'll be giving penalties every match if thats the case.

[gmcf 34,383]

1 minute ago, Negri's lovechild said:

I think soft is being polite there. Think that went to a VAR check as well?

I'm not sure if it went to VAR check . Does look like the celtic player was more interested in blocking the Dundee player rather than any serious attempt to get the ball . 

[Negri's lovechild 14,263]

4 minutes ago, gmcf said:

I'm not sure if it went to VAR check . Does look like the celtic player was more interested in blocking the Dundee player rather than any serious attempt to get the ball . 

Nothing wrong with the celtic's players actions there in blocking off to create space, although he does go down quite easily. 

Sad days when that's given as a penalty.

[ianferguson 2,619]

11 hours ago, dummiesoot said:

The sellik diddy made a rip roaring cunt if it, given how many attempts he took to touch the ball, I will never accept he was in control of it as he did not have a clue what he was doing.

moot point though as it was given as a foul, will always struggle to accept it though. Football is a contact sport afterall.

 

must admit thought St J should have had a pen with the Lawrence incident though to be fair the only time I recall that being given was for sellik v us at… let us call it ‘Clancy’s Game’

Yer arse Lawrence on Kane NEVER a pen and if it was even remotely close VAR would have given it.

[goaaaal 953]

Still we are waiting on an explanation from the cabal and sod all from Rangers in regard to their delay in responding.

The club should be demanding they sort their lazy arse approach 

[McEwan's Lager 30,672]

On 16/09/2023 at 19:03, GabrielTomato said:

It’s not whether it’s a contact sport or not, that is not the point. 

The point is if a player is in control of the ball. Their defender was, Dessers wasn’t. He then impeded their player when he was trying to play the ball.

I had no idea at the time it was a foul and called it a disgraceful decision, but I’ve read the rules and they were interpreted correctly. 

I actually agree with interpretation of the tripping rule - as @Inigo and I have said on here time and time again its to stop the Messi situation.

What I don't like about it is it is a rule interpretation that is pretty much impossible with the naked eye to get right. A referee can't tell with any great certainty, unless the ball has obviously changed direction, whether or not a player has touched the ball before getting kicked.

There will be 100% an incident before the end of the season where a player of ours gets in and nips the ball and is fouled, but a referee may give it the other way because they may have not seen the touch. That could lead to a goal scoring opportunity being denied and VAR won't overturn it because it hasn't actually led to a goal and the referee has already blown his whistle.

The only way you could do this is allow play to go on, like offsides, and wait for the play to finish / see how it plays out, before going back and giving a free kick but that would be a shambles.

[McEwan's Lager 30,672]

23 hours ago, Negri's lovechild said:

I don't think the Butland incident was a penalty. Butland draws back, and the attacker clips his own heels do make it look like there is greater contact.

The other one, i think some referees give that, but as has been said before, they'll be giving penalties every match if thats the case.

Lawrence one the ball isn't in play. Ref should have blown the whistle / halted as the corner was being taken and given him a warning for holding.

Butland one, think its probably a penalty. I'd be pretty annoyed if that wasn't given to us.

[bluenoz 31,060]

VAR didn't refer to the rule book in a 20-second decision on the Dessers incident. They are not that competent, ffs!

We were cheated. It's that simple. You will never convince me that is a foul.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,687]

6 hours ago, bluenoz said:

VAR didn't refer to the rule book in a 20-second decision on the Dessers incident. They are not that competent, ffs!

We were cheated. It's that simple. You will never convince me that is a foul.

If 4 different refs across 3 different competitions including one competing we have absolutely nothing to do with, all giving the same decision doesn't convince you then nothing will so you might as well go shout at a wall or something 

One question though, when the ref gave the same decision in the france v ireland game, how did that cheat us? 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,687]

7 hours ago, McEwan's Lager said:

I actually agree with interpretation of the tripping rule - as @Inigo and I have said on here time and time again its to stop the Messi situation.

What I don't like about it is it is a rule interpretation that is pretty much impossible with the naked eye to get right. A referee can't tell with any great certainty, unless the ball has obviously changed direction, whether or not a player has touched the ball before getting kicked.

There will be 100% an incident before the end of the season where a player of ours gets in and nips the ball and is fouled, but a referee may give it the other way because they may have not seen the touch. That could lead to a goal scoring opportunity being denied and VAR won't overturn it because it hasn't actually led to a goal and the referee has already blown his whistle.

The only way you could do this is allow play to go on, like offsides, and wait for the play to finish / see how it plays out, before going back and giving a free kick but that would be a shambles.

They'll be plenty of instances where a ref misses a wee nudge or a slight contact that will go unpunished because it leads to nothing, thats always been the case in football and will continue to be so until the end of time

It is a good change like you said to stop situations like the messi penalty incident

[kelvd1873 7,261]

14 hours ago, bluenoz said:

VAR didn't refer to the rule book in a 20-second decision on the Dessers incident. They are not that competent, ffs!

We were cheated. It's that simple. You will never convince me that is a foul.

If they score this goal at their midden it’s 100% a goal.