Which highlights the whole farce of the system. Just open to bias and abuse. The catholic officer should be citing players even if the ref saw it by got it wrong (I.e. was too lenient).They'll say the ref seen it and dealt with it at the time, so he can't be cited now.
I take it she isn't going to cite Clare? Can't really see how she can now cite any other player retrospectively if that is an acceptable challenge.
Also silent on Avril's comments.
The only caveat being that no Rangers player is cited in a similar scenario?It shouldn't be looked at imo. It was a bad tackle but where do we draw the line with this interfering after the game is finished? Most games have tackles which are just as bad if not worse than that.
The only caveat being that no Rangers player is cited in a similar scenario?
Clare, Avril and female compliance officer.
Girl power will rule.
I take it she isn't going to cite Clare? Can't really see how she can now cite any other player retrospectively if that is an acceptable challenge.
Also silent on Avril's comments.
Go for it mateAll it takes is someone to report it . Even a member of the public .
Agreed.Absolutely and I wouldn't expect them to be.
Violent conduct is one thing. A poor attempt at a tackle is just something that happens in football.
My understand (could be bollox) is the while Madjin gave a foul he failed to give an appropriate card therefore the compliant burd could get off her perch (on Pete's says so) and cite him. Depends if a subsequent ban affects St.Pats.CL is an interesting one. Lennon was allowed to say something almost identical after they played the filth away, and our own gaffer wasn’t cited after his opening day comments either.
However Steve Clarke HAS been charged this season though, as have we (as a club) over the Collum statement.
Not sure Clare will be cited as the ref seen it at the time and ‘punished’ him, by awarding us the free kick. Isn’t it just for incidents the ref or officials have missed?
Whole thing is a bit of a farce.
There was no card issued. That's the only way he could have dealt with it.They'll say the ref seen it and dealt with it at the time, so he can't be cited now.
There was no card issued. That's the only way he could have dealt with it.
or the Invisible officerThey should rename the post The Compliant Officer!
There was no card issued. That's the only way he could have dealt with it.
I'll go against the grain here.
I'm quite happy the player isn't being cited.
We'll get no benefit from this.
If he's banned, he'll be unavailable for games against our rivals, not against us.
My understand (could be bollox) is the while Madjin gave a foul he failed to give an appropriate card therefore the compliant burd could get off her perch (on Pete's says so) and cite him. Depends if a subsequent ban affects St.Pats.
Do I sound too cynical?
Agreed!!And if he re kind that it wasn't worthy of a cad he shouldn't be a referee.
To the people saying “ ach these things happen in football “ and “ don’t want to go down that road “ , I’ll leave you with one question .
If it’s Alfredo Morelos who commits the exact same foul as Sean Clare did on Sunday , do you think for a single minute that the clamour from BT Sport, Sportscene and all the other haters out there wouldn’t have already ensured that he’d have been cited already and hit with a retrospective red card ?
Turning the other cheek has failed us for so long .
I want Clare cited and banned because A/ it was a dangerous challenge which is a clear red card . And B/ because if it was a Rangers player he would be cited .
Simple.
I don't because he shouldn't be. It was a bad tackle. Happens in every game and sometimes it's our players who do it. I can't remember very many of our players being cited for a bad tackle.
If this is now cause to be cited, we would be cited most.
Testicles.I don't because he shouldn't be. It was a bad tackle. Happens in every game and sometimes it's our players who do it. I can't remember very many of our players being cited for a bad tackle.
If this is now cause to be cited, we would be cited most.
CL is an interesting one. Lennon was allowed to say something almost identical after they played the filth away, and our own gaffer wasn’t cited after his opening day comments either.
However Steve Clarke HAS been charged this season though, as have we (as a club) over the Collum statement.
Not sure Clare will be cited as the ref seen it at the time and ‘punished’ him, by awarding us the free kick. Isn’t it just for incidents the ref or officials have missed?
Whole thing is a bit of a farce.
I’m genuinely not sure. I know that he can get involved for stuff he’s seen, but failed to act correctly, like diving, but not sure about ‘lenient punishments.
Bollocks - it wasn’t a bad tackle, it was a horrendous challenge which has no place in football. The best way to eliminate such challenges is to hammer the players who commit them, at the time or retrospectively.I don't because he shouldn't be. It was a bad tackle. Happens in every game and sometimes it's our players who do it. I can't remember very many of our players being cited for a bad tackle.
If this is now cause to be cited, we would be cited most.
As I posted earlier, it isn't Rangers who benefit from this lad being banned.To the people saying “ ach these things happen in football “ and “ don’t want to go down that road “ , I’ll leave you with one question .
If it’s Alfredo Morelos who commits the exact same foul as Sean Clare did on Sunday , do you think for a single minute that the clamour from BT Sport, Sportscene and all the other haters out there wouldn’t have already ensured that he’d have been cited already and hit with a retrospective red card ?
Turning the other cheek has failed us for so long .
I want Clare cited and banned because A/ it was a dangerous challenge which is a clear red card . And B/ because if it was a Rangers player he would be cited .
Simple.
Garbage . “Happens every game” ?? Dearie me
It’s not even a tackle .
It’s an instant red , a dangerous studs up straight leg lunge , which is a red card every day of the week.
Are you for real saying we commit that type of challenge more than anyone else ??
Very strange.
No. I'm saying if people started getting cited for tackles, we would benefit the least as we seem to get 'done' by the compliance officer more than anyone.
Bollocks - it wasn’t a bad tackle, it was a horrendous challenge which has no place in football. The best way to eliminate such challenges is to hammer the players who commit them, at the time or retrospectively.
Your last comment is the biggest bollocks of all.
Probably true but as I said mate think about what I’ve posted re Morelos . He’d have been hung by now if he had made that challenge .
For me we must contest everything to the nth degree just to let them know we won’t accept being treated differently any more .
The point being if one of our players made the same tackle it would be replayed with 50 different camera angles, would be the major talking point on Jokescene and then this complete and utter sham of compliance officers position would most certainly act. Get the picture?It shouldn't be looked at imo. It was a bad tackle but where do we draw the line with this interfering after the game is finished? Most games have tackles which are just as bad if not worse than that.
Sorry but I really have to say this, “ what a lot of pure and utter fecking garbage”.I don't because he shouldn't be. It was a bad tackle. Happens in every game and sometimes it's our players who do it. I can't remember very many of our players being cited for a bad tackle.
If this is now cause to be cited, we would be cited most.
You sound like a rambling lunatic.My understand (could be bollox) is the while Madjin gave a foul he failed to give an appropriate card therefore the compliant burd could get off her perch (on Pete's says so) and cite him. Depends if a subsequent ban affects St.Pats.
Do I sound too cynical?
The point being if one of our players made the same tackle it would be replayed with 50 different camera angles, would be the major talking point on Jokescene and then this complete and utter sham of compliance officers position would most certainly act. Get the picture?
Sorry but I really have to say this, “ what a lot of pure and utter fecking garbage”.
Have you just returned from the moon?
Three ugly bastards.Clare, Avril and female compliance officer.
Girl power will rule.
If they don't charge Avril, it gives us the perfect defence against our charges.
He wasn't bookedThey'll say the ref seen it and dealt with it at the time, so he can't be cited now.
He wasn't booked
They do that already! So a bit of parity would be most welcome. You're Very keen on Clare not getting done.The point being if one of our players made the same tackle it would be replayed with 50 different camera angles, would be the major talking point on Jokescene and then this complete and utter sham of compliance officers position would most certainly act. Get the picture?
If would have been done first thing Monday morningTo the people saying “ ach these things happen in football “ and “ don’t want to go down that road “ , I’ll leave you with one question .
If it’s Alfredo Morelos who commits the exact same foul as Sean Clare did on Sunday , do you think for a single minute that the clamour from BT Sport, Sportscene and all the other haters out there wouldn’t have already ensured that he’d have been cited already and hit with a retrospective red card ?
Turning the other cheek has failed us for so long .
I want Clare cited and banned because A/ it was a dangerous challenge which is a clear red card . And B/ because if it was a Rangers player he would be cited .
Simple.
He wasn't booked therefore he can be done retrospectively. The referee failed to punish him accordingly. I don't know if you're at the wind up or just a strange fellow.A free kick was given.