Sky saying it was a harsh red card

[devilman]

He physically stopped the ball going in the net with his hand. What was harsh about it?

 

[jamcl_jamcl]

Is there not some stupid double punishment thing?

Only if you make a genuine attempt to play the ball I believe. As in, if you went into a tackle, missed the ball but fouled the player, then it'd be a penalty only.

 

[EddiBrock]

Miller went on and on and on about it

Put Sirblueballs would rather go on and on at Rangers fans. "Interesting" character.

Miller also made some weird comment about "those kinds of decisions at Ibrox" when the first penalty incident was correctly not changed by the ref.

Millers commentary all day was weird. Almost as weird as the 2 posters in here who delight in attacking our own fans for asking legitimate questions

 

[the_baron]

Us going on to miss the penalty is exactly why that rule is there, you can't have a situation where a player can stop a certain goal with their hand and not be punished for it or you'd have players doing it all the time.

 

[Bluenose Whistler]

Is Miller thick?he aknowledged it was within the rules but then questioned the rules,he's starting to do my head in with his supposed impartiality.and that fukn accent.

The new Fantabaws!

 

[SIRBLUE]

so who on Sky said it was harsh then?

They all agreed that the rule is harsh but it is the rule so it's a red.
No argument

 

[EddiBrock]

The only thing dubious was the penalty not being retaken. The keeper clearly came off his line

He didn't.

Tv pictures clearly show his feet on the line.

 

[hellofollow]

Biggest Fanny of them all at that moment
- Kenny Miller didn’t take that cu* t to long.

Jump the dykes are always the worst.

 

[SaulBearenson]

Soft penalties, harsh red cards, and just offside don't actually exist - these are all binary concepts that get spun into media talking points.

 

[gersin008]

He didn't.

Tv pictures clearly show his feet on the line.

Stand corrected. Only seen it in real time

 

[bkerr72]

Was only Miller that said it was harsh Mcfadden and Boyd both said it was red. To be fair Miller is one of the worst co-commentators in the country said after the first handball the ref should have been sent to the monitor to view it... after coming back from said monitor and not giving the decision.

 

[SIRBLUE]

You two are sad

Miller was absolutely drumming up controversy around it

Pair of sad acts

Jumping into threads being raging where others are not raging and accusing others of the same

Hypocritical sad acts

The Rangers fans on here who delight in digging up posters for asking legitimate questions are a right collection of odd balls

He's slapped the ball off the line

No need to suggest anything was harsh about a 100% correct decision where no comment would have been made had we not been involved

Pair of weirdos

Trio if you include Miller

Calm down petal.
I repeat no one suggested the decision was incorrect, only that they think the law is harsh.

 

[1BrianLaudrup]

The goal for Sky is not to provide intelligent, reasonable and insightful coverage of games. The goal is to generate clips and social media posts that will be liked, shared, commented on, that will lead to days of media coverage on "here's what Neville/Carragher/Michael Stewart said about a penalty/VAR decision." Then Sky uses those engagement stats to attract advertisers.

Controversy and rage-posting generates far more engagement than honest discussion. So it's virtually written into the Sky script before a match even kicks off that there must be at least one refereeing or VAR call that their pundits will label as unjust or controversial. No matter how embarrassing it is for pundits to pretend they think the Killie player was hard done by, they are going to tell you that's what happened.

 

[billybluehat]

Red card all day, every day.

Again, we needed VAR to make the decision because the ref gave offside initially

Indeed, and it wasn't even a close call. A yard onside easily.

 

[nasalsinatra]

Preventing a clear goal-scoring opportunity is punishable by a penalty kick and a yellow card. Preventing a goal by handling the ball on the goal-line takes the offence to a different dimension. The ref had no option but to show the red card.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Jump the dykes are always the worst.

Wanker trying too hard to be liked again by the rheptile fans. Fu*k him and them they can have him.

 

[hods967]

Kenny Miller said it was harsh but thats the rules. Then why discuss it being harsh if its the rule dick

 

[EddiBrock]

Soft penalties, harsh red cards, and just offside don't actually exist - these are all binary concepts that get spun into media talking points.

The guy on the Brighton villa game banging on about clear and obvious for the Brighton goal ruled off. That's not how offsides work. You are on or off.

Probably mates with SirB who will wank himself into a fury defending his crap contribution to the Brighton commentary as well

 

[Blue_Streak]

Harsh or not, it’s a red going by the rules. %^*& Sky.

 

[EddiBrock]

Calm down petal.
I repeat no one suggested the decision was incorrect, only that they think the law is harsh.

I repeat. Miller attempted to court controversy around it by repeatedly going on about it beyond the "its definitely the correct decision" that was all that was required

But you keep attacking Rangers fans, clearly gets you off somehow

 

[SIRBLUE]

The goal for Sky is not to provide intelligent, reasonable and insightful coverage of games. The goal is to generate clips and social media posts that will be liked, shared, commented on, that will lead to days of media coverage on "here's what Neville/Carragher/Michael Stewart said about a penalty/VAR decision." Then Sky uses those engagement stats to attract advertisers.

Controversy and rage-posting generates far more engagement than honest discussion. So it's virtually written into the Sky script before a match even kicks off that there must be at least one refereeing or VAR call that their pundits will label as unjust or controversial. No matter how embarrassing it is for pundits to pretend they think the Killie player was hard done by, they are going to tell you that's what happened.

Michael Stewart isn't on Sky

 

[EddiBrock]

The goal for Sky is not to provide intelligent, reasonable and insightful coverage of games. The goal is to generate clips and social media posts that will be liked, shared, commented on, that will lead to days of media coverage on "here's what Neville/Carragher/Michael Stewart said about a penalty/VAR decision." Then Sky uses those engagement stats to attract advertisers.

Controversy and rage-posting generates far more engagement than honest discussion. So it's virtually written into the Sky script before a match even kicks off that there must be at least one refereeing or VAR call that their pundits will label as unjust or controversial. No matter how embarrassing it is for pundits to pretend they think the Killie player was hard done by, they are going to tell you that's what happened.

It's very sad and making sports broadcasting brutal, particularly in Scotland

No viewer wants this dumbed down level of broadcast

Let's aim for a quality product instead

 

[Ibroxkev]

Doesn’t get much more plain than what’s set out in the rules

 

[SIRBLUE]

I repeat. Miller attempted to court controversy around it by repeatedly going on about it beyond the "its definitely the correct decision" that was all that was required

But you keep attacking Rangers fans, clearly gets you off somehow

A ban for derailment awaits so this is my last comment.
No one on Sky said it was a wrong decision.

Not one

Enjoy your Sunday and mind your ticker.

 

[Teddy Casablanca]

Without stating the bleeding obvious. SKY are on the rather long list of Rangers haters.

 

[hhss]

The easiest red card that fanny with the whistle will have in his career.

And he got wrong in real time. Useless caaant

 

[EddiBrock]

A ban for derailment awaits so this is my last comment.
No one on Sky said it was a wrong decision.

Not one

Enjoy your Sunday and mind your ticker.

Kenny Miller

Whos idea was it to give this guy a commentator job? Talks some amount of shite, 1000 words a minute and that accent is like nails down a blackboard.

www.followfollow.com

 

[insanicdrunk]

Preventing a clear goal-scoring opportunity is punishable by a penalty kick and a yellow card. Preventing a goal by handling the ball on the goal-line takes the offence to a different dimension. The ref had no option but to show the red card.

Only a yellow if it’s a legitimate attempt to get the ball.

 

[Flesher's Haugh]

Letter of the law its the correct decision, its one of them had it gone against us and say it was Souttar I'd be claiming the ruling was shite and harsh, defender knows very little about the ricochet that rebounds off Sterling however a clear goal was stopped due to the position of his arm, unfortunate that the ruling deems it a red through no fault of the defender deliberate or not, that being said girfuy to all those trying blindside the rulebook.

 

[Bigbluebear]

Not only did he handle the ball, he also totally wiped out Sterling as well. Take your pick as to which one he was being red carded for.

Was both a foul 2 yards from goal and a handball stopping a goal.

 

[Barca Bear]

Is there not some stupid double punishment thing?

Only if making a GENUINE attempt for the ball. Legally

 

[JerseyLoyalist]

Biggest Fanny of them all at that moment
- Kenny Miller didn’t take that cu* t to long.

He’s getting worse every week.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

The only thing dubious was the penalty not being retaken. The keeper clearly came off his line

Nothing dubious about it. Bomber on RTV, for once, was talking pish. The 'keepers right foot came forward off the line but the left foot didn't. All that is required is that one foot remains on the line.

 

[TBagg]

Stopping a goal with your arm on the goal line has been a red card as long as I can remember.

I think they get told that on day one of Ref University, maybe he forgot

 

[SDF91]

Sky’s coverage of Scottish football just tries to create controversy with refereeing decisions and nothing more. No tactical analysis, no insights from the pundits, just constant negativity and manufactured issues.

They pay next to nothing for it and present it accordingly.

 

[OZ1872]

I agree it's a harsh red. If it goes against us I'd feel it was harsh. However that's the rules so that's just the way it is.

 

[basiltherat]

If there's no red for stopping a certain goal with your hand then every defender will do so
Why wouldn't you since there's only a potential upside?
As for Miller he's joined the ranks of commentators who believe the game should be played to whatever rule he'd like to see being in place for that incident at that time. The rules can be different in different games or even within the same game
He's a first class fanny. Another with a failed coaching career looking for the easy money to be made pandering to scum fans on tv
Rangers man my arse

 

[Swansea_Gers]

Just back from the game watching it back and they are saying it was a harsh red card he stopped the ball on the line its the reddist of reds

It was a penalty and a red card because that’s what the law states. Still you’d be very disappointed to be sent off for that.

 

[jamcl_jamcl]

Killie will feel hard done by considering what the rat faced right back from celtic got away with against them.

And against us.

 

[1BrianLaudrup]

Michael Stewart isn't on Sky

OK but you understand the point. He plays the same role for the BBC or wherever else he appears.

 

[SIRBLUE]

OK but you understand the point. He plays the same role for the BBC or wherever else he appears.

Of course I do m8

 

[The U.S. Male]

Always believed stopping a clear goal with your hand should still be a goal and a red. Case in point - Suarez did it against Ghana last kick minute, Ghana missed penalty then proceeded to lose shootout in quarter finals of world cup

 

[CLSFB]

Just back from the game watching it back and they are saying it was a harsh red card he stopped the ball on the line its the reddist of reds

I think it’s a harsh rule, he clearly didn’t mean it. But by the letter of the law it’s a red because it stops the ball going into the net.

But if it was up to me if think he clearly doesn’t mean it and I’m the referee I should have the decision to say it’s a penalty and penalty only.

 

[blue genes]

Amazing isn't it, how many pundits expect the rules to be ignored when we are the beneficiaries of any decisions:

"I know it's in the rules, but it's still a harsh penalty/sending off"
"I know it's hit his hand & his hand's out, but it's never a penalty"
"I know he's prevented a goal by handling, but it's never a red card"

 

[The U.S. Male]

Just curious as never seen a good angle but what if Killie's goal never went in - was it heading in when hit Tav on the hand and if so would that have been a penalty (or was his hands in a normal position) and a red card?

 

[bud_light]

The only thing dubious was the penalty not being retaken. The keeper clearly came off his line

As long as a part of the goalkeepers foot is on the line at the point the ball is struck there is nothing wrong.
The penalty should not have been taken again

 

[BarestOfMargins]

Every one of the Sky pundits said the law is harsh, but it is the law so a definite red.
Sorry but nothing to get ragin about here.

See that's the problem right there. Why are they discussing the laws on that one? Where was the discussion of the fairness of a laws when we were trawling back through time to find an offside to excuse punching the ball in the box? The 'offside' they eventually found as an excuse was harsh but the law. I don't recall a debate on the offside law on that occasion.

 

[mike myers loyal]

It’s pretty poor when they are saying originally that it was offside and I agreed until my daughter who plays as a winger and is 14 points out that it was never offside and the defender in the middle is playing him on

 

[insanicdrunk]

I think it’s a harsh rule, he clearly didn’t mean it. But by the letter of the law it’s a red because it stops the ball going into the net.

But if it was up to me if think he clearly doesn’t mean it and I’m the referee I should have the decision to say it’s a penalty and penalty only.

It stops the ball going into the net, it’s not harsh at all.

 

[CLSFB]

It stops the ball going into the net, it’s not harsh at all.

He clearly doesn’t mean it so aye it is a harsh rule. If he means it then 100% a red card. Pretty sure you and the majority on here would be saying otherwise if it’s the other way about.