What did the ref blow for before the penalty?

[McCrae]

9 hours ago, Melbourne Jambo said:

He indicated to SIbbick that he'd blown the foul for a push. Reckon he's thought Sibbick pushed Bashiri 😂

This outcome makes sense to me…play halted before Sibbick scored. Therefore can’t give a goal. Var get involved …clear mistake PK. They check to see if Sibbick is offside… would rule PK out… he is not therefore Clancy is asked to look at the monitor. 

[DETTY29]

12 hours ago, Kirky Jambo said:

Agreed although I think the point of the thread was to work out what Clancy blew for, and the consensus seems to be that nobody has a clue 😂 

 

Seems he got bailed out by VAR on this occasion.

Delete.

Edited January 3, 2023 by DETTY29

[DETTY29]

9 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

Sibbick couldn't have been deemed active (influencing the defenders actions) at either the first touch by a defender or the second (handball), otherwise he would have been given offside.

 

The fact that a penalty was given, suggests that Clancy had given a free kick, or had blown inadvertently, before the ball was knocked into the net.

 

The image below is the closest I can get to the first defender playing the ball, which shows Sibbick to be onside, if the defender has in fact been deemed to have played the ball.

 

 

 

I can't screen grab from BBC but as the ball leaves Devlin's foot, Sibbick's foot was in an offside position, so why not active at that point?  Is it because Devlin was shooting so Sibbick is only active at that point if it had been a pass?

 

Clancy did blow for a non existent foul for Hibs but its difficult to determine if the ball had already crossed the line by then. 

 

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by DETTY29

[colinmaroon]

 

 

Watched it again this morning and Clancy indicated a foul after the ball had gone in the net and I belive it was for a supposed grab by Halliday but, he will have seen as part of the VAR analysis that there was nothing in it and so it proceeded from there.   He and VAR actually got it right, which is incredible as there were 3 incidents at least to look at.

 

 

[DETTY29]

10 minutes ago, colinmaroon said:

 

 

Watched it again this morning and Clancy indicated a foul after the ball had gone in the net and I belive it was for a supposed grab by Halliday but, he will have seen as part of the VAR analysis that there was nothing in it and so it proceeded from there.   He and VAR actually got it right, which is incredible as there were 3 incidents at least to look at.

 

 

If the ball had crossed the line before he blew his whistle, Sibbick wasn't deemed to be active at Devlin's initial shot and there was no foul by a Hearts player, then why didn't Sibbick's goal not just stand?

 

So there was a foul by a Hearts player, but it was after the hand ball and he had blown to stop the game before the ball crossed line, but fortunately for us there was the hand ball.

 

🤷

[DETTY29]

As a ps, while Bishiri could be deemed unlucky with the deflection off Hanlon there is an angle showing movement towards the ball with his arm.  And if it had got past his arm the ball was on target going directly towards goal so lucky not to be red carded.

 

Happy to be corrected.

[Busby8]

17 hours ago, db211833 said:

 Clancy guessed that something had happened. He had absolutely no idea. Thankfully, despite taking too long, VAR got it right.

 

Pretty sure that this is what happened.

 

Clancy tried his utmost not to award a goal, so the next best thing he did was to disallow it and hope for some assistance to vindicate his action from VAR.

 

It would have been very interesting to hear his views on exactly why he had disallowed the goal, given that his positioning prevented him from seeing Sibbick's position properly.... so offside, without the linesman's signal, couldn't be the reason.

Or did he just hope that it was offside and that VAR would vindicate his decision !!

 

And although it probably would have, he made that decision before the VAR option had even been utilised.

 

As it happened though, that pesky VAR thingy also gave conclusive proof that there was a clear handball that blew his chances of giving Hearts nothing. 

Pity for him and hibs that it was something he couldn't ignore.

 

.

 

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by Busby8

[RobboM]

1 hour ago, DETTY29 said:

I can't screen grab from BBC but as the ball leaves Devlin's foot, Sibbick's foot was in an offside position, so why not active at that point?  Is it because Devlin was shooting so Sibbick is only active at that point if it had been a pass?

 

Clancy did blow for a non existent foul for Hibs but its difficult to determine if the ball had already crossed the line by then. 

 

 

Imagine Devlin's shot had just gone straight in. No way would it be ruled off for Sibbick being offside 👍

[DETTY29]

Just now, RobboM said:

Imagine Devlin's shot had just gone straight in. No way would it be ruled off for Sibbick being offside 👍

Unless he was obscuring Marshall, but wasn't.

 

Thanks.

[RobboM]

Just now, DETTY29 said:

Unless he was obscuring Marshall, but wasn't.

 

Thanks.

Btw agree on the red card for Rocky. Definitely goal bound from our angle in Main Stand. Surely handball doesn't come into double jeopardy thinking? It wasn't denying a goal scoring "opportunity" .... it was denying a goal!

[TheBigO]

11 hours ago, SectionDJambo said:

No flag, that I saw, from the linesman.

So what did Clancy disallow Sibbick‘s goal for in the first place?

Another thing, this is a referee who had no difficulty or hesitation in red carding 2 Hearts players at Parkhead for 2 soft second yellow cards, but he couldn’t manage to give Cadden his second yellow for a rash challenge at Tynecastle. 
All we need to know about him.

 

100%.  I watched the highlights closely and no flag, so he'd disallowed the goal for some reason only known to himself.  Was the long holdup while he tried to justify it (haw VAR gonnae find something for me here...)

 

 

As you say, we had 2 players sent off against Celtic, perhaps letter of the law correctly, but nontheless harshly.  Cadden had 3 yellow cardable offences and received one card.  Campbell also lucky to stay on (not saying it was a definite red, but in the context of other recent reds in Scotland, many of which Hibs have benefited from, some of which we've been given, he was lucky).

 

I said before the game that the ref was my only worry.  It proved that way, we still won.

 

How many games in the last few season have they "got away with it" against us.  We still beat them, but they're very very lucky to have had any points and not had a couple of proper doings over the last maybe 3 years.  Penalties, red cards, getting fouls on their players when ours are clean through on goal, its all fell in their lap but we've still been too good for them

[PapaShango]

29 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

If the ball had crossed the line before he blew his whistle, Sibbick wasn't deemed to be active at Devlin's initial shot and there was no foul by a Hearts player, then why didn't Sibbick's goal not just stand?

 

So there was a foul by a Hearts player, but it was after the hand ball and he had blown to stop the game before the ball crossed line, but fortunately for us there was the hand ball.

 

🤷

Because he was offside when Devlin hit the shot and became active when he touched the ball so it was the correct call. The handball was before that so they had to look at that before the offside. I think they got it right in the end to be honest. If Devlins shot goes in then I think it stands.

[ericb]

16 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

 

31:05 Clancy signals a foul.

(+1") 31:06 "Sibbick scores"  Assistant Ref thinks its a goal and heads towards halfway, but only got as far as the edge of the box.

(+3'02") 34:08 Clancy signals that he is going to the review screen

(+17") 34:25 Clancy gets to the screen

(+1'25") 35:50 Clancy signals penalty after review. 

(+1'20") 37:10 Penalty is taken

What I don't understand is if there is a team watching the whole game on screen, why don't they calculate the stoppage time and tell the ref?

[PapaShango]

5 minutes ago, RobboM said:

Btw agree on the red card for Rocky. Definitely goal bound from our angle in Main Stand. Surely handball doesn't come into double jeopardy thinking? It wasn't denying a goal scoring "opportunity" .... it was denying a goal!

He was very fortunate to get away with it as was Cadden with his foul on Halliday could easily have been another yellow. 

[TheBigO]

Just now, PapaShango said:

Because he was offside when Devlin hit the shot and became active when he touched the ball so it was the correct call. The handball was before that so they had to look at that before the offside. I think they got it right in the end to be honest. If Devlins shot goes in then I think it stands.

Correct.  And correct decision in the end.

 

But that's not what Clancy had originally given. He'd made up a foul and chalked off the goal.  Flag never went up.

[DETTY29]

2 minutes ago, PapaShango said:

Because he was offside when Devlin hit the shot and became active when he touched the ball so it was the correct call. The handball was before that so they had to look at that before the offside. I think they got it right in the end to be honest. If Devlins shot goes in then I think it stands.

Cheers.

[DETTY29]

12 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Correct.  And correct decision in the end.

 

But that's not what Clancy had originally given. He'd made up a foul and chalked off the goal.  Flag never went up.

Clancy seemed to go to tug his own shorts to indicate a foul or pull but there clearly isn't one.

 

I think he believes some has had to have pushed Bishiri to the ground because no-one would be so dumb to try and tackle like that.

[DETTY29]

32 minutes ago, Busby8 said:

 

Pretty sure that this is what happened.

 

Clancy tried his utmost not to award a goal, so the next best thing he did was to disallow it and hope for some assistance to vindicate his action from VAR.

 

It would have been very interesting to hear his views on exactly why he had disallowed the goal, given that his positioning prevented him from seeing Sibbick's position properly.... so offside, without the linesman's signal, couldn't be the reason.

Or did he just hope that it was offside and that VAR would vindicate his decision !!

 

And although it probably would have, he made that decision before the VAR option had even been utilised.

 

As it happened though, that pesky VAR thingy also gave conclusive proof that there was a clear handball that blew his chances of giving Hearts nothing. 

Pity for him and hibs that it was something he couldn't ignore.

In rugby you would have heard the ref saying to the TMO, I believe there was foul play by player number.....and then proved wrong.

[TheBigO]

5 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Clancy seemed to go to tug his own shorts to indicate a foul or pull but there clearly isn't one.

 

I think he believes some has had to have pushed Bishiri to the ground because no-one would be so dumb to try and tackle like that.

Haha, true.  When we have a rule which states something like "in an unnatural position", how does Bushiri last beyond kickoff in any game!?

[PapaShango]

55 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Correct.  And correct decision in the end.

 

But that's not what Clancy had originally given. He'd made up a foul and chalked off the goal.  Flag never went up.

I think the only thing he could have seen was Halliday with his hands on the Hibs player but was never a foul. Couldn’t see anything else. Good job we have VAR with those decisions as we would have had a penalty ruled out if there wasn’t.

[TheBigO]

1 minute ago, PapaShango said:

I think the only thing he could have seen was Halliday with his hands on the Hibs player but was never a foul. Couldn’t see anything else. Good job we have VAR with those decisions as we would have had a penalty ruled out if there wasn’t.

I wondered that but then why wouldn't he blow straight away for that?  I guess maybe if that's what he thought was a foul, he did the right thing in not doing so, let the passage of play play out, let VAR check.  I grudgingly suppose if he thought he saw a foul there, then he got his timings right.

 

I really do not like VAR, now I've experienced it live and for my own club, I truly hate it.  But we've had 2 penalties against Celtic and one against Hibs which we wouldn't have had hadn't it been for VAR, which in such a short period of time shows how bad the on field reffing is (mind you we also had one overturned against DUtd that Im adamant* was a penalty)

 

"Your money or your life

[PapaShango]

1 minute ago, TheBigO said:

I wondered that but then why wouldn't he blow straight away for that?  I guess maybe if that's what he thought was a foul, he did the right thing in not doing so, let the passage of play play out, let VAR check.  I grudgingly suppose if he thought he saw a foul there, then he got his timings right.

 

I really do not like VAR, now I've experienced it live and for my own club, I truly hate it.  But we've had 2 penalties against Celtic and one against Hibs which we wouldn't have had hadn't it been for VAR, which in such a short period of time shows how bad the on field reffing is (mind you we also had one overturned against DUtd that Im adamant* was a penalty)

 

"Your money or your life

I’m not a fan either and Clancy is a poor ref. We had a break in the first half where a Hearts player was fouled ball fell to McKay one on one with their defender. He looked to see if there was advantage and there clearly was and then pulled it back for the free kick.

[TheBigO]

2 minutes ago, PapaShango said:

I’m not a fan either and Clancy is a poor ref. We had a break in the first half where a Hearts player was fouled ball fell to McKay one on one with their defender. He looked to see if there was advantage and there clearly was and then pulled it back for the free kick.

Yup, similar after their chance in the second half, he gave us a foul on the edge of our own box but we were on a break and I'm sure had them outnumbered.

 

He's an awful ref.

 

As I've pointed out, for the same ref who officiously sent off two of our players against Celtic for two very technical second bookings (after a soft first booking for Toby too) to then only produce one yellow across Cadden's three yellow card fouls yesterday, just shows what a charlatan the man is.  Terrible ref.  Although about middle of the pack in Scotland.

[db211833]

55 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

In rugby you would have heard the ref saying to the TMO, I believe there was foul play by player number.....and then proved wrong.

Agreed, football is not progressive, with decision making being a closed shop. If we could hear the miced up ref saying, here is what I think happened, what are you seeing, it would be more transparent and respected.  No chance. 

[Boof]

55 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Haha, true.  When we have a rule which states something like "in an unnatural position", how does Bushiri last beyond kickoff in any game!?

 

I take it you mean the "unnatural position" is him actually being on the pitch during a game of professional football?

[TheBigO]

3 minutes ago, Boof said:

 

I take it you mean the "unnatural position" is him actually being on the pitch during a game of professional football?

Yes. Absolutely.

 

He basically does the cossack every time the ball is near him.  Like he thinks that's what he's meant to do.  "Is this it, boss?" as he looks at the bench, "did I do good?"

[joondalupjambo]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64150636

 

Answers at 5.15 onwards.

For me, like so many it is the time taken to decide but after watching this I can now understand why, so many things going on.  The way forward for me is simply to mic up the refs and once a decision is reached they tell the crowd, like in rugby,  Unless we do that we will, as fans always worry about the whole process.

[Busby8]

29 minutes ago, db211833 said:

Agreed, football is not progressive, with decision making being a closed shop. If we could hear the miced up ref saying, here is what I think happened, what are you seeing, it would be more transparent and respected.  No chance. 

 

They don't want you to hear all the Glasgow accents in case you were to think they were biased.

 

( Apologies to Glasgow hearts fans 🙂  )

Edited January 3, 2023 by Busby8

[TheBigO]

20 minutes ago, joondalupjambo said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64150636

 

Answers at 5.15 onwards.

For me, like so many it is the time taken to decide but after watching this I can now understand why, so many things going on.  The way forward for me is simply to mic up the refs and once a decision is reached they tell the crowd, like in rugby,  Unless we do that we will, as fans always worry about the whole process.

I still say that it's a red card.  If Dougall is saying the only thing stopping it being a red is if the ball was going wide, then that's that then as it was going in, 100% not one angle makes it look like it's going wide.  If Hibs had gone down to 10 men at this point, it could have been cricket score time.

 

Caveat here is that Rocky going off maybe would have helped them!!!

 

Was Campbell's challenge he got a yellow for reviewed by var?  guess a challenge like that would be automatically.

[joondalupjambo]

3 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Was Campbell's challenge he got a yellow for reviewed by var?  guess a challenge like that would be automatically.

Who knows. VAR may have said something but he may have said back, happy it was a yellow so no need for a review.

 

Can VAR upgrade a yellow card to a red?

An important point to note is the fact that VAR cannot change the referees decision. VAR can only recommend action to the referee but, as is the case now, the referee will make the final call.

[TheBigO]

7 minutes ago, joondalupjambo said:

Who knows. VAR may have said something but he may have said back, happy it was a yellow so no need for a review.

 

Can VAR upgrade a yellow card to a red?

An important point to note is the fact that VAR cannot change the referees decision. VAR can only recommend action to the referee but, as is the case now, the referee will make the final call.

Yeah, as I say, not saying it was a nailed down red, but given some of the ones we've seen recently where the ref has even looked at the screen and it's been red, I'm surprised, they didn't tell him to have a look.

 

Put it this way, had he flashed a red (like so many have done in hibs favour this season), no way he could have changed it.  Point I'm making isn't so much VAR, more how lucky Hibs are and have been all season when it comes to refereeing.  Imagine where they'd be if it wasn't for all the red cards their opponnents have had and the ones they haven't!?!

 

What is missed in the "canny beat 11 men" chat is that it's totally fair play if the opposition make stupid mistakes against you, or you're forcing last ditch tackles and your oppo keep getting red cards.  Totally.  But the issue I have with Hibs getting almost all their points against <11 men is that a majority of the reds were ill-gotten.  I've also seen a number of instances where they should have had reds and didn't.  They've been massively lucky. I wouldn't care, but it would be larvely to see them sitting stranded at the foot of the table and that's where they would have been.  And as I say, yesterday, a bit of luck, judgement calls the other way by the ref, we're looking at a cricket score.  If they'd gone to 10 men pre-45 mins, they'd have collapsed and I think we'd have ridden over them this time.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

Actually think he blew for a VAR check, seems to explain to Sibbick immediately, Toby seems to accept it

[Sooks]

20 hours ago, Heres Rixxy said:

The linesman didn't give offside so it would be a strange call from his angle to call offside, so what did he blow for? Did he give a foul against Sibbick? 

 

Thats my thinking as to why it took so long as well. Process being 1) was it a foul, 2) no, so was it offside, 3) yes, so was it a handball before offside. 

Personally I hope they made an arse of it tbh 

[Voice of reason]

20 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

I still say that it's a red card.  If Dougall is saying the only thing stopping it being a red is if the ball was going wide, then that's that then as it was going in, 100% not one angle makes it look like it's going wide.  If Hibs had gone down to 10 men at this point, it could have been cricket score time.

 

Caveat here is that Rocky going off maybe would have helped them!!!

 

Was Campbell's challenge he got a yellow for reviewed by var?  guess a challenge like that would be automatically.

Definitely a red card - Devlin’s shot was on target and Bushiri made a good save. No idea why Dougall was saying there was doubt whether the shot was on target. It felt like he was just desperately trying to cover up the mistake his fellow refs had made of it not being a red. Anyway, yet another VAR decision benefits Hibs. Cadden also should have been sent off - he did three clearly bookable offences in the first half and only got one yellow. We should have been playing against 9 men the whole second half.

[DETTY29]

1 hour ago, PapaShango said:

I think the only thing he could have seen was Halliday with his hands on the Hibs player but was never a foul. Couldn’t see anything else. Good job we have VAR with those decisions as we would have had a penalty ruled out if there wasn’t.

There was about 4 or 5 things happened after the Halliday incident, all 'favouring' Hearts for him to go back to that one as the foul.  And if it was then the Halliday incident preceeds all the rest and Hibs should get a free kick.  Of course VAR could have concluded a foul as a reason to chalk the goal off, that was never scored as he blew his whistle to stop play.

 

I still think he believes Bishiri had to be fouled.

[H2]

Just now, Voice of reason said:

Definitely a red card - Devlin’s shot was on target and Bushiri made a good save. No idea why Dougall was saying there was doubt whether the shot was on target. It felt like he was just desperately trying to cover up the mistake his fellow refs had made of it not being a red. Anyway, yet another VAR decision benefits Hibs. Cadden also should have been sent off - he did three clearly bookable offences in the first half and only got one yellow. We should have been playing against 9 men the whole second half.

Even if off target it should be red, it is a deliberate hand ball trying to stop a goal.

[part_time_jambo]

15 hours ago, part_time_jambo said:

Don't worry. The BBC VAR review with ex-ref Dougal will clear it all up, telling us how all the officials did everything correctly and reached all the correct decisions.

Sorry for quoting myself. Does anyone want this week's lottery numbers?

Dick Foster I can understand, but there is no excuse for Dougal agreeing that the Goldson penalty wasn't handball. His hands were above his head when the ball hit them. Absolutely no point in this program if Dougal is just going to agree with all the the decisions every time. A 5 second clip from Dougal would suffice - "I agree with everything".

[Heres Rixxy]

40 minutes ago, part_time_jambo said:

Sorry for quoting myself. Does anyone want this week's lottery numbers?

Dick Foster I can understand, but there is no excuse for Dougal agreeing that the Goldson penalty wasn't handball. His hands were above his head when the ball hit them. Absolutely no point in this program if Dougal is just going to agree with all the the decisions every time. A 5 second clip from Dougal would suffice - "I agree with everything".

 

The only reason for this show is to try reassure everyone that VAR is working perfectly.

[Kirky Jambo]

2 hours ago, H2 said:

Even if off target it should be red, it is a deliberate hand ball trying to stop a goal.

I’ve often wondered if that’s the rule or not. Deliberate hand ball is usually a yellow I think. Not sure if the intent makes a difference, more a question of whether or not it has denied a goal.

 

That said, if there’s a chance it was going in, then surely it’s equivalent to denying a goal scoring opportunity. Seems bizarre to have to be 100% sure it was going in. Think Dougal may be wrong on that.

 

I also remember an Arsenal player (Clichy maybe) getting sent off for mistaken identity when Oxlade chamberlain did a diving save for a Hazard shot for Chelsea that was going clearly wide. Can’t remember any analysis over whether or not the fact it was going wide made a difference, although it was before the days of VAR. 

[poggs]

Couple of things after further viewings and reflections.

 

Clancy gave a free kick for a perceived push by halliday.   However, he didnt actually blow his whistle until after the ball had hit the hibs players arm.

 

Thus it was possible for him to review that decision and overturn as it was obviously wrong.

 

Play was stopped before the ball hit the net, so regardless of any offside discussions, the goal couldn't stand.  Sibbick not interfering with the shot, so not offside before whistle blown.

 

So it was back to look at the footage before the game was stopped by the whistle.

 

If you look at the shot, it took a slight defection from the hibs players boot and bounced up onto the extended arm of the player.  Penalty!

 

From umpteen viewings, I reckon the ball was still going in, but its possible it was missing. 

 

Var and the ref only had a few minutes to view it and couldnt be certain the ball was going in.

 

In this scenario, intent is irrelevant, the ball MUST be going in the goal for a red card to be shown.  As they weren't certain, then by the laws of the game, they had to award a yellow.

 

You can disagree with the laws, but incredibly, everything the VAR and ref did in this whole passage of play (other than clancy blowing for a foul) was correct going by the laws.

 

Incredible farce it was at the time though!

 

However we scored and won 3-0 anyway so its a bit moot :-)

[Spellczech]

I think VAR prevented the referee being ahem, "incompetent" in Hibs favour. Therefore VAR proved its value to the Scottish game.

[nick_3892]

I’ve just watched the VAR analysis and they covered:

 

hearts player had their arm around a hibs defender so they had to check if this was enough for a foul. I think this is what Clancy gave originally.

 

Rocky saved the ball with his hand so they had to check if the ball was going in or wide but was inconclusive so had to go with a yellow otherwise it was red.

 

They then checked if Sibbick was offside or not but was therefore pen instead as Rocky didn’t react to Sibbick so his offside was irrelevant here.

 

I guess this was why a foul was blown and why VAR took so long.

[boag1874]

I've gone back & watched this incident a good few times & to be perfectly honest I don't think he had a ****ing clue what he was blowing for. VAR bailed him out big time, right call in the end although it took far too long.

[DETTY29]

47 minutes ago, nick_3892 said:

I’ve just watched the VAR analysis and they covered:

 

hearts player had their arm around a hibs defender so they had to check if this was enough for a foul. I think this is what Clancy gave originally.

 

Rocky saved the ball with his hand so they had to check if the ball was going in or wide but was inconclusive so had to go with a yellow otherwise it was red.

 

They then checked if Sibbick was offside or not but was therefore pen instead as Rocky didn’t react to Sibbick so his offside was irrelevant here.

 

I guess this was why a foul was blown and why VAR took so long.

But that was at the very start from Sonodgrass' cross?  Or later?  I'm sure from the moment of the incident at the back post, no Hearts player made contact with a Hibs player.

 

We had the ball break to Devlin, Devlin shoot, another swipe, ball hitting Hanlon, then deflecting onto Bishiri's arm who moved towards the goal, the scramble and just as Sibbick's toe poke was about to cross the line, he blew for a foul.  

 

I'm still convinced believed someone must have fouled Bishiri.

18 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

I've gone back & watched this incident a good few times & to be perfectly honest I don't think he had a ****ing clue what he was blowing for. VAR bailed him out big time, right call in the end although it took far too long.

Or this.

Edited January 4, 2023 by DETTY29

[henryheart]

The big screens stated that there were two incidents checked - offside and handball. There was no reference to a check for a foul (the Halliday incident) and if was being checked the screens would surely have stated so. I'm of the impression that the Halliday incident was picked up by the BBC in its checking and not by either Clancy or VAR. The first VAR check was for offside, and it concluded that there was no offside, so it moved on to handball hence the penalty.

 

The error was from Clancy and his early blowing of the whistle. He should have seen the incident through to its conclusion, as is the correct procedure. This would have allowed him the award Sibbick the goal under the advantage rule. Shankland scoring the penalty got him out of jail.    

[The White Cockade]

Watching it again I think he blows his whistle then straight away changes his mind or something don’t sure as he never tries to chalk off the goal or not give pen he goes straight to talking to VAR unless VAR officials unbelievably quick and were in his ear before he could do anything else

VAR got it right in the end although it took too long 

Also we have to move the monitor or have barriers round it as you can’t have fans 2 feet away abusing the ref as he’s trying to watch the screen

[John Findlay]

18 minutes ago, The White Cockade said:

 

Also we have to move the monitor or have barriers round it as you can’t have fans 2 feet away abusing the ref as he’s trying to watch the screen

Agree fully with this. Its current position is far to close to the supporters in the Wheatfield.

[DETTY29]

23 minutes ago, henryheart said:

The big screens stated that there were two incidents checked - offside and handball. There was no reference to a check for a foul (the Halliday incident) and if was being checked the screens would surely have stated so. I'm of the impression that the Halliday incident was picked up by the BBC in its checking and not by either Clancy or VAR. The first VAR check was for offside, and it concluded that there was no offside, so it moved on to handball hence the penalty.

 

The error was from Clancy and his early blowing of the whistle. He should have seen the incident through to its conclusion, as is the correct procedure. This would have allowed him the award Sibbick the goal under the advantage rule. Shankland scoring the penalty got him out of jail.    

Not quite.

 

Sibbick's goal couldn't stand for 2 reasons.

 

He was offside once active and Clancy blew to stop the game before the ball crossed the line, or intend to.

 

However, if he was intending on stopping the game and Sibbick's toe poke just couldn't count, the offside shouldn't have been checked.

 

It's a mess despite getting there.

 

 

Edited January 4, 2023 by DETTY29

[happyjam]

26 minutes ago, henryheart said:

The big screens stated that there were two incidents checked - offside and handball. There was no reference to a check for a foul (the Halliday incident) and if was being checked the screens would surely have stated so. I'm of the impression that the Halliday incident was picked up by the BBC in its checking and not by either Clancy or VAR. The first VAR check was for offside, and it concluded that there was no offside, so it moved on to handball hence the penalty.

 

The error was from Clancy and his early blowing of the whistle. He should have seen the incident through to its conclusion, as is the correct procedure. This would have allowed him the award Sibbick the goal under the advantage rule. Shankland scoring the penalty got him out of jail.    

 

On your first point does anyone know who controls the messages that are shown on the screen is it Hears or the VaR officials back in Glasgow.

 

Having watched it a few times and my take on it is

1. Clancy thought Halliday had fouled the Hibs player but played on as he wasn't 100% sure so let play continue.

2. Ball broke to Devlin who had a shot that was deflected by a Hibs player then hit Rocky's arm.

3. Ball then broke to Sibbick who put it in the back of the net.

4. Clancy blew for what he thought was the initial foul.

 

In terms of VaR checks my take on it is 

1. They quickly dismissed the initial foul (and was therefore never shown on screen).

2. Proceeded to check Offside and and the Goal as displayed on the big screens.

 

In terms of the VaR decisions my take on it is  

1.   The goal was correctly chalked off as Sibbick was offside at the initial shot but was considered to be inactive at this point but active after the ball hit Rocky.

2.  The penalty was correctly awarded for handball.

3.  The yellow card was given for the handball.  In my opinion the correct result, my initial thoughts on seeing it at full speed are the ball was going directly towards the goal but having slowed it down I think the direction of the ball from the deflection to Rocky is the ball is possibly going passed the post and therefore inconclusive.

 

My verdict is that VaR got all the decisions correct albeit at the game it did seem to take a long time, although this was probably down to the number of incidents that took place and the lack of camera angles available.  

 

While very frustrating that it took longer than we would have liked I'm just glad the correct decision was made and a tick in the box for VaR on this occasion.

 

[John Findlay]

17 minutes ago, happyjam said:

 

On your first point does anyone know who controls the messages that are shown on the screen is it Hears or the VaR officials back in Glasgow.

 

Having watched it a few times and my take on it is

1. Clancy thought Halliday had fouled the Hibs player but played on as he wasn't 100% sure so let play continue.

2. Ball broke to Devlin who had a shot that was deflected by a Hibs player then hit Rocky's arm.

3. Ball then broke to Sibbick who put it in the back of the net.

4. Clancy blew for what he thought was the initial foul.

 

In terms of VaR checks my take on it is 

1. They quickly dismissed the initial foul (and was therefore never shown on screen).

2. Proceeded to check Offside and and the Goal as displayed on the big screens.

 

In terms of the VaR decisions my take on it is  

1.   The goal was correctly chalked off as Sibbick was offside at the initial shot but was considered to be inactive at this point but active after the ball hit Rocky.

2.  The penalty was correctly awarded for handball.

3.  The yellow card was given for the handball.  In my opinion the correct result, my initial thoughts on seeing it at full speed are the ball was going directly towards the goal but having slowed it down I think the direction of the ball from the deflection to Rocky is the ball is possibly going passed the post and therefore inconclusive.

 

My verdict is that VaR got all the decisions correct albeit at the game it did seem to take a long time, although this was probably down to the number of incidents that took place and the lack of camera angles available.  

 

While very frustrating that it took longer than we would have liked I'm just glad the correct decision was made and a tick in the box for VaR on this occasion.

 

This is my take on the events too.