Season 23/24

[ger intae them]

9 minutes ago, kumnio said:

Thats a disgraceful performance from the Portuguese cheat, hopefully he gets smashed and then he might be able to really show his theatrics.

what a pussy. If you’re hurt you don’t thrash around like a mackerel.

[Jersey Jim]

Hilarious penalty for Rangers.

Would love to be a fly in the wall in Big Ramys house 

2-2 😂
 

nope 2-1 VAR 😂

Edited April 7 by Jersey Jim

[Ally Bongo]

13 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:

Surely everyone should be betting Tavernier to score at anytime given that Rangers will get a penalty - you also have the bonus of free kicks and from open play

Indeed

[Big Ramy 1314]

6 minutes ago, Jersey Jim said:

Hilarious penalty for Rangers.

Would love to be a fly in the wall in Big Ramys house 

2-2 😂
 

nope 2-1 VAR 😂

4 windows panned after that penalty !!!

[ThistleWhistle]

The quality of football is absolutely atrocious 

[Diamond Scot]

Really poor game in terms of quality but action and incident packed.

I normally like Sutton but having him commentate on this match is pointless as there is the natural bias.

I thought Rangers penalty was a dive real time. But when you see the replay Silva is caught about the knee. He goes down easy and might have gone down anyway but Sutton just repeatedly said he was already down at the point of contact, even though at the same time you were getting numerous replays showing that wasnt the case. What this did was take away from the other aspect which was how much did Johnstone touch the ball. Unfortunetly Sky didnt even show that part of the replay.

CCV was the standout for Celtic.

Tavinear, Goldson and Lawrence were shocking for Rangers who were lucky to get a draw.

[Big Ramy 1314]

Don't like the way we threw it away. Our defence is shocking on the left hand side.. Rangers penalty was shocking. Flavio Silva is a disgrace... It's in our hands now, win remaining matches, the title is ours. I believe rangers are playing away 5 or their remaining 7 matches. Disappointed, but I'll take the draw.....

[Fairbairn]

8 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Really poor game in terms of quality but action and incident packed.

I normally like Sutton but having him commentate on this match is pointless as there is the natural bias.

I thought Rangers penalty was a dive real time. But when you see the replay Silva is caught about the knee. He goes down easy and might have gone down anyway but Sutton just repeatedly said he was already down at the point of contact, even though at the same time you were getting numerous replays showing that wasnt the case. What this did was take away from the other aspect which was how much did Johnstone touch the ball. Unfortunetly Sky didnt even show that part of the replay.

CCV was the standout for Celtic.

Tavinear, Goldson and Lawrence were shocking for Rangers who were lucky to get a draw.

It’s a clear penalty and gets given in any other game for any other team. The insistence that he was “on his way down” is nonsense. He’s went down theatrically after the contact/foul but it wasn’t a dive. As far as I could see the ref and VAR got all the big calls correct (eventually).  Was hoping for a win obviously but happy with the draw having been behind twice. 

[slasher]

We really should be seeing that out after the 3rd goal. I have no idea what Yang thought he was doing at their equaliser. We should have been out of sight by half time anyway. That’s 2 points dropped as far as I’m concerned. 
On Beaton, overall I thought he was poor but got the pens and disallowed goal correct.

[Orraloon]

57 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Really poor game in terms of quality but action and incident packed.

I normally like Sutton but having him commentate on this match is pointless as there is the natural bias.

I thought Rangers penalty was a dive real time. But when you see the replay Silva is caught about the knee. He goes down easy and might have gone down anyway but Sutton just repeatedly said he was already down at the point of contact, even though at the same time you were getting numerous replays showing that wasnt the case. What this did was take away from the other aspect which was how much did Johnstone touch the ball. Unfortunetly Sky didnt even show that part of the replay.

CCV was the standout for Celtic.

Tavinear, Goldson and Lawrence were shocking for Rangers who were lucky to get a draw.

That bit is largely irrelevant. A foul is a foul, it doesn't matter whether the player touches the ball or not. Not that I've seen this one you are talking about, so I've no idea whether it was a foul or not. 

[EddardStark]

Great point in the end  from a game we should really have been dead and buried at half time. 

[EddardStark]

1 hour ago, Big Ramy 1314 said:

Don't like the way we threw it away. Our defence is shocking on the left hand side.. Rangers penalty was shocking. Flavio Silva is a disgrace... It's in our hands now, win remaining matches, the title is ours. I believe rangers are playing away 5 or their remaining 7 matches. Disappointed, but I'll take the draw.....

Yes I say the deck is now stacked  in Celtics favour but it could have been a whole lot worse for Rangers. 

[Barney Rubble]

1 hour ago, Fairbairn said:

It’s a clear penalty and gets given in any other game for any other team. The insistence that he was “on his way down” is nonsense. He’s went down theatrically after the contact/foul but it wasn’t a dive. As far as I could see the ref and VAR got all the big calls correct (eventually).  Was hoping for a win obviously but happy with the draw having been behind twice. 

You're having a laugh??

Everyone of us on here has played 5-a-sides. 7-a-sides, amateur football to a decent standard, and maybe even some at a higher level than that. If every physical contact in a game was judged to the standard of that penalty award, then every physical contact in the game would be a free-kick.

That would never have constituted a foul in the middle of the park, and it certainly wasn't a foul or anything close to the legal description at the Copland Road end either. Beaton shat it after being called to the monitor, that much is clear.

[Big Ramy 1314]

35 minutes ago, EddardStark said:

Yes I say the deck is now stacked  in Celtics favour but it could have been a whole lot worse for Rangers. 

To be fair, your keeper saved you in the 1st half alone. Should be an exciting and arse shitting the next 7 weeks....😂

[Diamond Scot]

51 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

That bit is largely irrelevant. A foul is a foul, it doesn't matter whether the player touches the ball or not. Not that I've seen this one you are talking about, so I've no idea whether it was a foul or not. 

If the defending player kicks the ball then then follows through onto the attacker then how much contact he makes with the ball 100% matters.

Another thing that annoys me watching OF games is how its generally accepted that the ref can just apply the rules differently.  Scales had a deliberate pull of a Rangers player who was then going to go into the attacking 3rd. Its a yellow all day long but because it was only 5 mins in he just gets a warning. Likewise, CCV walks up and flicks the ball away, preventing Rangers taking a free kick. Again, a yellow all day yet because its early in the game he gets a warning.

Ironically the booking Khun gets was the least deserving of this and the above 2 but because it was 20 odd mins in he gets given one.

I understand that if its a questionable foul then use abit of discretion but you cant just not book somebody because it might put them and the ref in a difficult decision later in the game.

This indirectly affects other teams as a natural result of this type of refereeing results in the OF having less players suspended. It doesnt happen in any other derby or game. 

[Diamond Scot]

29 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

You're having a laugh??

Everyone of us on here has played 5-a-sides. 7-a-sides, amateur football to a decent standard, and maybe even some at a higher level than that. If every physical contact in a game was judged to the standard of that penalty award, then every physical contact in the game would be a free-kick.

That would never have constituted a foul in the middle of the park, and it certainly wasn't a foul or anything close to the legal description at the Copland Road end either. Beaton shat it after being called to the monitor, that much is clear.

Its a foul and a penalty anywhere on the pitch, any day of the week. Johnstone catching Silva above the knee whilst attempting to kick the ball. Out of interest, what makes you think its not a foul?

As I said earlier, the only thing that could have made it not a foul is if he had taken alot of the ball beforehand. From the replays Sky showed, he swings for the ball, either misses it or doesnt get alot of it, starts to fall back and follows through onto Silva leg (who then goes down easy but as expected)

[Barney Rubble]

10 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

Its a foul and a penalty anywhere on the pitch, any day of the week. Johnstone catching Silva above the knee whilst attempting to kick the ball. Out of interest, what makes you think its not a foul?

As I said earlier, the only thing that could have made it not a foul is if he had taken alot of the ball beforehand. From the replays Sky showed, he swings for the ball, either misses it or doesnt get alot of it, starts to fall back and follows through onto Silva leg (who then goes down easy but as expected)

Except it isn't.

No-one bats an eyelid at that challenge in the middle of the park in any game anywhere in the world this weekend. The worst thing Beaton did was issue a yellow card for the perceived dive. Had he pointed for a goal-kick without the card, then this discussion wouldn't be happening.

For the record, Beaton was the ref at Firhill last weekend @ Jags v Fake Jags, which I attended. He booked ICT's Kerr for a perceived dive which was rescinded on appeal following a later second yellow that saw him red-carded.

I'll let you draw your own conclusion.

Edited April 7 by Barney Rubble

[Orraloon]

16 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

If the defending player kicks the ball then then follows through onto the attacker then how much contact he makes with the ball 100% matters.

 

It doesn't matter in determining whether a foul has been committed. It's either a foul or it isn't. Whether a player touches the ball before, during, or after, only comes into play in determining the severity of the foul. The ref can consider that in mitigation when determining the level of intent, and hence it can be used to help him decide if it warrants a yellow or red card, for example. 

Touching the ball only plays a small role in the refs decision making, and should have no bearing whatsoever in whether a foul has been committed. 

Edited April 7 by Orraloon

[vanderark14]

It's not a penalty. Contact isn't enough to go down

It was an entertaining match. 

[vanderark14]

2 hours ago, Diamond Scot said:

Really poor game in terms of quality but action and incident packed.

I normally like Sutton but having him commentate on this match is pointless as there is the natural bias.

I thought Rangers penalty was a dive real time. But when you see the replay Silva is caught about the knee. He goes down easy and might have gone down anyway but Sutton just repeatedly said he was already down at the point of contact, even though at the same time you were getting numerous replays showing that wasnt the case. What this did was take away from the other aspect which was how much did Johnstone touch the ball. Unfortunetly Sky didnt even show that part of the replay.

CCV was the standout for Celtic.

Tavinear, Goldson and Lawrence were shocking for Rangers who were lucky to get a draw.

This will sound of coming from me as one of the most anti OF fans on here but the quality wasn't that bad IMO. 

[Diamond Scot]

30 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

It doesn't matter in determining whether a foul has been committed. It's either a foul or it isn't. Whether a player touches the ball before, during, or after, only comes into play in determining the severity of the foul. The ref can consider that in mitigation when determining the level of intent, and hence it can be used to help him decide if it warrants a yellow or red card, for example. 

Touching the ball only plays a small role in the refs decision making, and should have no bearing whatsoever in whether a foul has been committed. 

So you are saying if player A kicks the ball full on but on his follow through kicks Player B then thats a foul? Because thats blatantly not correct.

Whereas in the same scenario, if Player A misses the ball and only kicks player B then that is a foul.

[Big Ramy 1314]

35 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:

Except it isn't.

No-one bats an eyelid at that challenge in the middle of the park in any game anywhere in the world this weekend. The worst thing Beaton did was issue a yellow card for the perceived dive. Had he pointed for a goal-kick without the card, then this discussion wouldn't be happening.

For the record, Beaton was the ref at Firhill last weekend @ Jags v Fake Jags, which I attended. He booked ICT's Kerr for a perceived dive which was rescinded on appeal following a later second yellow that saw him red-carded.

I'll let you draw your own conclusion.

Interesting point Barney. I'm puzzled now, you make a good point.. Said player is booked for diving, then awarded a penalty !!! How does that work???

[killiefaetheferry]

Just now, Big Ramy 1314 said:

Interesting point Barney. I'm puzzled now, you make a good point.. Said player is booked for diving, then awarded a penalty !!! How does that work???

'Cos penalty Rangers. 

[Orraloon]

2 minutes ago, Diamond Scot said:

So you are saying if player A kicks the ball full on but on his follow through kicks Player B then thats a foul? Because thats blatantly not correct.

Whereas in the same scenario, if Player A misses the ball and only kicks player B then that is a foul.

If the ref deems it to be "careless" or "reckless" it's a foul, whether the ball is touched or not. The laws of the game don't mention "making contact with the ball". The only thing that the ref needs to convince himself of, is, - was the tackle careless? If it was it's a foul, if he decides it wasn't careless it's not a foul.

[Diamond Scot]

29 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:

It's not a penalty. Contact isn't enough to go down

It was an entertaining match. 

The problem with what you say is that its not what the rules are.

Nowhere in law 12 does it mention that any contact has to be enough to make the opponent go down. 

Very few fouls that are correctly awarded in football would result in a person going to ground. If a person is kicked on the leg in a non football context then the natural thing to do would be hop about abit, not fall to the ground. In football though its accepted that players fall over when kicked. Thats what happened here, Johnstone swung and kicks Silva. I dont think anybody is disputing that. The only consideration then is whether the ref thinks its in careless / reckless. If it is then its a penalty.

I saw that whilst also saying Silva and players like him do my nut in. He was rolling about trying to get Celtic players booked or sent off all game. He was very much looking for Johnstone to connect with him but thats then what happened.