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.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
Peekaboo I see youStated Ref had the best view possible and called it right.
No penalty forward looking for contact which never came, yellow card correct.
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.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.
She’s allegedly quite an expert diver herself.But Eilidh Barbour says its a penalty despite there being no contact. Just because.
Sky are upset at their lack of access to the Champions, aye? Carry on being upset then.But Eilidh Barbour says its a penalty despite there being no contact. Just because.
Some of our panelists were saying Alfredo dived against Livi not so long ago remember .....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?
If that was morelos we would ever hear the end of it, but as usual nothing just a few saying he should have been more cute and left his foot trailing when he went down!!It wasn't even a good dive.
Some incidents in football are open to interpretation. A matter of opinion. Subjective.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.
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.
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.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
Given that we recently appealed Morelos's yellow for "diving" I would suspect that you can.Can you appeal a yellow?
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?
Around 34 seconds in is the best view that most places have omitted when discussing it.just saw the clip from sky, it's a dive pretty clear cut, I don't know what the big hoo-ha's about
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
Aye, I had totally forgotten just with everything that’s gone on.Given that we recently appealed Morelos's yellow for "diving" I would suspect that you can.
Yeah you can if it was a booking for simulation we did it with Morelos a few weeks ago against LivingstonCan you appeal a yellow?
Yep, Barbour and Crocker would have sent out personal appeals to get the CO on the case at least 3 times each againWon’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
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 incidentPropaganda.
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.
Actually seconds before this the ref gives an almost identical foul against Roofe.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
The prick had lost control of the ball, that’s why he dived. Joe was always going to clear it.
Aye!!! Ed weird !!!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?