it was the 4th official who told the ref to send Jack off

weebudsbud said:
No but you can and have.

You made up a story (even after replay) claiming RJ 'raked' big clubfoot to back up your fellow ref`. You sir are a liar and if you are capable, then so are you chums. No more than a cheat.

I`ve tried to give you the benefit in the past but nah, am out with your opinions now.
Click to expand...
Have you read what I have said.
My seat is in the Club deck Broomloan side of the half way line.
It looked like that from my angle.
That other angle shows differently.

I have said Broadfoot should be done.
 
kaznkev said:
I doubt they will admit to being wrong because there has been a lot said about how bad the refs are since Sunday and to make a big mistake the very next game will almost prove that Pedro was right to say the refereeing standards are very poor and getting worse.

From the minute the ref gave the penalty he looked like he was panicking.
The Kilmarnock players put pressure on him and he was flapping. He made a big show of putting his decisions on the linesman (for the penalty) and the 4th official (for the red card).

I know you are a ref and will take his side but in all the years I’ve watched football I’ve never seen a display like the last 5 mins of last nights game.
Click to expand...
And you can add in the abysmal refereeing in the Edimbra derby on Tuesday.
 
ontheline said:
What did he wrong?
It was the fourth official.
Click to expand...

He did the following things wrong

-allowed himself to be influenced by the Kilmarnock players to consult the linesman about the pen. He had given the pen and the lineman didn’t disagree. He should have stood firm. If he did, then the incident wouldn’t have happened
- he should have also told the fourth official to hold the conversation till after the game. If jack had head butted/kicked him and he missed it, he could have mentioned it in his match report and jack could have been done retrospectively. He didn’t. Again he allowed himself to be influenced by someone else to the detriment of the two correct decisions he made.

With these points in mind, I don’t mark him as cheat. I mark him clearly as a person who doesn’t have the strength of character to referee even a game of fives.
 
weebudsbud said:
No but you can and have.

You made up a story (even after replay) claiming RJ 'raked' big clubfoot to back up your fellow ref`. You sir are a liar and if you are capable, then so are you chums. No more than a cheat.

I`ve tried to give you the benefit in the past but nah, am out with your opinions now.
Click to expand...

When you have the benefit of watching the replay but still continue to lie it doesn't come down to incompetence.

When you point blank refuse to say what you see you just can't be trusted to give an honest opinion.
 
noucamp72 said:
OTL watched a replay of Morelos being clearly fouled by a lunging tackle in the St Johnstone game but still said the St Johnstone player played the ball.

OTL continued to lie in the face of clear cut video evidence.

OTL then fecked off from the thread after making a kunt of himself once again.
Click to expand...

The ignore function is bliss.
 
Papasmurf said:
He did the following things wrong

-allowed himself to be influenced by the Kilmarnock players to consult the linesman about the pen. He had given the pen and the lineman didn’t disagree. He should have stood firm. If he did, then the incident wouldn’t have happened
- he should have also told the fourth official to hold the conversation till after the game. If jack had head butted/kicked him and he missed it, he could have mentioned it in his match report and jack could have been done retrospectively. He didn’t. Again he allowed himself to be influenced by someone else to the detriment of the two correct decisions he made.

With these points in mind, I don’t mark him as cheat. I mark him clearly as a person who doesn’t have the strength of character to referee even a game of fives.
Click to expand...
Beaton consulted with both linesman and fourth official over penalty incident with the scum. Nothing happened.
He has to deal with the matter before he restarts the game, not afterwards.
 
gersmad said:
Broadfoot stood on his foot 3 times, it was on the third that Jack pushed him, Rangers TV showed the incident.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you have quoted my post by mistake?? I'm not arguing with what you have said.
 
Its-Sebo said:
OTL he didn't put his studs into his leg, you can tell that from this angle: https://twitter.com/talkingbaws/status/923294791319789568

What's the score with big çunt Broadfoot, surely stamping someones foot multiple times and faking head injury gets some retrospective action?
Click to expand...

First time I've seen it from this angle, a much better view of the incident. Broadfoot is just pathetic, blatant cheating, and as an ex-player?! But.... echoing others on here, Jack needs to get a bit smarter and walk away from these situations.
 
ontheline said:
Beaton consulted with both linesman and fourth official over penalty incident with the scum. Nothing happened.
He has to deal with the matter before he restarts the game, not afterwards.
Click to expand...
I agree. But dealing with it doesn’t involve being weak when the players are shouting at him.

He’d made the call, the lino agreed. That should have been the end of it. Instead he bowed to pressure and the rest was a result of that.

In terms of the fourth official. The response should have been clear. I saw the incident. I’ve cautioned both players and I believe I’ve made the right call. Instead he bowed to pressure and messed up.

If he had the courage of conviction that any ref should have, we would have ended up where we should be. Not where we are

Then there is the issue of the 4th officials involvement.
 
ontheline said:
So a caution for each was the correct decision?
Click to expand...

Personally, I thought Broadfoot's play-acting was reprehensible - but the award of a yellow card to each was more appropriate than what eventually transpired.

I note you haven't argued the point that the referee could, and should, have had the courage of his convictions and stuck to the original decision by rejecting the 4th official's 'advice'. Nor have you contested that he was walking towards the incident and saw what transpired. Do you consider that he didn't actually see the incident (which begs the question why issue the yellows)?
 
ontheline said:
50,000 fans in the stadium rose to their feet and roared in the belief there was contact.
Dougall reacted in the same way as 50,000 others.
No way is that cheating.


It is a lot harder when there is an act of deception.
Click to expand...

Dougall was closer than every one of the 50,000 and he is paid to get it right. He got it wrong and acted on something that didn't happen.

I accept it is harder when there is an act of deception, but it would appear that refs now have a policy of randomly sending off the closest Rangers player, every time someone goes down holding their face.

If you are on the receiving end of a headbutt, there is likely to be blood, bruising or at least redness, immediately. A simple look at the player alleging that he has been headbutted might assist on making that decision.

On the other hand, a Rangers player with blood pouring from a broken nose, would appear to be deemed as little or no contact and certainly not dangerous.

All I ask is for a level playing field.
 
bigduds58 said:
Jeff winter who was at the game....


.As long as play hasn’t restarted a Ref can change any decision . What happened tonight though has me baffled .
Click to expand...

I'll take his word for it, he knows the laws of the the game and that at least explains the thing I didn't understand which was how someone could be clearly booked, and then subsequently red carded for what seemed to be the same offence.

I wonder how you're meant to un-book, or send someone back on when they've been incorrectly sanctioned and quickly proven to be innocent.
 
Papasmurf said:
Now, I need to say that I’ve seen it once, from the broomloan. And only really going on comments here. But, by all accounts, jack pushed him AND kicked him.

Not saying it’s right(what the ref and his pal did), far from it. But that will be their excuse. Yellow for the push. Red for the kick.

Shambles.
Click to expand...
Jack pulled his foot away after Broadfoot stamped on it three times Jack pushed him away and Broadfoot feigned injury there was no kick only Jack pulling his foot away.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Personally, I thought Broadfoot's play-acting was reprehensible - but the award of a yellow card to each was more appropriate than what eventually transpired.

I note you haven't argued the point that the referee could, and should, have had the courage of his convictions and stuck to the original decision by rejecting the 4th official's 'advice'. Nor have you contested that he was walking towards the incident and saw what transpired. Do you consider that he didn't actually see the incident (which begs the question why issue the yellows)?
Click to expand...
#91
 
Refs don’t have the balls to make their own decisions or come out and explain them. They’ve been roasted by Celtic over the years, accused of cheating, supporting us, followed by private detectives and intimidated to the point of a strike. They now apologise to them directly when they make a mistake. Has Pedro ever had that courtesy this season, or Warburton before him?

Our referees are now a laughing stock, neutered, bitch slapped and owned by Celtic and backed up by questionable Compliance Officers.

We need a bastard in charge now or a Magnificent Bastard as spokesman.
 
ontheline said:
#91
Click to expand...

That’s a cop-out. Firstly, the advice wasn’t ‘good’ it was poor. Secondly, accepting ‘poor’ advice because it ‘covers your arse’ smacks of someone who doesn’t have the courage of their own convictions. He’s either very, very weak and lacking confidence in his own ability - or we have a culture amongst the referees whereby ‘covering your arse’ is seen to be more important than getting the decision correct. Neither option is very palatable.

They are both very lucky that their clusterf*ck will be lost in the swamps of today’s much more important news regarding Caixinha.
 
The ref sees the incident from less than 10 yards away and blows his whistle a few times. He then runs over as Jack pulls his foot up after being stood on and pushes Broadfoot who then falls as if he has been shot.
Both players are rightly booked. The ref has seen everything and done his job.
Why the feck he then listens to the 4th official who is 40 yards from the incident and changes his mind to give a red is baffling.
The refereeing of our games,don’t watch others so can’t comment on their games, is beyond a joke. Nearly every game so far this season has seen shocking officiating.
 
Broadfoot is an utter disgrace, but Ryan Jack needs to get smarter and not put himself in these positions.
As for the officials; they are a pack of cellic-owned cheats in Scotland and we are being blatantly cheated wek in week out.
 
imager said:
Broadfoot walked up to jack and stood on his left foot, he done the same again and then a third time he stood on his right foot, jack pulled his foot away and gave him a little push. Broadfoot then crashed to the ground holding his face.
Click to expand...
These are the facts.
 
The whole carry on with match officials pushing each other out the way to be at the very front of the battle against Rangers FC, and ofcourse to score points with tim press, has to be the most incredible thing ive seen in sport. It used to be mostly big tv games but now its pretty much every single game we play.

And this is at a time when the teams pretty poor and Celtic have a strong side can you imagine the kind of crazy shit they will get up to as soon as we are the stronger side ? They really are mental.
 
Would have liked Jack to walk away but can't be easy. Football is full of men with egos and it's hard to leave the ego in the house so I'm not sure I could have walked away though in my professional capacity
 
HereLiesDavidStHubbins said:
I'll take his word for it, he knows the laws of the the game and that at least explains the thing I didn't understand which was how someone could be clearly booked, and then subsequently red carded for what seemed to be the same offence.

I wonder how you're meant to un-book, or send someone back on when they've been incorrectly sanctioned and quickly proven to be innocent.
Click to expand...

Happened with Mo Johnston at Hampden. Ref sent Celtic player off (Cannae mind his name) and changed his mind and sent Mo off.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
That’s a cop-out. Firstly, the advice wasn’t ‘good’ it was poor. Secondly, accepting ‘poor’ advice because it ‘covers your arse’ smacks of someone who doesn’t have the courage of their own convictions. He’s either very, very weak and lacking confidence in his own ability - or we have a culture amongst the referees whereby ‘covering your arse’ is seen to be more important than getting the decision correct. Neither option is very palatable.

They are both very lucky that their clusterf*ck will be lost in the swamps of today’s much more important news regarding Caixinha.
Click to expand...
You have already accused me of one thing that wasn't true.
You are just looking for an arguement.

You missed it and now want to pick an arguement of something someone else missed.
 
johnny1872 said:
The ref sees the incident from less than 10 yards away and blows his whistle a few times. He then runs over as Jack pulls his foot up after being stood on and pushes Broadfoot who then falls as if he has been shot.
Both players are rightly booked. The ref has seen everything and done his job.
Why the feck he then listens to the 4th official who is 40 yards from the incident and changes his mind to give a red is baffling.
The refereeing of our games,don’t watch others so can’t comment on their games, is beyond a joke. Nearly every game so far this season has seen shocking officiating.
Click to expand...
It's a three-tiered attack now - referee and linesmen, 4th official and CCO ( Celtic Compliance Officer,) all aided and abetted by the media.

One or the other gets us every time and has done for years.

Just because we're now paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get us.
 
The match officials are terrified of making a mistake that could in some way be interpreted as being beneficial to Rangers. The result is they continually punish Rangers players even when they are not sure what has happened.

Referees are intimidated by the power Celtic minded individuals have within the SFA.
 
Disco Deejay said:
Looking at the twitter video, the ref is on the scene within 2 seconds at most, from the left side.

This would suggest that he was 5-10 yards away, with a clear side-on view of what happened and he correctly deemed it a yellow card.

How then, can the ref possibly believe that the 4th Official has seen the incident better than him, from 50 yards away, when his view of Jack is partly obscured by Broadfoot?

If he saw the same video that is on twitter, then it isn't a red card. Broadfoot is repeatedly trying to stand on Jack's feet. Jack pulls his feet away, pushes Broadfoot and moves towards him. Broadfoot then takes a dive, holding his face. On the basis of that video, there is no headbutt and no kick. It is a yellow card for the push, no more.

The BBC Live Text does not mention Jack being booked earlier in the game, so that rules out the possibility of the ref forgetting that he had booked Jack already.... unless they missed it.

Once again, it looks like an Official has wrongly acted upon the reaction of an opposition player, rather than the actions of a Rangers player, which is becoming a common occurrence.
Click to expand...
What I don't get is how, when the referee has already issued his sanction on Jack, the fourth official can then override that decision and instruct him to upgrade it to an ordering off? I know we've got more important things to discuss after today's news, but refereeing in Scotland is utterly rank and needs addressing.
 
The whole thing is utterly bewildering.

Said it earlier in the thread and that was before today’s revelations but the Club must take action on the some of these abysmal decisions.

This type of madness is happening almost in every game this season ffs
 
RS_Jam said:
The whole thing is utterly bewildering.

Said it earlier in the thread and that was before today’s revelations but the Club must take action on the some of these abysmal decisions.

This type of madness is happening almost in every game this season ffs
Click to expand...
ive a shit memory but the hearts game was the only one i can remember passing by incident free..
 
ontheline said:
You have already accused me of one thing that wasn't true.
You are just looking for an arguement.

You missed it and now want to pick an arguement of something someone else missed.
Click to expand...

I’m lost now - and, no, I’m not looking to pick an argument. Plenty on here take that line with you but I’m not one of them. Are you sure you’re not confusing me with someone else? Genuine question because I don’t know what you’re on about.

For clarity, I think the refereee got it right only to be screwed over by the 4th official who, it would seem, our referees are afraid to stand up to. Have I got that wrong?
 
Incompetent refreeing once again which seems to go unpunished but the SFA are quick to judge players for any perceived wrong doings.......albeit in a selective manner.
 
i have watched a few different angles now and that talkinbaws one from the govan stand is by far the most conclusive. i used to be a fan of broadfoot. not the most talented but he always tried his best but he is just a cheating c u n t egg faced pr ic k.

i dont see how the ref from 5 yards away got a worse view than the 4th official who was 50 yards away. on the main highlights just before he shows the red card the ref points to his ear and to the dug out area clearly to say who it was that told him it was red.

on various other threads folk are saying we are getting bullied and must stand up for ourselves. well, last night jack did just that and look what happened. it was predictable, it was forecasted by many. we ARE being referreed differently from other teams. we are not being allowed to stand up for ourselves, we are getting booked or sent off for far less than any opposition. examples have abounded all season, last night the tackle from the back on dorrans and only a free kick, at the weekend morelos gets booked after a soft couple of fouls.
 
Rangerista said:
What I don't get is how, when the referee has already issued his sanction on Jack, the fourth official can then override that decision and instruct him to upgrade it to an ordering off? I know we've got more important things to discuss after today's news, but refereeing in Scotland is utterly rank and needs addressing.
Click to expand...

The 4th Official can't override the ref's decision. He can draw his attention to something that the ref may have missed and offer his opinion, but the ref is in control and it is entirely his decision whether to act on the 4th Officials advice, or basically tell him ..... GTF, I'm in charge.

No doubt we will never be told, but it would be very interesting to hear what the 4th Official told the ref he saw last night and how the ref accepted that the 4th Official had a better view of Jack's actions than he did, from 40 yards further away and through Broadfoot's body.
 
Ubik said:
ive a shit memory but the hearts game was the only one i can remember passing by incident free..
Click to expand...

Exactly, having to rack your brain to try and remember the games there wasn’t some ridiculous and totally unexplainable decisions!
 
tottie beck said:
If he did, then there’s no way he did it without consulting a TV replay (which I believe would be illegal) There’s no way he had a better view than the referee who was a matter of feet away from the incident
Click to expand...


Ive said this since it happened. Why the long delay? They are meant to be all mic'ed up.

The ref was the closest of all the officials, so why was someone 40 yds over ruling him?
 
Valley Bluenose said:
I note you haven't argued
Click to expand...

Valley Bluenose said:
I’m lost now - and, no, I’m not looking to pick an argument. Plenty on here take that line with you but I’m not one of them. Are you sure you’re not confusing me with someone else? Genuine question because I don’t know what you’re on about.

For clarity, I think the refereee got it right only to be screwed over by the 4th official who, it would seem, our referees are afraid to stand up to. Have I got that wrong?
Click to expand...

You started off saying the referee got it wrong. Post #135
I asked you what he got wrong. You followed it up with a list.
You are now saying the referee got it right.
You wanted me to argue with you.
You are now saying, you are not looking for an arguement.

I am not doing this anymore.
 
ontheline said:
Have you read what I have said.
My seat is in the Club deck Broomloan side of the half way line.
It looked like that from my angle.
That other angle shows differently.

I have said Broadfoot should be done.
Click to expand...

The ref had the best view. The 4th officials view would have been worse than yours, Jack's card should be overturned.
 
ontheline said:
You started off saying the referee got it wrong. Post #135
I asked you what he got wrong. You followed it up with a list.
You are now saying the referee got it right.
You wanted me to argue with you.
You are now saying, you are not looking for an arguement.

I am not doing this anymore.
Click to expand...

Running away then, I see. What the referee got wrong - as you well know because you are capable of reading my posts in their entirety rather than cherry-picking phrases - was that he failed to have the courage of his convictions and stick to the decision HE made, namely the two yellow cards. He got the decision right, in my view, but having wilted under ‘advice’ from the 4th official went on to make an absolute balls-up of it all. Of course, you understand only too well that that is the line I’m taking. The argumentative one here is you.

Do you think the ultimate decisions reached were correct? Maybe if you just answered the question instead of ducking and diving (sic!) we would get somewhere.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Running away then, I see. What the referee got wrong - as you well know because you are capable of reading my posts in their entirety rather than cherry-picking phrases - was that he failed to have the courage of his convictions and stick to the decision HE made, namely the two yellow cards. He got the decision right, in my view, but having wilted under ‘advice’ from the 4th official went on to make an absolute balls-up of it all. Of course, you understand only too well that that is the line I’m taking. The argumentative one here is you.

Do you think the ultimate decisions reached were correct? Maybe if you just answered the question instead of ducking and diving (sic!) we would get somewhere.
Click to expand...
How about you read what I have said in the thread, instead of cherry picking?
Twice you missed it.
 
ontheline said:
How about you read what I have said in the thread, instead of cherry picking?
Twice you missed it.
Click to expand...

OK - done as requested.:rolleyes:

Stripping out all the ancillary stuff about players in general 'conning' referees and, in this instance, Broadfoot being guilty of that, this is what I found.

You suggest there was a kick/stamp by Jack and also say referee can reject 4th officials advice (post #71).

You say Jack was sent off for using his studs (post #78).

You say referees (and 4th officials?) don't have the benefit of replays (post #87)

You say YOU would have taken the 4th officials advice in order to 'cover your arse' (post #91).

You backtrack - and say Jack may not have touched Broadfoot (post #102).

You ask if 2 cautions was the correct decision (post #149).

I subsequently agreed it was and the principal error made by the referee was in bowing to the 4th officials advice instead of sticking to his guns regarding his earlier decision of 2 yellows. That is why I criticised the referee.

So, I come back to my question - do you think the ultimate decisions reached were correct? I honestly am not trying to trip you up or call you out here or even pick argument for the sake of it, I am genuinely interested in whether you think the ultimate outcome was the correct one. A simple 'yes' or 'no' would be good.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top