Possibly the worst example of cheating our game has ever seen on Saturday - Where’s the condemnation?

GreigC said:
Of course in Robertson's eyes it's not debatable. That's why he's given it

Its not him thats given himself an option on when to award it, its IFAB and the laws of the game

I think he makes the conscious decision to delay the whistle when he sees the ball drop to Aberdeen, in the box, at 3-2 in a cup semi final. I think that is good refereeing. I actually think it is so far removed from him cheating to help Celtic...

I think he was giving the foul regardless of the outcome of the play - by holding his whistle, he allowed the opportunity for VAR to be able to intervene in the event he was wrong
Click to expand...

Good refereeing? I see we have a tag team here.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
It was never a foul on plug .

For you to say it was a good bit of refereeing by Robertson is not only bonkers, it is vomit inducing.
Click to expand...

Vomit inducing? Hyperbole, no?

I've clearly stated whether that's a foul or not is debatable. My comments are based on the VAR procedure followed being good refereeing.
 
Every big game they get a helping hand at a major decision. Not the first time mythical fouls have been manufactured to get them out of jail.
 
Bigbluebear said:
Vomit inducing? Hyperbole, no?

I've clearly stated whether that's a foul or not is debatable. My comments are based on the VAR procedure followed being good refereeing.
Click to expand...

It was never a foul on plug. Never in a month of Sundays. End of.

So rather than it being good refereeing, it was downright cheating and VAR backs up the cheating.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
It was never a foul on plug .

For you to say it was a good bit of refereeing by Robertson is not only bonkers, it is vomit inducing.
Click to expand...
wee bud's pit boots said:
Good refereeing? I see we have a tag team here.
Click to expand...
But it is

Whether its a foul or not, is a different conversation. One that has been backed up by VAR for what its worth.

There are plenty out there who do think it was a foul on Johnstone.

Me? I think it's soft... seen them given, seen them not. Can I particularly argue the point either way... frankly, not overly

To allow the situation to play out in a way that allows the technology to be used to correct a potential mistake with a strong attacking chance instead of immediately blowing is good refereeing - and almost likely to be expected at the top level.

The idea that a soft foul, and an appropriate delay of the whistle is possibly the "worst example of cheating our game has ever seen" is frankly the most bonkers aspect of this thread...
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
It was never a foul on plug. Never in a month of Sundays. End of.

So rather than it being good refereeing, it was downright cheating and VAR backs up the cheating.
Click to expand...

You have a real failure to differentiate here between the debate about the use of VAR in this situation, and whether it was a foul.

Two different topics, with a different opinion being able to be held on both.
 
GreigC said:
But it’s not anywhere on the park

Its in the penalty box, with a decent attacking opportunity, specifically catered for in the laws of the game

It’s happened at Ibrox on numerous occasions, sometimes the ball then falls to the keeper or for a goal kick and the referee just indicates play on

Sometimes, it goes for a corner, and instead he gives a free kick - that thread has appeared on here on a few occasions as “baffling refereeing to not give us a corner”

I’m saying, he sees a foul, it falls to an Aberdeen player in the box so he delays the whistle… the passage of play plays out, the result is a penalty. So he returns to the delayed whistle

Same as a delayed offside flag. Exactly the same. Folk need to get their heads round VAR and the differences it provides to the games in obvious attacking situations
Click to expand...
At least delaying the offside flag is a simple rule that usually ends up with the correct decision.

In this situation, there's no point in letting play develop because a soft foul to the defender would never be called a clear and obvious error anyway. Defenders already get so many nonsense fouls that we're desensitised to them. Aberdeen score, referee would blow for FK to Celtic, on field decision would almost always stand.

Delaying creates the extra problem that, if instead of winning a penalty, Aberdeen retain the ball around the penalty box for another 30 or 40 seconds before winning a corner, the referee will just let them take the corner. If the referee thinks a foul was committed on a Celtic defender then why should Aberdeen retain an advantage?

They have tied themselves in knots trying to fix all aspects of the game, and it's ended up a confused muddle that even referees don't seem to understand.
 
Bigbluebear said:
You have a real failure to differentiate here between the debate about the use of VAR in this situation, and whether it was a foul.

Two different topics, with a different opinion being able to be held on both.
Click to expand...
Follow Follow... and a lack of understanding of the use of VAR...

Well I never
 
GreigC said:
But it is

Whether its a foul or not, is a different conversation. One that has been backed up by VAR for what its worth.

There are plenty out there who do think it was a foul on Johnstone.

Me? I think it's soft... seen them given, seen them not. Can I particularly argue the point either way... frankly, not overly

To allow the situation to play out in a way that allows the technology to be used to correct a potential mistake with a strong attacking chance instead of immediately blowing is good refereeing - and almost likely to be expected at the top level.

The idea that a soft foul, and an appropriate delay of the whistle is possibly the "worst example of cheating our game has ever seen" is frankly the most bonkers aspect of this thread...
Click to expand...



There are plenty out there who do think it was a foul on Johnstone.

Aye, you, bigbluebear and every yahoo.
 
Johnny Yen said:
See all the tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy nuts.

You do realise that the exact same happens in reverse on the filth message boards and social media pages, they are 100% convinced the refs are out to get them and VAR is completely in favour of helping one team (Rangers), they will do everything in their power to try and stop Celtic and do everything to help Rangers.

It's preposterous of course.
Click to expand...
The fallacy of false equivalence.

They are the most indoctrinated people this side of the Middle East.
 
juan guy said:
At least delaying the offside flag is a simple rule that usually ends up with the correct decision.

In this situation, there's no point in letting play develop because a soft foul to the defender would never be called a clear and obvious error anyway. Defenders already get so many nonsense fouls that we're desensitised to them. Aberdeen score, referee would blow for FK to Celtic, on field decision would almost always stand.

Delaying creates the extra problem that, if instead of winning a penalty, Aberdeen retain the ball around the penalty box for another 30 or 40 seconds before winning a corner, the referee will just let them take the corner. If the referee thinks a foul was committed on a Celtic defender then why should Aberdeen retain an advantage?

They have tied themselves in knots trying to fix all aspects of the game, and it's ended up a confused muddle that even referees don't seem to understand.
Click to expand...
I don't think you can say that, because there will almost certainly be examples out there of this exact thing happening, and the on field decision being overturned. Its why it exists.

I don't think there's any prospect of it being retained for that length of time without the foul being given. He was always giving it, and I suspect would have done so at what ever point the APP broke down... ie, at the point where VAR would no longer be looking at it to correct it

Delaying the offside flag, is overused, often poorly. Delaying the whistle is rarely used, often well
 
I think he was giving the foul regardless of the outcome of the play - by holding his whistle, he allowed the opportunity for VAR to be able to intervene in the event he was wrong

If it's not debatable then why not give it?

This idea of allowing referees to backdate decisions like this ( without VAR) is utterly beyond reason and opens them up for criticism and suspicion.
It's as close to re- refereeing as you can get and that's wrong.
 
GreigC said:
Follow Follow... and a lack of understanding of the use of VAR...

Well I never
Click to expand...

What has has the lack of understanding of VAR got to do with the ref on Saturday?

If he thinks it is a foul on plug, why doesn't he give the foul immediately?

Point me to the rules on phases and passages of play after a foul?

I'll say it again, if a Rangers player is adjudged to have committed a foul, it is an instant decision. No afters allowed.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
What has has the lack of understanding of VAR got to do with the ref on Saturday?

If he thinks it is a foul on plug, why doesn't he give the foul immediately?

Point me to the rules on phases and passages of play after a foul?

I'll say it again, if a Rangers player is adjudged to have committed a foul, it is an instant decision. No afters allowed.
Click to expand...

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocol | IFAB

www.theifab.com www.theifab.com
 
George Smiley said:
I think he was giving the foul regardless of the outcome of the play - by holding his whistle, he allowed the opportunity for VAR to be able to intervene in the event he was wrong

If it's not debatable then why not give it?

This idea of allowing referees to backdate decisions like this ( without VAR) is utterly beyond reason and opens them up for criticism and suspicion.
It's as close to re- refereeing as you can get and that's wrong.
Click to expand...
But the point is that they have VAR. And they are refereeing to having VAR. Nothing has been re-refereed.

Criticism stems from lack of understanding from what occurred. Lack of understanding of how to use VAR properly, and lack of understanding of its remit and limitations

He's backdated a decision 7 seconds, its less time than the Lawrence foul for 2-2 the other week and somehow it's less understandable and more contentious....

Incredible
 
Somehow Don Robertson goes under the radar. Maybe because he sounds a bit poofy. After wee Brendon gave him a warning first time around he should never have been in charge of a senior game again.
He for me is now no1 cheat.
 
GreigC said:

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocol | IFAB

www.theifab.com www.theifab.com
Click to expand...

  • Delaying the whistle for an offence is only permissible in a very clear attacking situation when a player is about to score a goal or has a clear run into/towards the opponents’ penalty area

None of those 2 things happened at that incident on Saturday though, if he thought it was a foul he should have given it immediately, he used it as an excuse not to give the stonewall penalty, I.e he bottled it
 
GreigC said:
I don't think you can say that, because there will almost certainly be examples out there of this exact thing happening, and the on field decision being overturned. Its why it exists.

I don't think there's any prospect of it being retained for that length of time without the foul being given. He was always giving it, and I suspect would have done so at what ever point the APP broke down... ie, at the point where VAR would no longer be looking at it to correct it
Click to expand...
Mate I've seen this happen umpteen times, it never fails to piss me off.

As to your point about the foul being overturned, there may be the odd example if you look hard enough. But in cases of such subjectivity, overturning the on-field decision is exceptionally rare. It's just not a scenario that justifies all the added complexity.

When it comes to VAR they really need a line in the sand, the game can't take any more micro-officiating. Attempting to fix every problem only serves to create new ones.
 
Bigbluebear said:
If you could point out anywhere on this site that I have said I think it was a foul then that would be good. Thanks.
Click to expand...


If you watch the footage closely, he makes the slightest of arm movements towards the incident with his right arm when it occurs. I lean to the side of he consciously delayed the decision to let it play out.

If that's not an excuse for implying a foul then what is it?

It was never a foul.
 
scooter70 said:
  • Delaying the whistle for an offence is only permissible in a very clear attacking situation when a player is about to score a goal or has a clear run into/towards the opponents’ penalty area

None of those 2 things happened at that incident on Saturday though, if he thought it was a foul he should have given it immediately, he used it as an excuse not to give the stonewall penalty, I.e he bottled it
Click to expand...
Do you not deem the ball falling at an Aberdeen player in the box a very clear attacking situation? The ball is falling to an Aberdeen player unchallenged in the penalty area, so it can be delayed and played out.

There's clearly a bit of interpretation allowed there on the "very clear attacking situation"
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
If you watch the footage closely, he makes the slightest of arm movements towards the incident with his right arm when it occurs. I lean to the side of he consciously delayed the decision to let it play out.

If that's not an excuse for implying a foul then what is it?

It was never a foul.
Click to expand...

Am I the referee?

To clarify since you appear to be having difficulty, I do not think it was a foul. If I was a referee I would not have given a foul. However I was not the referee. I am a punter discussing the use of VAR on a message board.

However, I think the referee thought it was a foul, therefore my other comments on the VAR protocol and how it was correctly used in that scenario are based on that assumption.

The point to be raising is the soft fouls they get that gets them out of danger, not anything to do with VAR use.
 
Bigbluebear said:
Do you not deem the ball falling at an Aberdeen player in the box a very clear attacking situation? The ball is falling to an Aberdeen player unchallenged in the penalty area, so it can be delayed and played out.

There's clearly a bit of interpretation allowed there on the "very clear attacking situation"
Click to expand...

“When a player is about to score a goal or a clear run into the box”, the ball falling to the lad just inside the box and being closed down by opposing players is not either of those 2 examples

Anyway I’ll let you all keep making excuses for what was a scandalous decision yet again in favour of the one side who constantly benefit from these

Suppose the handball in first half was definitively outside the box as well?

Or is that covered by another bit of IFAB rules that are little known?
 
scooter70 said:
“When a player is about to score a goal or a clear run into the box”, the ball falling to the lad just inside the box and being closed down by opposing players is not either of those 2 examples

Anyway I’ll let you all keep making excuses for what was a scandalous decision yet again in favour of the one side who constantly benefit from these

Suppose the handball in first half was definitively outside the box as well?

Or is that covered by another bit of IFAB rules that are little known?
Click to expand...

So to be clear.... you want him to have blown for the contentious foul immediately rather than allow play to continue and potentially have a goal or penalty awarded to the attacking side, and no opportunity to review if the referee was wrong in his assessment of the "foul"?

This question is based on the decision the ref made to award a foul. Not on whether any of us think it should have been a foul.

Edit - Yes, I think there is an angle that shows it was definitely outside the box, sadly.
 
And the very substance of this thread ,is the reason there have been no scottish referees at the last 4 big tournaments.
they are crap ,corrupt ,incompetent ,full of their own self importance and are a laughing stock compared to other european/world refs (although there are more than a few dodgy ones there too).
 
Bigbluebear said:
Am I the referee?

To clarify since you appear to be having difficulty, I do not think it was a foul. If I was a referee I would not have given a foul. However I was not the referee. I am a punter discussing the use of VAR on a message board.

However, I think the referee thought it was a foul, therefore my other comments on the VAR protocol and how it was correctly used in that scenario are based on that assumption.

The point to be raising is the soft fouls they get that gets them out of danger, not anything to do with VAR use.
Click to expand...

So why did you try to justify the incident with your post with garbage about the Aberdeen player's right arm being slightly raised?

It has sod all to do with VAR and everything to do with the referee.

I'll repeat, if that rat judges a Rangers player to have fouled an opponent in the same circumstances, it's an instant foul. Whistle right away and no passages and phases of play p1sh.
 
Jeff Portnoy said:
The sleeping lady's front bottom johnston does it again.

The biggest cheating snide lady's front bottom we've seen in scottish football for years.

Cankle calves Vickers knows its a pen as well and no celtic player even appeals for johnstons theatrics.
Click to expand...
They have quite a few cheats Taylor, Scales and Kyogo to name a few
 
Kb91 said:
Every big game they get a helping hand at a major decision. Not the first time mythical fouls have been manufactured to get them out of jail.
Click to expand...

Alfie's goal at the piggery being disallowed was scandalous, and again Johnston throwing himself to the ground for a foul was eagerly noted by Clancy the ref. Even Dermot Gallagher and the rest of the ref watch team on Sky were mocking Clancy's cheating.
 
Bigbluebear said:
So to be clear.... you want him to have blown for the contentious foul immediately rather than allow play to continue and potentially have a goal or penalty awarded to the attacking side, and no opportunity to review if the referee was wrong in his assessment of the "foul"?

This question is based on the decision the ref made to award a foul. Not on whether any of us think it should have been a foul.

Edit - Yes, I think there is an angle that shows it was definitely outside the box, sadly.
Click to expand...

But according to the rules that's what he should have done as there was not clear goal scoring opp immediately after the foul, id imagine the XG on the chance when it broke to the lad was slightly above 0 so according to the rules the ref should have blown then if he thought it was a foul

Anyone can see he has absolutely bottled it and gave the softest foul ever

Well softest since Morelos "foul" on same player when we had a perfectly good goal scored against them last season

Ive yet to see any evidence that the handball was definitely outside the box but hey ho

2 decisions that have they gone in our favour we'd be reading about in the press for weeks and form fans of other clubs for months

The excuse he saw a foul is up there with our penalty claim at Parkhead being offside, fictitious
 
Bigbluebear said:
Am I the referee?

To clarify since you appear to be having difficulty, I do not think it was a foul. If I was a referee I would not have given a foul. However I was not the referee. I am a punter discussing the use of VAR on a message board.

However, I think the referee thought it was a foul, therefore my other comments on the VAR protocol and how it was correctly used in that scenario are based on that assumption.

The point to be raising is the soft fouls they get that gets them out of danger, not anything to do with VAR use.
Click to expand...
I don't watch their games did their B52's drop on the ball again against Aberdeen?
 
muttley said:
Alfie's goal at the piggery being disallowed was scandalous, and again Johnston throwing himself to the ground for a foul was eagerly noted by Clancy the ref. Even Dermot Gallagher and the rest of the ref watch team on Sky were mocking Clancy's cheating.
Click to expand...

Go back and watch that again, I pointed this out at the time. Watch Clancy, he makes a slight move to point to centre circle when it goes in, you see his body position move slightly, looks and sees it was Alfie and assumes its a foul, its scandalous really

Again one team benefiting from a weird call
 
scooter70 said:
Go back and watch that again, I pointed this out at the time. Watch Clancy, he makes a slight move to point to centre circle when it goes in, you see his body position move slightly, looks and sees it was Alfie and assumes its a foul, its scandalous really

Again one team benefiting from a weird call
Click to expand...

I don't even celebrate our goals scored in real time nowadays, as I know that they will be looking for a reason to chalk them off. Its utterly embarrassing that we're at that level of open cheating.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
So why did you try to justify the incident with your post with garbage about the Aberdeen player's right arm being slightly raised?

It has sod all to do with VAR and everything to do with the referee.

I'll repeat, if that rat judges a Rangers player to have fouled an opponent in the same circumstances, it's an instant foul. Whistle right away and no passages and phases of play p1sh.
Click to expand...

I didn't. Maybe you should read again what I said.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
Why did you bring up a slight raising of the right arm?

I'll wager they've not even came up with that crap on Kerryfail.
Click to expand...

The referees arm, it indicated he acknowledged the foul at the time rather than decided after the penalty shout he was giving a foul.

I've never at any point suggested I think it should have been given.
 
scooter70 said:
But according to the rules that's what he should have done as there was not clear goal scoring opp immediately after the foul, id imagine the XG on the chance when it broke to the lad was slightly above 0 so according to the rules the ref should have blown then if he thought it was a foul

Anyone can see he has absolutely bottled it and gave the softest foul ever

Well softest since Morelos "foul" on same player when we had a perfectly good goal scored against them last season

Ive yet to see any evidence that the handball was definitely outside the box but hey ho

2 decisions that have they gone in our favour we'd be reading about in the press for weeks and form fans of other clubs for months

The excuse he saw a foul is up there with our penalty claim at Parkhead being offside, fictitious
Click to expand...
Which VAR would have been entitled to overrule if it was "the softest foul" ever

A soft foul is still a foul

Thankfully the laws allow a bit of subjectivity towards a "clear attacking opportunity"

I'm with BigBlueBear - I'd far rather see a referee delay giving that foul and see what plays out... because, there's every chance that could have been turned over by VAR
 
Just had a quick look at AFCchat.
4 pages about this penalty decision.
Last 3 pages mostly about cheating hun refs!??
Complaint about how they were cheated at the LC final??.

Don't even know what they are on about...
 
Spam javelin said:
Just had a quick look at AFCchat.
4 pages about this penalty decision.
Last 3 pages mostly about cheating hun refs!??
Complaint about how they were cheated at the LC final??.

Don't even know what they are on about...
Click to expand...
“Penalty” at the end on Duk I suspect

It wasn’t…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top