He wouldn't miss more than the Ayr game.There's no doubt the card was wrong but if we appeal and lose then he'd maybe miss a more difficult game than Ayr at home
Is it worth the gamble to make the point is the question the club needs to address
The angles the referee was given on the monitor made it look much worse than it was. On one of them it looks like contact was down his shin.
He tries to nick the ball away and when his foot starts to give way he plants his foot so studs aren't showing.
A really shite decision that came as no surprise from that idiot.
Would the appeal process result in different views of the incident being reviewed then?
I was so annoyed by this. The ref never saw the angle we all did where it was clear he slipped!The angles the referee was given on the monitor made it look much worse than it was. On one of them it looks like contact was down his shin.
He tries to nick the ball away and when his foot starts to give way he plants his foot so studs aren't showing.
A really shite decision that came as no surprise from that idiot.
The VAR told him to look again, that immediately casts doubt as they obviously think he's made a mistake.Zero chance of a successful appeal given the ref reviewed it and stuck by his decision.
To overturn that would be to cast doubt over the referees competence.
Zero chance of a successful appeal given the ref reviewed it and stuck by his decision.
To overturn that would be to cast doubt over the referees competence.
Ah ha, I see what you did there ;-)There's an unnecessary letter 'm' in that quote, and it's not in remember.
What you saw were Sky's cameras was it not. Sly don't have access to VAR cameras which are completely different. Unless you were actually looking at the same monitor the ref was. Remember we have cheap VAR with hardly any cameras cause the SFA couldn't afford it and forced the clubs to pay for it.I honestly don't know, but I was watching in the house and he was shown two angles (as far as I can see). One showing the speed he came in at, which didn't look great, and the other was an angle from the near touchline which made it look like his studs were at ankle height at impact. They weren't. There is a much better angle which shows that the moment Sterling realises he's not getting the ball he pulls out of the tackle. His standing foot gives way which makes it look bad in real time.
I suspect an appeal would be won, especially if Lawell's chimps think it'll calm us down after the nonsense at the Piggery.
I thought it actually looked worse in slow motionYou can see the cheating ref ask for the final look at the VAR to be on full speed thus making it look worse and justifying his decision
Agreed.It was a poor decision and even worse that the ref doubled down and stood by it - purely in the confidence the SFA will have his back regardless of how wrong it is. We should be appealing it and the board need to be making more noise, regardless of whether we think the SFA care or not. The board's job is to make them care.
Is this down to sky? Do they offer the replay angles? Wouldn’t surprise me if they are involved somewhere. They also have agendaI was so annoyed by this. The ref never saw the angle we all did where it was clear he slipped!
Funny how subjective these things are, I thought in real time with the 1 angle I’ve seen it looked bad, then on the replay I seen nothing but Sterling slipping and clipping his toe.I thought it actually looked worse in slow motion
In general I don't think there's anything wrong with a ref being told to go to the monitor but deciding to stick with his original decision. After all he is still the main official and final decision should be his.I do t think we would win an appeal. Not based on an actual investigation of the incident, but the ref gave a red, was advised by VAR to review the incident then he stuck by his decision. How many refs go to the monitor and stick by the decision? So we have a ref who has reviewed his own decision at the time via VAR and still sent him off! The system is a joke, they would probably stand by the ref as he reviewed it at the time! Couldn’t wait to change the perfectly good goal we scored against them earlier in the season the cheating prick!
Rangers*
The footage during the review on sky looked much quicker than it was during play almost as if the footage had been speeded up didn’t look natural to meYou can see the cheating ref ask for the final look at the VAR to be on full speed thus making it look worse and justifying his decision
His original decision in real time was 25/30 yards away with a Rangers player in his line of sight.You can see the cheating ref ask for the final look at the VAR to be on full speed thus making it look worse and justifying his decision