Lee Mcculloch - Page 2 - Football related - Discussion of non TA football - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Lee was bit of a hero originally because he decided not to walk when everything went pear shaped. On the other hand if you're being cynical you might say that no-one other club would offer him the deal he was on when he TUPEd across, only Lee knows the truth.

Turtle heid is on good money at ibrox, he wouldn't get that anywhere else as he is well past his sell-buy date. Forced loyalty me thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violent conduct cases can be dealt with retrospectively, even if a player was booked.

It's up to the ref though. So I doubt Rangers fan Bobby Madden will be deciding to take another look at the incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violent conduct cases can be dealt with retrospectively, even if a player was booked.

It's up to the ref though. So I doubt Rangers fan Bobby Madden will be deciding to take another look at the incident.

i thought the compliance officer could step in at any point. usually after watching sportscene. is this not what has happened previously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought the compliance officer could step in at any point. usually after watching sportscene. is this not what has happened previously?

My understanding of an incident which has already been punished on the field, is as I posted previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i thought the compliance officer could step in at any point. usually after watching sportscene. is this not what has happened previously?

I didn't watch sportscene, but I'd doubt any mcculloch thuggery made the edit?

Do Rangers still not talk to the BBC?

I don't know if I'd give them the money for showing a live cup game if that were the case. For £80k (seems the accepted figure for a live cup game) I'd be wanting normal access.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding of an incident which has already been punished on the field, is as I posted previously.

I thought if the referee deals with it at the time it stands as it is, unless it's mistaken identity, unless the referee retrospectively agrees he got it wrong?

(If that makes sense?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled how Madden could see the incident & give a yellow. He either misses it & nothing or see it & gives a red.

Same goes for the "tackle" in the 2nd half. How can he not give a yellow for that?

Would be a blessing in disguise if he got a lengthy ban, so fingers crossed they continue to look the other way!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought if the referee deals with it at the time it stands as it is, unless it's mistaken identity, unless the referee retrospectively agrees he got it wrong?

(If that makes sense?)

3rd time I've written this...

If a referee later deems the incident to be violent conduct, further action can be taken.

This is as I understand it. If someone else knows better then please elaborate. Just asking me the same question multiple times wont change my answer though :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3rd time I've written this...

If a referee later deems the incident to be violent conduct, further action can be taken.

This is as I understand it. If someone else knows better then please elaborate. Just asking me the same question multiple times wont change my answer though :lol:

That's a more succinct version of what I was trying to say.

:ok:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still baffled how Madden could see the incident & give a yellow. He either misses it & nothing or see it & gives a red.

Same goes for the "tackle" in the 2nd half. How can he not give a yellow for that?

Would be a blessing in disguise if he got a lengthy ban, so fingers crossed they continue to look the other way!

Completely agree. It's either no foul or a red but not a yellow for the first incident.

The one in the second half was a stonewall yellow so no idea how he stayed on the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forearm smashed someone in the back of the head and then stamped on the guy as he fell to the ground.

I expect to take pelters for this and I'm not excusing it but I don't really think he "stamped" on him. If I were describing it I'd say he "trod" on him. In saying that it should still be looked at as he could easily have avoided the guy but I don't think there was as much for as a "stamp".

Link to it here actually. "Forearm smash" is being a bit melodramatic too if I'm being honest!

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/556951/Worse-Chelsea-Diego-Costa-Rangers-Lee-McCulloch-escape-red-stamp

Edited by Fairbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect to take pelters for this and I'm not excusing it but I don't really think he "stamped" on him. If I were describing it I'd say he "trod" on him. In saying that it should still be looked at as he could easily have avoided the guy but I don't think there was as much for as a "stamp".

Link to it here actually. "Forearm smash" is being a bit melodramatic too if I'm being honest!

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/556951/Worse-Chelsea-Diego-Costa-Rangers-Lee-McCulloch-escape-red-stamp

Could McCulloch have avoided the guy if he'd wanted to ?

I think that answer to that is undoubtedly 'yes'.

Stamped or trod, it was deliberate. should have been red carded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...