Nick Walsh

[silverbear]

There was no need for Clancy to blow the whistle for a foul. The ball was already in the net and he would know that VAR would do a check.
Had he not blown the whistle VAR would not have overruled it as there was no clear and obvious error (well, I’d like to think that would happen).
However as Clancy had blown for a foul and already disallowed the goal the VAR check was now one to see if he, Clancy, had made a clear and obvious error. Now, as it happens I think it was a clear and obvious error and thought the VAR check was unusually quick.
But, make no mistake there was no need for Clancy to blow for a foul. He knew what he was doing. In the same way the linesmen are now instructed not raise their flag for offside unless they are 100% sure, he should not have blown for a foul. He doesn’t do that, I reckon the goal would have stood.

 

[nybear]

that prick Johnston spent the whole game falling on his face or his arse. he dived at the goal and when we should have had a penalty

 

[OlegKuznetsov]

Whatsapp from a Hearts fan “thats the most blatant example of cheating Ive ever seen”

 

[derek145]

Excuse me if he wasn't the VAR today, but if he was, do we have any explanation yet, as to why Clancy hadn't made a clear and obvious error?

Rangers unfortunately aren't good enough to win games against them with cheating filth doing their business.

I mentioned it earlier, the assistant VAR official is a season ticket holder at Parkhead and was described to me as being of the Rhebel variety. His dad apparently ran a Celtic supporters bus to.

 

[Big D]

The decision to disallow Morelos' goal could 100% have been overturned by VAR involvement. The foul is not given until after the ball hits the net, therefore it falls under the goal category and will have been checked. Walsh will have asked Clancy what he saw and could (100% should) have instructed Clancy to go and check the monitor.

Walsh is as culpable as Clancy for me, but it was a legitimate goal (or penalty to us if they say contact isn't allowed).

I don't believe he can 'instruct' Clancy to review it. He can suggest he may want to review it, but if Clancy says he had a clear view of it and in his opinion it was a foul, he's under no obligation to look at it again. If Clancy had awarded the goal, there's no way VAR overturns it. This one is on Clancy for me. I hope part of the 'clarification' Rangers have asked for, is whether VAR suggested Clancy might want to review and he declined.

Sure I read that was Collum's get out when he didn't award Killie a penalty in the semi final too. He'd seen it clearly and no foul, so no need to review. It hasn't taken the usual suspects long to work out a way around VAR.

 

[El Pedro]

Strangely enough Dalziel was one of them.

Never a Rangers man!

Talks a lotty utter shite most of the time.

Stopped listening to that sh!te a couple of years ago, the pundits are in the main clueless and talk drivel. Obviously they're still sipping on the Kool-Aid too

 

[Coplandfrontier]

Correct. Like Davie Edgar said on the post match pod, and I'm paraphrasing, he didn't want the 2 months of threats to his family or having to replace broken windows or watch his back when he goes out. This is what years of scum fan and board intimidation has done.

Every 50/50 only goes one way in defining moments. This has been the mantle for years. Look at the trophies they have won with poor refereeing decisions. Funny how they never get a decision that costs them points or a trophy. We are all told that is just inconsistency and its poor officials! It is poor officials but it’s also biased officials and that’s why we are witnessing a club winning every competition.

 

[Kris1872]

It was the quickest VAR check in history.

 

[blueballs]

The reason it doesn’t get overturned is because Clancy has deemed it a foul and you can’t over turn that kind of decision in VAR

Resisted the temptation to post anything since yesterday.....but need to now

This is just plainly wrong, and indeed is the very core of VARs being. Ref has made a clear error awarding a foul, and the fact Walsh never even suggested he looks over it again is symbolic of either how stupid SFA application of the VAR system which works better elsewhere really is...or something a tad more sinister

But you absolutely can overturn a foul via VAR

 

[TheGoalie11]

I don't believe he can 'instruct' Clancy to review it. He can suggest he may want to review it, but if Clancy says he had a clear view of it and in his opinion it was a foul, he's under no obligation to look at it again. If Clancy had awarded the goal, there's no way VAR overturns it. This one is on Clancy for me. I hope part of the 'clarification' Rangers have asked for, is whether VAR suggested Clancy might want to review and he declined.

Sure I read that was Collum's get out when he didn't award Killie a penalty in the semi final too. He'd seen it clearly and no foul, so no need to review. It hasn't taken the usual suspects long to work out a way around VAR.

I think you are correct on my use of the word instruct, I should have said recommend. I guess my point is that Walsh didn't seem to take the time to review the incident. The quote below is from the English Premier League but I assume our rules are the same and I would like to know if Walsh recommended an overturn and if not, why not? You are correct, it is on Clancy and I have made my feelings on him clear, particularly his treatment of Morelos but I also think the VAR team are culpable because they did not take the time to review it:

When will VAR be used in Premier League matches?​

The VAR is constantly monitoring the match.
VAR is used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity.
But factual decisions such as offsides, and the issue of whether a player is inside or outside the penalty area, are not subject to the "clear and obvious" test.
If the VAR sees an error has been made in such a situation they will intervene, regardless of how marginal the decision is.
There is a high bar for the VARs to intervene on subjective decisions, to maintain the pace and intensity of matches.

How does it work?​

For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.
At the next stoppage of the match, the referee will hold up the restart of play until a decision has been reached.

The referee explains their decision to the VAR, and what they have seen from the pitch.

The VAR reviews the broadcast footage, using as many angles as possible. Real-time replays will be used initially to check for intensity. Slow-motion replays will be used to identify the point of contact.
If the VAR’s view does not agree with what the referee believes they have seen then they can recommend an overturn.

 

[temperance]

Clancy and Walsh, a combination hand picked by the SFA.

 

[Bucky bear]

Cheat !
Cheat !
Cheat !
Cheat !
Cheat !
Cheat !
Every ref, every decision
It’s worked before……

 

[tazzabear]

Excuse me if he wasn't the VAR today, but if he was, do we have any explanation yet, as to why Clancy hadn't made a clear and obvious error?

Rangers unfortunately aren't good enough to win games against them with cheating filth doing their business.

Clancy can reject the VAR official’s advice, if any were forthcoming.
The referee is the final arbiter.

 

[Big D]

I think you are correct on my use of the word instruct, I should have said recommend. I guess my point is that Walsh didn't seem to take the time to review the incident. The quote below is from the English Premier League but I assume our rules are the same and I would like to know if Walsh recommended an overturn and if not, why not? You are correct, it is on Clancy and I have made my feelings on him clear, particularly his treatment of Morelos but I also think the VAR team are culpable because they did not take the time to review it:

When will VAR be used in Premier League matches?​

The VAR is constantly monitoring the match.
VAR is used only for "clear and obvious errors" or "serious missed incidents" in four match-changing situations: goals; penalty decisions; direct red-card incidents; and mistaken identity.
But factual decisions such as offsides, and the issue of whether a player is inside or outside the penalty area, are not subject to the "clear and obvious" test.
If the VAR sees an error has been made in such a situation they will intervene, regardless of how marginal the decision is.
There is a high bar for the VARs to intervene on subjective decisions, to maintain the pace and intensity of matches.

How does it work?​

For subjective decisions, either the referee informs the VAR that a decision should be reviewed or the VAR identifies a “clear and obvious error” in one of the four match-changing situations and communicates this to the referee.
At the next stoppage of the match, the referee will hold up the restart of play until a decision has been reached.

The referee explains their decision to the VAR, and what they have seen from the pitch.

The VAR reviews the broadcast footage, using as many angles as possible. Real-time replays will be used initially to check for intensity. Slow-motion replays will be used to identify the point of contact.
If the VAR’s view does not agree with what the referee believes they have seen then they can recommend an overturn.

I think though that if Walsh asks Clancy if he saw it clearly and Clancy says he did and (chose!) to see it as a foul, that's the end of it, even if Walsh disagrees. The ultimate decision lies with Clancy. There will be cases where the mistake is just so blatant the VAR official can probably be quite insistent, but yesterday, when both players had their hands on each other, if Clancy takes the opportunity to award a foul against Morelos - and he couldn't fukn wait - I'm not sure there's much VAR can do. As I say, I hope Rangers ask what the conversation was between Walsh and Clancy. I've a feeling Clancy just doubled down on his decision and dismissed any suggestion of a VAR review.

 

[hms]

that prick Johnston spent the whole game falling on his face or his arse. he dived at the goal and when we should have had a penalty

Maybe that’s why the frog faced lady's front bottom is so ugly

 

[TheGoalie11]

I think though that if Walsh asks Clancy if he saw it clearly and Clancy says he did and (chose!) to see it as a foul, that's the end of it, even if Walsh disagrees. The ultimate decision lies with Clancy. There will be cases where the mistake is just so blatant the VAR official can probably be quite insistent, but yesterday, when both players had their hands on each other, if Clancy takes the opportunity to award a foul against Morelos - and he couldn't fukn wait - I'm not sure there's much VAR can do. As I say, I hope Rangers ask what the conversation was between Walsh and Clancy. I've a feeling Clancy just doubled down on his decision and dismissed any suggestion of a VAR review.

Possibly but it all happened too quick for me. It meets the criteria for a VAR review in that it was a goal and for me it is a clear and obvious error so Walsh should ask him to delay the restart while he looks before recommending a review. You are right that we should ask what the conversation between them was.

 

[the_littlest_hobo]

Need to remember, VAR cannot overturn the on field referees decision except for offside and handball

 

[Gibraltar Loyal]

Probably right.

We'll go from a cheat to a coward.

Sounds like a Frank Sinatra song

 

[tazzabear]

Three of them on Clyde 1 thought it was a foul on Johnston!

If you take it back then technically he had a hold of Morelos' shirt, therefore a penalty should've been awarded.

Of course they did.
“I’m surprised” said not a soul.

 

[tazzabear]

I wonder if Walsh highlighted either of the incidents where Treacherous Taylor and both had both hands wrapped round Ryan Jack.
Or if he highlighted the Scum defender who stretched Morelos’s jersey when de did get his head on the ball.
Was even highlighted on Sportscene!

 

[Murkle]

Walsh could have barely looked at the Morelos goal play was pretty much started straight away.

 

[Deco1978]

Clancy Bhoy was too quick to blow his whistle.

 

[BlueSevenTwo]

The decision to disallow Morelos' goal could 100% have been overturned by VAR involvement. The foul is not given until after the ball hits the net, therefore it falls under the goal category and will have been checked. Walsh will have asked Clancy what he saw and could (100% should) have instructed Clancy to go and check the monitor.

Walsh is as culpable as Clancy for me, but it was a legitimate goal (or penalty to us if they say contact isn't allowed).

Funnily enough Walsh and Clancy have a common interest.

 

[Disco Down]

Not what I said at all. It didn’t get overturned because he gave a foul first as in VAR isn’t going to overturn his decision.

Don’t be alarmed, I know the goal is a stonewaller

Definitely why Clancy gave a foul instead of a goal and then checking for any fouls

 

[Giffnock bear]

The reason it doesn’t get overturned is because Clancy has deemed it a foul and you can’t over turn that kind of decision in VAR

Morelos was celebrating the goal before the whistle blew so VAR should have been checked.

 

[Div1872]

The scum have intimidated likes of Walsh but Clancy is just a cheating scumbag who supports Bheast FC and gifted them a lifeline when they needed it

Walsh spent very little time reviewing the VAR check as Johnston fouled Alfie first

Utter disgrace the way the Bheasts have the country scared of their scummy fans

 

[TheGreatDane]

Its clear the SFA have made a mess of the training for VAR. Decisions all season have taken far too long and now it seems they are just making it up as they go, there is no consistency at all.

It’s nothing to do with training. They receive training from the company who supply the equipment, not the SFA.

This is referees deliberately abusing the system to either re-referee the game, thereby taking the heat off them, or in Clancy’s case, abusing the system to benefit the team he supports.

 

[TheGreatDane]

There was no need for Clancy to blow the whistle for a foul. The ball was already in the net and he would know that VAR would do a check.
Had he not blown the whistle VAR would not have overruled it as there was no clear and obvious error (well, I’d like to think that would happen).
However as Clancy had blown for a foul and already disallowed the goal the VAR check was now one to see if he, Clancy, had made a clear and obvious error. Now, as it happens I think it was a clear and obvious error and thought the VAR check was unusually quick.
But, make no mistake there was no need for Clancy to blow for a foul. He knew what he was doing. In the same way the linesmen are now instructed not raise their flag for offside unless they are 100% sure, he should not have blown for a foul. He doesn’t do that, I reckon the goal would have stood.

This is bang on. The referees are playing the system. Either to take the pressure off themselves, or to cheat the system

 

[Only God Forgives]

Three of them on Clyde 1 thought it was a foul on Johnston!

If you take it back then technically he had a hold of Morelos' shirt, therefore a penalty should've been awarded.

They must've been listening to the game on the radio rather than watching it. Pathetic pundits

 

[BSPECIAL]

There was no need for Clancy to blow the whistle for a foul. The ball was already in the net and he would know that VAR would do a check.
Had he not blown the whistle VAR would not have overruled it as there was no clear and obvious error (well, I’d like to think that would happen).
However as Clancy had blown for a foul and already disallowed the goal the VAR check was now one to see if he, Clancy, had made a clear and obvious error. Now, as it happens I think it was a clear and obvious error and thought the VAR check was unusually quick.
But, make no mistake there was no need for Clancy to blow for a foul. He knew what he was doing. In the same way the linesmen are now instructed not raise their flag for offside unless they are 100% sure, he should not have blown for a foul. He doesn’t do that, I reckon the goal would have stood.

Walsh or collum will get the semi final with Clancy VAR fourth official. That's the way SFA works.

 

[TheGoalie11]

Funnily enough Walsh and Clancy have a common interest.

100% - both grew up as part of the Celtic cult, until yesterday though I had always found Walsh to be pretty fair.

Clancy is an out and out cheat in our games, particularly when refereeing Morelos