Ref watch Sky re non penalty

Ross_ said:
Mr Mark wilson Esq said in on SSB

i had it on yesterday after the gaem when i as cutting the grass lol

No contact but it was still a penalty haha unbelievable
Click to expand...
This is a sad indictment as to where our game is going. We now accept that the faintest of touches is ok. Ajeti and Taylor? Two of the worst decisions I have witnessed this season. Tav gets kicked from behind no penalty. If there were fans in the ground I have no doubt the noise from the stands would have resulted in a spot kick.
 
Mackania said:
I find it odd that it's the decision to award a penalty or not up for debate.

If you get caught diving on the park you get a yellow card and it gets swept away, if it's found in hindsight then you are dragged through the mud for a week by the media. Eduoard should be getting slaughtered for his cheating yesterday.
Click to expand...
Bingo, what those in the other thread are deliberately missing. Sky have again set an agenda that helps Celtic or hurts Rangers. In stark contrast to what they would do if it was Alfie or another Ranger.

Edouard should have a reputation as a diver now, he's done it many times. Perhaps the worst diver in Scotland.
 
That one isn’t even the controversial one. Why was he not booked next time he done it?

Sleekit cheat who’s also had a few nasty tackles and lashed out. No one seems keen to point it out though.
 
will be interesting to see if they appeal it ... and what happens.
 
The fact is , as a previous post suggested if Alfredo or indeed any of our players did what French Diddy did they would still be getting slaughtered in the mhedia , Brown , Christie and Calum McGregor are allowed to run about fouling by elbowing , and kicking everything in site with the more than occasional dive , until the ref ( regardless which one ) eventually gets embarrassed into action. We're back where we belong and I've every confidence we will be for plenty of years to come.

It's good to be alive and the first to do 55......
 
Last edited:
coopsleftboot said:
I recall the good old days when Aluko got cited for diving and ended up suspended....because even though there was contact, the panel felt it wasn't enough for him to go down.

Weird eh?
Click to expand...
Some of our panelists were saying Alfredo dived against Livi not so long ago remember .....
 
Its-Sebo said:
The cünts trying to make this into a penalty must be up there was some of the most embarrassing punditry ever. No shame with these bastards because they aren't called out.
Click to expand...
Some incidents in football are open to interpretation. A matter of opinion. Subjective.

Others, there is only one interpretation.

E.g. Roofe absolutely had to walk v Slavia. No questions asked.

Eduoard's dive falls into this category.

Its 100% a dive and shouldn't even be questioned.

The talking point is whether he should have walked for the 2nd dive. Thats the one people can argue both ways as the ref arguably got it wrong.

But Sky's agenda has worked. Instead people are discussing whether he should have had a pen. Even though it was 100% the correct decision and not open for sensible discussion. We should be discussing Edouard's reputation as a diver. Not a never in a million years pen
 
Mackania said:
I find it odd that it's the decision to award a penalty or not up for debate.

If you get caught diving on the park you get a yellow card and it gets swept away, if it's found in hindsight then you are dragged through the mud for a week by the media. Eduoard should be getting slaughtered for his cheating yesterday.
Click to expand...

Propaganda.

If a man sees a naked woman, he's described as a peeping Tom

If a woman sees a naked man, he's described as a flasher.

LOL.
 
monkey magic said:
Even though there was clearly no contact, its still a penalty.

I actually heard that on Radio Clyde yesterday from one of the " experts ". lol
Click to expand...
I had one rancid cow firstly screaming her hatred for Alfredo, then insisting there doesn't have to be contact to be a penalty. I advised her a good ride was essential for her mental health. :)
 
The whole programme yesterday was about them. We got very little before, during and after and it was all driving the narrative that although we are unbeaten, got to the last 16 in Europe again and have broken clean sheet records and many more of course it's all about their sh*tty season! The stats show that they haven't performed much worse than they usually do so it's only our form that is the reason the league is done this early. They have been spooking the mentally challenged boaby that long the pain is killing them.
Boyd had to say yesterday why are we talking about a penalty that wasn't when we should be talking about that man scoring his goal and pointed down to Alfie.
 
They truly are a WEIRD bunch over at KerryFail.

They basically admit it wasn't a penalty but go on to tear the ref apart because he shouldn't have been able to see it! I've heard this kind of deluded drivel from them before. The ONLY supporters anywhere who spout such nonsense!

Given Clancy and Robertson's recent cheating, not to mention off-side howlers for Celtic, I think Collum HAD to be honest!

WE NEED VAR!
 
Not the first time he has dived for a penalty. He never even claimed for a penalty yesterday He knew he made an arse of it by not shooting first time. A cheat,who if he was wearing Rangers colours would be slaughtered by the celtic friendly press in this country. Simply a cheat.
 
They’re posting McGregor bringing down an Aberdeen player and saying it’s exactly the same and Collum gave one against them. In what stratosphere is this anything like edouards dive? McGregor clearly jumps in and lifts his leg to catch the player. Imagine using that as proof you’re cheated.

kerrydalestreet.co.uk

Ref Watch ( aka The Dallas Bias Club)

Recently heard from a very reliable source that one of our 'finest' has failed a drugs test but all covered up.
kerrydalestreet.co.uk kerrydalestreet.co.uk
 
DaveL said:
They all agreed that the view the ref had shows there was no contact so the correct decision.
Surely that's the end of it, but they then go on about how it looks from different angles.
Then Warnock says he's entitled to go down because he's expecting contact!
Does that mean every players who gets done for diving can just use that in his defence and get away with it?
Click to expand...

You can bet if that was Morelos they wouldn’t be saying that.
 
The smell of their desperation for something to cheer them up is overwhelming! They just can't accept their team are finished!

And who's to blame?
The board?
The players?
The management?

Sure! BUT the biggest blame lies with the supporters themselves!

Getting embarrassed in Europe year after year they were ecstatic with the odd fluke result. ZERO consistency in their only opportunity to assess their REAL progress!

As long as Rangers were below them they were ecstatic beating Ross Countys.

HILARIOUS. And the fun is just beginning too!!!!!
 
cooperman said:
just saw the clip from sky, it's a dive pretty clear cut, I don't know what the big hoo-ha's about
www.skysports.com

Ref Watch: Should Celtic have had a penalty?

Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher discusses whether Celtic forward Odsonne Edouard should have been awarded a penalty in their 1-1 draw with Rangers.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
Click to expand...
Around 34 seconds in is the best view that most places have omitted when discussing it.
 
If there was the slightest touch with the first one but not enough to give penalty and his dive was worthy of a booking,The second was certainly a full on dive and worthy of a second booking and a sending off.
 
Kingdom Bear said:
Won’t stop the mhedia up here trying to justify the tired old ‘ta sellick have been done by a ref again’ line

if Morelos had done that the compliance officer would have been on speed dial and the sky emerald supporters club would have replayed it ad-nauseam
Click to expand...
Yep, Barbour and Crocker would have sent out personal appeals to get the CO on the case at least 3 times each again
 
LOL 133 said:
Propaganda.

If a man sees a naked woman, he's described as a peeping Tom

If a woman sees a naked man, he's described as a flasher.

LOL.
Click to expand...
If a man sees a fully clothed Eilidh Barbour he loses all sense of perspective and reality is what I've learned from this latest incident

Severally "valiantly" defending the mentally challenged agenda she willingly propagates.
 
Wilkinsvolley said:
Was this not offside against Griffiths?




https://twitter.com/x/status/1373985604673753094
Click to expand...
Actually seconds before this the ref gives an almost identical foul against Roofe.

It sticks in my mind because Crocker described Roofe's actions as a push. Then Walker says something like Borna clatters through the back of him. Despite Roofe and Christie's actions being almost identical.

mentally challenged has picked an hilarious example here to justify his point. Whilst I don't necessarily agree with Collum's decision, he was consistent in deeming that a foul by both sides.
 
If anyone who had not watched the game tuned in to SkySportsNews' highlights they'd have thought it was a stonewaller given the narrative and coverage. Inexplicably they also throw in footage of Alfie nudging Brown to the ground.
 
BoomSong said:
If anyone who had not watched the game tuned in to SkySportsNews' highlights they'd have thought it was a stonewaller given the narrative and coverage. Inexplicably they also throw in footage of Alfie nudging Brown to the ground.
Click to expand...
And this is the agenda they wanted to set. And some of our fans are willingly duped and want to castigate anyone who dares highlights Sky’s blatant agenda.
 
Tailwind said:
Actually seconds before this the ref gives an almost identical foul against Roofe.

It sticks in my mind because Crocker described Roofe's actions as a push. Then Walker says something like Borna clatters through the back of him. Despite Roofe and Christie's actions being almost identical.

mentally challenged has picked an hilarious example here to justify his point. Whilst I don't necessarily agree with Collum's decision, he was consistent in deeming that a foul by both sides.
Click to expand...
I don’t remember thinking anything much at the time tbh. They must be sitting going over every incident in the match with tears streaming down their face. Delightful.
 
Wilkinsvolley said:
I don’t remember thinking anything much at the time tbh. They must be sitting going over every incident in the match with tears streaming down their face. Delightful.
Click to expand...
Its because it happens a matter of seconds after the Roofe “foul”, that is identical, and the almost polar opposite way Sky referred to the 2 incidents that it stuck with me. The contrast couldn’t have been more stark. Not a big issue in the grander scheme, but clear at the time none the less.

Mind you, plenty on here don’t like us pointing out the stark contrast in the way Sky staff deal with incidents involving those in blue and very similar incidents involving those in green and grey.
 
Tailwind said:
Its because it happens a matter of seconds after the Roofe “foul”, that is identical, and the almost polar opposite way Sky referred to the 2 incidents that it stuck with me. The contrast couldn’t have been more stark. Not a big issue in the grander scheme, but clear at the time none the less.

Mind you, plenty on here don’t like us pointing out the stark contrast in the way Sky staff deal with incidents involving those in blue and very similar incidents involving those in green and grey.
Click to expand...

They tell you you're paranoid.
 
The defence on SSB was it must be a penalty because why would he go down when it would be a certain goal. Totally ignoring the fact he over ran it and it went straight to Aribo hence why he decided to try and win a penalty.
 
A few years back in an Old Firm at Ibrox, Alfredo in trying to get a shot away had to hurdle a lunge from Lustig (I think) in the box, which caused him to stumble to the ground. No penalty awarded as there was no contact, wrongly in my opinion and obviously not a dive. Mr Gerrard once benefitted from a similar challenge, where he hurdled a reckless challenge, there was no contact and was awarded a penalty as he lost his footing in the box.
Edouard didn’t hurdle a reckless challenge, he wasn’t moving at pace,he blatantly fell to the floor, as clear a dive as you will see.
The pandering to the idea that it was a penalty must be for reasons other than football.
 
100% right decision and card but it was a silly attempt to get the ball , if you’re going to tackle in the box be 100% sure you get the ball
 
hhss said:
The prick had lost control of the ball, that’s why he dived. Joe was always going to clear it.
Click to expand...

That's the bit I didn't get. Poor first touch from Edouard and Aribo obviously going to clear it but nobody challenged Brown or Kennedy when they suggested that he was going to score if he didn't get 'brought down'.
 
Seriously, if that’s what they are clinging to, things are really looking up. I can’t believe that they think that’s a penalty. I was shocked when I heard he wasn’t getting pelters for diving. You know he knows as well. He wasn’t exactly going mental when he didn’t get it. It’s always a sure sign the ref got it right.
 
I know I shouldn't be surprised but I am suprised at the tims trying to say it was a penalty.

Even by there standards its clutching at straws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top