Celtic appeal the Yang red card. (appeal dismissed)

[brawlad74]

We shouldn't be surprised with the victims response. It's the Tics way of piling on pressure on refs and officials to ensure decisions go there way in future. Even when they win they're desperate to bring up perceived injustices to them during game. They never, as in the pen against us on Sun acknowledge opposition injustice. Horrible club.

[Dia Liom]

The whole thing was PR from celtic from the start. Don't really care if it appeases their fans, though I doubt it as Rodgers is not popular. The annoying thing is the bbc seemingly bending over backwards to back up this daft narrative. It is genuinely one of the most one-sided reporting I've ever seen. Like they've just copied and pasted whatever the celtic pr folk sent them. 

[1953]

40 minutes ago, kila said:

 

Trying to find a recent example of it.

 

2022, Porteous against Aberdeen: https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/ryan-porteous-hibs-red-card-23473500

 

But their appeal against the red has been rejected by the Scottish FA, who have handed Porteous and extra game on top of his three-match suspension, with the panel deciding that it had "no prospect of success."

 

Yang's red card surely had no prospect of success either given it was a high foot to the face

 

Was the Portuous one not something about they appealed it, without prospect of success, to let him play in the next match as the match was to be before the hearing, but Yang's was fast tracked so being available for the next match didn't apply. 

[PortyJambo]

2 hours ago, Carl Fredrickson said:

BBC Scotland football site still has no mention of the appeal failing https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/scottish-premiership

 

Lumped in with Killie's appeal being rejected.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68485928

 

"WUR'S OOR CLARRIFIKASHUN!"

Edited March 6 by PortyJambo

[Lambert Simnel]

Celtic just being Celtic. All you can do is laugh at them.

[henrysmithsgloves]

The rhabid plastic paddys, it's a conspiracy nonsense is a laugh 😂 if anyone should be shouting about the wrong calls,it should be all the teams out with the arse cheeks. For now sit back and enjoy the seeth,tears and snotters. Because normal service will resume 🤬🤬

[Carl Fredrickson]

10 minutes ago, PortyJambo said:

Lumped in with Killie's appeal being rejected.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68485928

 

"WUR'S OOR CLARRIFIKASHUN!"

 

Strange - the link you sent works for me but I cant find it when looking direct onto the BBC site under Scottish Premiership or Scottish Football. 

[Bozi]

The Celtic narrative has switched from there being "no contact" to "Cochrane headbutted his foot intentionally" 😂😂😂 

The other laughable thing is this constant rhetoric about there not being 'excessive force" or "malice" none if this matters a jot, if your foot is 6 foot high in the air and touches an opposition players it's ENDANGERING AN OPPONENT

[PortyJambo]

1 minute ago, Carl Fredrickson said:

 

Strange - the link you sent works for me but I cant find it when looking direct onto the BBC site under Scottish Premiership or Scottish Football. 

They should have it in the Entertainment section, as it's certainly good for a laugh 😆

[Carl Fredrickson]

1 minute ago, PortyJambo said:

They should have it in the Entertainment section, as it's certainly good for a laugh 😆

[wentworth jambo]

Panel result not to increase suspension basically opens up any red card to appeal...worst case scenario, you lose £500....suspect they're going to be a busy panel.

[Jack Torrance]

Player suspensions where possible, should include at least one game against the opposition where the penalty was incurred.

 

Anyway, no surprise the media have swept it under the carpet so far.

[Bazzas right boot]

9 hours ago, meister said:

Let’s be 100% clear on this.  Celtic did not in any way appeal this because they thought it wasn’t a red, they knew it was.

 

They also knew the appeal would fail and they could play the hard done by party in all this. It’s a ****ing farce.

 

Get. It. Right. ****ing. Up. Them.

 

No one is buying it.

 

It's more sinister than that, it's topic officials under more pressure infuture games.

 

The discussion should be-

 

Celtic pen- why wasn't it at least reviewed?

 

High foot- yes he went for the ball. He didn't mean it, but under the rules he endangered our player.  The question is why did it NEED var to make the decision- a win for VAR. 

 

Our pen- soft as shite. But the handball rules are what they are.- a win for VAR.

 

Offside goal- tight as ****, lino let it go- win for VAR.

 

The officials got 3 out of the 4 big decisions wrong and NEEDED var to help them out.

 

Their pk wasn't even reviewed, that should be issue being discussed,  not the decisions VAR got correct.

 

 

[bigdav]

50 minutes ago, Carl Fredrickson said:

 

Strange - the link you sent works for me but I cant find it when looking direct onto the BBC site under Scottish Premiership or Scottish Football. 

Same here- they don't want to upset Celtic more than they have already. 

[boag1874]

16 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

It's more sinister than that, it's topic officials under more pressure infuture games.

 

The discussion should be-

 

Celtic pen- why wasn't it at least reviewed?

 

High foot- yes he went for the ball. He didn't mean it, but under the rules he endangered our player.  The question is why did it NEED var to make the decision- a win for VAR. 

 

Our pen- soft as shite. But the handball rules are what they are.- a win for VAR.

 

Offside goal- tight as ****, lino let it go- win for VAR.

 

The officials got 3 out of the 4 big decisions wrong and NEEDED var to help them out.

 

Their pk wasn't even reviewed, that should be issue being discussed,  not the decisions VAR got correct.

 

 

Agree on all counts tbh. VAR did it's job well with the exception of the Celtic pen not being looked at, the on field officials got nearly every big call wrong, with the only one they got "right" (right as in VAR agreeing with the decision) being the Celtic pen. Yes VAR is there as a safety net but when it's been relied on that many times to correct on field mistakes in one game then the Ref & his assistants should be questioned as to why they got it wrong that often. Robertson has come out of this looking like a complete fud second only to Brenda & the Celtic conspiracy mob.

Edited March 6 by boag1874

[Bazzas right boot]

10 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

Agree on all counts tbh. VAR did it's job well with the exception of the Celtic pen not being looked at, the on field officials got nearly every big call wrong, with the only one they got "right" (right as in VAR agreeing with the decision) being the Celtic pen. Yes VAR is there as a safety net but when it's been relied on that many times to correct on field mistakes in one game then the Ref & his assistants should be questioned as to why they got it wrong that often. Robertson has come out of this looking like a complete fud second only to Brenda & the Celtic conspiracy mob.

 

 

Agreed,  apart from the offside, centimetres in it, if that.

 

Offside is ****ed anaw, like the handball rule tbh.

 

 

Edited March 6 by Bazzas right boot

[Fozzyonthefence]

1 hour ago, casper said:

There was nothing silly about our PK on Sunday. Johnston threw himself at a high ball arm first and the ball clearly hit it. For some reason all the press are saying it was given because the ball went on to hit the other guys arm.

It was a penalty under current rules but the rule is ridiculous.  Just about everyone agrees that it needs changed, there is no way that should be a penalty but until the rules are changed it is!  The thing is that is the first penalty against Celtic in the league this season so they’re not used to it.  There’s been loads of soft handball penalties given and they need to learn to suck it up like all the other clubs.
 

Pretty sure it wasn’t given for a handball against Johnston though. 

**** Celtic!

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

[jock _turd]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

It was a penalty under current rules but the rule is ridiculous.  Just about everyone agrees that it needs changed, there is no way that should be a penalty but until the rules are changed it is!  The thing is that is the first penalty against Celtic in the league this season so they’re not used to it.  There’s been loads of soft handball penalties given and they need to learn to suck it up like all the other clubs.
 

Pretty sure it wasn’t given for a handball against Johnston though. 

**** Celtic!

 

I wonder if referee match reports are available to the general public under freedom of information? I ask because at the time I thought that the reason the penalty was awarded was because of the first handball not the second and it would be interesting to know if this was the case. It would also help to know the reason why a red card was not given at the high foot incident. I am sure the rules are clear that a high foot such as that is a straight red, it would be interesting to know why the ref saw that as not a dangerous play.

[Jack Torrance]

36 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

It's more sinister than that, it's topic officials under more pressure infuture games.

 

The discussion should be-

 

Celtic pen- why wasn't it at least reviewed?

 

High foot- yes he went for the ball. He didn't mean it, but under the rules he endangered our player.  The question is why did it NEED var to make the decision- a win for VAR. 

 

Our pen- soft as shite. But the handball rules are what they are.- a win for VAR.

 

Offside goal- tight as ****, lino let it go- win for VAR.

 

The officials got 3 out of the 4 big decisions wrong and NEEDED var to help them out.

 

Their pk wasn't even reviewed, that should be issue being discussed,  not the decisions VAR got correct.

 

 

 

Correct on the aim to put officials under pressure. 

 

I'm not sure they did get the big decisions wrong. I think they purposely make the call that way then leave it to VAR to decide. This is the way most of the decisions are going and appears to be how they are directed to officiate. It's leading to on-field referees losing decision-making skills and taking the easy option. 

 

I think the Celtic pen would have been reviewed but we just didn't get to hear about. This is another flaw in VAR with rubbish communication. The way rugby handle it with microphone feeds being played and accessible, is the way forward. 

[saxondale]

45 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

It's more sinister than that, it's topic officials under more pressure infuture games.

 

The discussion should be-

 

Celtic pen- why wasn't it at least reviewed?

 

High foot- yes he went for the ball. He didn't mean it, but under the rules he endangered our player.  The question is why did it NEED var to make the decision- a win for VAR. 

 

Our pen- soft as shite. But the handball rules are what they are.- a win for VAR.

 

Offside goal- tight as ****, lino let it go- win for VAR.

 

The officials got 3 out of the 4 big decisions wrong and NEEDED var to help them out.

 

Their pk wasn't even reviewed, that should be issue being discussed,  not the decisions VAR got correct.

 

 

 

Spot on.

[Seymour M Hersh]

I feel sorry for Livingston on Sunday. They may not even get the kick off for first or second half decision. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

11 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

I wonder if referee match reports are available to the general public under freedom of information? I ask because at the time I thought that the reason the penalty was awarded was because of the first handball not the second and it would be interesting to know if this was the case. It would also help to know the reason why a red card was not given at the high foot incident. I am sure the rules are clear that a high foot such as that is a straight red, it would be interesting to know why the ref saw that as not a dangerous play.

Well he did eventually as he gave a red card.  He only got to see it once in real time before watching it on the monitor.  Did you think it was a red in real time?  I’m not saying it wasn’t a red but I still think it’s of the soft variety, same as our penalty.  Theirs wasn’t a soft penalty though, just simply a free kick to Hearts. 

[casper]

27 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

Pretty sure it wasn’t given for a handball against Johnston though. 

**** Celtic!

If it wasn't given against Johnston then it should have been. That would be a penalty in the old rules or the new rules or any rules there has ever been.

Either way, justice was done and a penalty was awarded.

 

[boag1874]

33 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

Agreed,  apart from the offside, centimetres in it, if that.

 

Offside is ****ed anaw, like the handball rule tbh.

 

 

The offside is tight, I don’t think offside & handball are quite the same though as offside is objective black & white you either are or you aren’t. I’m ok with that. The subjective nature of handball and what a “natural position” is creates all the issues with consistency around it. That needs to change at IFAB level.

[jock _turd]

;

Edited March 6 by jock _turd

[jock _turd]

12 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

Well he did eventually as he gave a red card.  He only got to see it once in real time before watching it on the monitor.  Did you think it was a red in real time?  I’m not saying it wasn’t a red but I still think it’s of the soft variety, same as our penalty.  Theirs wasn’t a soft penalty though, just simply a free kick to Hearts. 

Well of course I was seeing it from a different angle but to me that is a red card straight off. The penalty is entirely different because Brenda was rabbiting on about the player getting a nudge and having nowhere to go re the ball hitting his arm, so clearly he thought the pen was for the second hand ball not the first. The first hand ball is most definetely a pen he deliberately played the ball with his arm.

[davemclaren]

36 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

I wonder if referee match reports are available to the general public under freedom of information? I ask because at the time I thought that the reason the penalty was awarded was because of the first handball not the second and it would be interesting to know if this was the case. It would also help to know the reason why a red card was not given at the high foot incident. I am sure the rules are clear that a high foot such as that is a straight red, it would be interesting to know why the ref saw that as not a dangerous play.

Freedom of Information only applies to public bodies. 

[Hackney Hearts]

24 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

Brenda was rabbiting on about the player getting a nudge and having nowhere to go re the ball hitting his arm, so clearly he thought the pen was for the second hand ball not the first. The first hand ball is most definetely a pen he deliberately played the ball with his arm.

 

Such a pity no interviewer was able to ask him about the first handball...

[Fozzyonthefence]

21 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

Well of course I was seeing it from a different angle but to me that is a red card straight off. The penalty is entirely different because Brenda was rabbiting on about the player getting a nudge and having nowhere to go re the ball hitting his arm, so clearly he thought the pen was for the second hand ball not the first. The first hand ball is most definetely a pen he deliberately played the ball with his arm.

I don’t think either of them deliberately handled, not that it matters.  The other guy had his arm out like an aeroplane, making his body bigger, I think it was for that. To be honest I didn’t notice Johnston handle it. 
 

Instances like this just highlight why it should be like rugby where it is so transparent and you can hear the conversation between ref and TMO (VAR) room.   Transparency and honesty in football will never catch on though. 

[Pasquale for King]

13 hours ago, Hearts_fan said:

I wish someone in the media, or even John Beaton himself, would just come out and say the Hearts penalty was legitimate, because it was. As someone pointed out here previously, the Celtic player Johnston handles it with his elbow as it falls out the air. Stonewall penalty. One TV angle on Sportscene showed the change in direction.

 

Sour grapes, Celtic. GIRUY. Red card legit. Penalty legit. Fair and square.

Declan Gallagher did, Mark Wilson said the Celtic one wasn’t on Monday. Don’t hold your breath though. 

[henrysmithsgloves]

4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Declan Gallagher did, Mark Wilson said the Celtic one wasn’t on Monday. Don’t hold your breath though. 

Here's one that is until his precious selling stops getting picked on🤣🤣🤣

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, henrysmithsgloves said:

Here's one that is until his precious selling stops getting picked on🤣🤣🤣

😂

[Hackney Hearts]

In terms of decisions, the worst thing that happened to Celtic on Sunday was them being (wrongly) awarded an early penalty. If that had been correctly given as a free kick to Hearts, the whole match would have played out differently.

 

Obviously if they'd scored from it, that's a different matter!

[wavydavy]

36 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

Such a pity no interviewer was able to ask him about the first handball...

 

Or the fact that when Brenda moaned about his player being pushed in the lead up to the hand ball it was infact another Celtic player who did it.

[wavydavy]

37 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Declan Gallagher did, Mark Wilson said the Celtic one wasn’t on Monday. Don’t hold your breath though. 

 

What did they say about Johnstone's challenge on Tait ? or was that just ignored?

[Turkishcap]

I posted on Herald fb page that maybe we should apologise for beating them as its caused ramifications in the media.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, Jack Torrance said:

 

Correct on the aim to put officials under pressure. 

 

I'm not sure they did get the big decisions wrong. I think they purposely make the call that way then leave it to VAR to decide. This is the way most of the decisions are going and appears to be how they are directed to officiate. It's leading to on-field referees losing decision-making skills and taking the easy option. 

 

I think the Celtic pen would have been reviewed but we just didn't get to hear about. This is another flaw in VAR with rubbish communication. The way rugby handle it with microphone feeds being played and accessible, is the way forward. 

 

When I said reviewed, I meant Robertson to get called over and review it.

 

 

 

 

[Bull's-eye]

Statement required by Hearts apologising for not only making it difficult for them to play but scoring goals and beating them.

 

Poor show Hearts.

 

 

[HeartsandonlyHearts]

5 hours ago, kila said:

Did the suspension not used to get increased if you failed the appeal once upon a time?

 

 

Not for every team 😜

[OTT]

I can't believe they actually appealed that and are surprised that they were told to sling their hook. 

 

The arrogance  

[JimmyCant]

Take VAR out of that game and accept all the on field decisions and the score is still Hearts 2 Celtic 0

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

3 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Take VAR out of that game and accept all the on field decisions and the score is still Hearts 2 Celtic 0

They would probably not be offside, and no red card given. We'd have been a goal down and playing against 11 men.

[Spellczech]

4 hours ago, casper said:

There was nothing silly about our PK on Sunday. Johnston threw himself at a high ball arm first and the ball clearly hit it. For some reason all the press are saying it was given because the ball went on to hit the other guys arm.

Agreed - I thought it was given for the first handball too...

 

How many arms do Celtic think would be reasonable before it is a penalty against them?

[boag1874]

1 minute ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

They would probably not be offside, and no red card given. We'd have been a goal down and playing against 11 men.

No danger the officials miss that offside, I know they're incompetent (or crooked depending who you ask) but the boy was about 3 yards in front of the last man - that would have been flagged with no VAR

 

We'd have been playing v 11 men but honestly I think we'd have beat them anyway, we were better than them on the day

[Hackney Hearts]

6 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

They would probably not be offside, and no red card given. We'd have been a goal down and playing against 11 men.

 

That wasn't a VAR decision.

Just a very late flag, as is the way these days.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

4 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

No danger the officials miss that offside, I know they're incompetent (or crooked depending who you ask) but the boy was about 3 yards in front of the last man - that would have been flagged with no VAR

 

We'd have been playing v 11 men but honestly I think we'd have beat them anyway, we were better than them on the day

 

Just now, Hackney Hearts said:

 

That wasn't a VAR decision.

Just a very late flag, as is the way these days.

We're playing Celtic, remember, of course they would get the benefit.

[Hackney Hearts]

1 minute ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

 

We're playing Celtic, remember, of course they would get the benefit.

 

It was flagged offside though.

 

[JimmyCant]

13 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

They would probably not be offside, and no red card given. We'd have been a goal down and playing against 11 men.

Their offside ‘goal’ was an on field decision and it wasn’t even close

[Hackney Hearts]

17 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Take VAR out of that game and accept all the on field decisions and the score is still Hearts 2 Celtic 0

 

Yes. Admittedly we'd have been playing 11 men - although I have a suspicion that if there were no VAR in place, Robertson might have been more inclined to go for the red card. I think he may have been hedging his bets, passing the buck, knowing that if it looked like he'd been too lenient, VAR would soon let him know and share the responsibility. I'm sure this is one of the effects VAR has on refereeing generally now.