Fozzyonthefence Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 22 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 Doubtful but possible as we would have played against 11 men for whole game. They created enough chances with 10 to suggest they would bother us even more with 11 but we’ll never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, wavydavy said: What did they say about Johnstone's challenge on Tait ? or was that just ignored? It seems to have been ignored by everyone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 37 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: 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. No way would he have red carded him without VAR, he let them away with bookable offences the whole game and gave a dodgy penalty and didn’t give us a one which was. Without VAR they have 11 men and the 2nd half starts at 0-0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said: We're playing Celtic, remember, of course they would get the benefit. Linesman raised his flag. It was given as offside on pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 25 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: No way would he have red carded him without VAR, he let them away with bookable offences the whole game and gave a dodgy penalty and didn’t give us a one which was. Without VAR they have 11 men and the 2nd half starts at 0-0. Without VAR Shankland scores before half-time - but the 11 men issue is obviously an unknown factor. To be fair to Robertson - not that I want to be, but let's just say I was his defence lawyer... The Celtic penalty may have looked like a penalty from his angle - I just don't understand why VAR didn't insist he take another look at it. For our penalty, it's possible he missed it - I don't think any of our players claimed for it? You're right about ignoring the bookable offences though - particularly on Tait... although maybe he was fearing for his life having already given a red card and a penalty against Celtic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 6 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Without VAR Shankland scores before half-time - but the 11 men issue is obviously an unknown factor. To be fair to Robertson - not that I want to be, but let's just say I was his defence lawyer... The Celtic penalty may have looked like a penalty from his angle - I just don't understand why VAR didn't insist he take another look at it. For our penalty, it's possible he missed it - I don't think any of our players claimed for it? You're right about ignoring the bookable offences though - particularly on Tait... although maybe he was fearing for his life having already given a red card and a penalty against Celtic. I think the pen is given by Johnstons ridiculous clumsy leap which connects only with his arm onto another of his teams arm. Had it not come off Johnston I dont think they give it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Jeez! No wonder their appeal was rejected... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/yang-celtic-appeal-details-revealed-28763748?utm_source=football_scotland_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Edinburgh+Live+-+Hearts+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=971ab7b3-148d-4dbc-b720-4cb8031e15a3 A brief response should be all that's required: "You don't know the rules" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 9 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Jeez! No wonder their appeal was rejected... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/yang-celtic-appeal-details-revealed-28763748?utm_source=football_scotland_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Edinburgh+Live+-+Hearts+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=971ab7b3-148d-4dbc-b720-4cb8031e15a3 A brief response should be all that's required: "You don't know the rules" 'Clear and obvious error' isn't a thing. Instead certain incidents are checked including potential red card incidents. Ignorant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canscot Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 7 hours ago, dtgj said: There's a bit in today's gossip column: Celtic have been left astonished by the decision to uphold Yang Hyun-Jun's red card - and are yet to be given a reason for their claim being dismissed. (Scottish Sun) I don't know how they can be astonished. It was as clear a red card as could be. The only astonishing thing was that it was originally given as a yellow. The even more astonishing thing is having the temerity to appeal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 13 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Jeez! No wonder their appeal was rejected... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/yang-celtic-appeal-details-revealed-28763748?utm_source=football_scotland_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Edinburgh+Live+-+Hearts+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=971ab7b3-148d-4dbc-b720-4cb8031e15a3 A brief response should be all that's required: "You don't know the rules" They want to make up their own rules to suit themselves. Must be really hard for them when the correct rules are followed and enforced. My heart bleeds for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) 2 hours ago, Hackney Hearts said: 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. Just my opinion but I'd wager they've been told to ref the game as they normally would. Saying that, I think you're right and it has changed how refs operate. I disagree that the sending off was one of these moments though. I reckon without VAR he still gives a yellow. Edited March 6 by WDJ87 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Pasquale for King said: No way would he have red carded him without VAR, he let them away with bookable offences the whole game and gave a dodgy penalty and didn’t give us a one which was. Without VAR they have 11 men and the 2nd half starts at 1-0. FTFY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTT Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 23 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Jeez! No wonder their appeal was rejected... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/yang-celtic-appeal-details-revealed-28763748?utm_source=football_scotland_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Edinburgh+Live+-+Hearts+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=971ab7b3-148d-4dbc-b720-4cb8031e15a3 A brief response should be all that's required: "You don't know the rules" "and finally argued VAR John Beaton should not have been getting involved because Robertson hadn't made a clear and obvious error." This point specifically really rangles me because it is so utterly inconsistent. Collum did the same thing FOR Celtic with the Cochrane red card for the Maeda foul at Tynie. To everyone else in the stadium, Walsh had got the decision spot on. There was no controversey. Cochrane had impeded Maeda, a free kick was given and he was booked. Zero complaints from anyone. Collum then saw it fit to overrule Walsh and re-referee the decision. There was no excessive contact from Cochrane and any arguement about it being a clear goalscoring opportunity is frankly giving far too much credit to Celtic. It was a complete and utter misuse of VAR. Whereas in this instance, the winger endangered the opponent. So VAR re-refereeing the decision makes sense. - Failing to immediately award the red card is a clear and obvious error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 56 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Without VAR Shankland scores before half-time - but the 11 men issue is obviously an unknown factor. To be fair to Robertson - not that I want to be, but let's just say I was his defence lawyer... The Celtic penalty may have looked like a penalty from his angle - I just don't understand why VAR didn't insist he take another look at it. For our penalty, it's possible he missed it - I don't think any of our players claimed for it? You're right about ignoring the bookable offences though - particularly on Tait... although maybe he was fearing for his life having already given a red card and a penalty against Celtic. I said at the time without VAR the flag goes up right away, and their offside goal probably stands. Why Beaton didn’t intervene when Robertson gave the penalty for them is a mystery, maybe by the time the red card happened he had seen enough. You hear a few shouts of hand ball when it happened as a couple of our players appealed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 9 minutes ago, WDJ87 said: FTFY How do you work that out? No way Shanklands goal doesn’t get chalked off by the Assistant referee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 minutes ago, OTT said: "and finally argued VAR John Beaton should not have been getting involved because Robertson hadn't made a clear and obvious error." The error was quite clear and obvious. You can't raise your studs to head height near an opponent's face. Words that are irrelevant in this context: Malice Force Injury Intent Flick Celtic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 7 minutes ago, OTT said: "and finally argued VAR John Beaton should not have been getting involved because Robertson hadn't made a clear and obvious error." This point specifically really rangles me because it is so utterly inconsistent. Collum did the same thing FOR Celtic with the Cochrane red card for the Maeda foul at Tynie. To everyone else in the stadium, Walsh had got the decision spot on. There was no controversey. Cochrane had impeded Maeda, a free kick was given and he was booked. Zero complaints from anyone. Collum then saw it fit to overrule Walsh and re-referee the decision. There was no excessive contact from Cochrane and any arguement about it being a clear goalscoring opportunity is frankly giving far too much credit to Celtic. It was a complete and utter misuse of VAR. Whereas in this instance, the winger endangered the opponent. So VAR re-refereeing the decision makes sense. - Failing to immediately award the red card is a clear and obvious error. Spot on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 5 minutes ago, OTT said: "and finally argued VAR John Beaton should not have been getting involved because Robertson hadn't made a clear and obvious error." This point specifically really rangles me because it is so utterly inconsistent. Collum did the same thing FOR Celtic with the Cochrane red card for the Maeda foul at Tynie. To everyone else in the stadium, Walsh had got the decision spot on. There was no controversey. Cochrane had impeded Maeda, a free kick was given and he was booked. Zero complaints from anyone. Collum then saw it fit to overrule Walsh and re-referee the decision. There was no excessive contact from Cochrane and any arguement about it being a clear goalscoring opportunity is frankly giving far too much credit to Celtic. It was a complete and utter misuse of VAR. Whereas in this instance, the winger endangered the opponent. So VAR re-refereeing the decision makes sense. - Failing to immediately award the red card is a clear and obvious error. Imo that phrase needs to go. It's open to interpretation and causes confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: How do you work that out? No way Shanklands goal doesn’t get chalked off by the Assistant referee. I don't recall him flagging Shankland offside? It was VAR that disallowed the goal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1953 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 25 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said: 'Clear and obvious error' isn't a thing. Instead certain incidents are checked including potential red card incidents. Ignorant. Celtic obviously thought that there was no clear and obvious error, but it wasn't their decision to make, it was Beaton's, and as he got involved he obviously thought that there was a clear and obvious error, and as the appeal has failed he has been proved to be correct. What a stupid basis for an appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: You hear a few shouts of hand ball when it happened as a couple of our players appealed. Possibly, but it wasn't one of those where 16,000+ Hearts fans are screaming for a penalty, so giving the benefit of the doubt, it's just plausible that Robertson missed it in real time. No idea why I'm trying to defend him!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: How do you work that out? No way Shanklands goal doesn’t get chalked off by the Assistant referee. Eh ! He didn’t flag and he indicated goal and moved towards half way. As did the referee. Offside is a absolutely impossible to give for that goal without VAR. The on field decision was ‘goal’ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Possibly, but it wasn't one of those where 16,000+ Hearts fans are screaming for a penalty, so giving the benefit of the doubt, it's just plausible that Robertson missed it in real time. No idea why I'm trying to defend him!! You need listen to the audio on the highlights. Clear shouts of ‘handball’ from the crowd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 minutes ago, WDJ87 said: I don't recall him flagging Shankland offside? It was VAR that disallowed the goal. No shit Sherlock, do you remember the guy on the other side flagging them offside when they scored? At best both would’ve been chalked off with no VAR but past experience shows we were most likely to be 1:0 down against 11 men without the much maligned system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 6 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Possibly, but it wasn't one of those where 16,000+ Hearts fans are screaming for a penalty, so giving the benefit of the doubt, it's just plausible that Robertson missed it in real time. No idea why I'm trying to defend him!! He clearly missed a few things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 5 minutes ago, JimmyCant said: Eh ! He didn’t flag and he indicated goal and moved towards half way. As did the referee. Offside is a absolutely impossible to give for that goal without VAR. The on field decision was ‘goal’ Have you forgotten how many marginal decisions they get for them even with VAR, he would’ve flagged in years gone by without a shadow of a doubt without VAR being in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said: No shit Sherlock, do you remember the guy on the other side flagging them offside when they scored? At best both would’ve been chalked off with no VAR but past experience shows we were most likely to be 1:0 down against 11 men without the much maligned system. Mate there was a late flag for the Celtic goal and the guy is at least a yard off. There is no flag for the Hearts goal and but for VAR it would have stood. Both officials thought it was a ‘good’ goal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 minute ago, JimmyCant said: You need listen to the audio on the highlights. Clear shouts of ‘handball’ from the crowd Yeah, a few maybe - but not quite like the reaction to the Yang/Cochrane incident! And nothing picked up on by the TV commentators - they usually say something, even if it's only to say "hopeful/half-hearted shout for a penalty". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: No shit Sherlock, do you remember the guy on the other side flagging them offside when they scored? At best both would’ve been chalked off with no VAR but past experience shows we were most likely to be 1:0 down against 11 men without the much maligned system. No need You said without VAR. I just followed your logic but you changed logic somehow and now the linesmen would have made different decisions without VAR? Is that what you're saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: Have you forgotten how many marginal decisions they get for them even with VAR, he would’ve flagged in years gone by without a shadow of a doubt without VAR being in place. He didn’t flag mate. You can’t escape that fact. Even if he flags it’s still getting checked. Every single marginal goal is checked. He clearly doesn’t think it’s offside. Edited March 6 by JimmyCant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said: Mate there was a late flag for the Celtic goal and the guy is at least a yard off. There is no flag for the Hearts goal and but for VAR it would have stood. Both officials thought it was a ‘good’ goal Even Chris Sutton thought it was onside when watching the initial replays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyCant Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, Hackney Hearts said: Even Chris Sutton thought it was onside when watching the initial replays. As did I. I’m still not entirely convinced about the decision. Final ball release AND the telemetry of the drawn lines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckies1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 They’ll be even more livid now that Rodgers has been charged by the SFA and to appear before them on 28th March. Excellent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 8 minutes ago, WDJ87 said: No need You said without VAR. I just followed your logic but you changed logic somehow and now the linesmen would have made different decisions without VAR? Is that what you're saying? Sorry If you couldn’t understand what my point is, no change of logic, as I said without VAR he flags Shankland offside as has happened many times in the 50 years I’ve been watching us play the uglies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, Luckies1874 said: Hahahahaha quite right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 9 minutes ago, JimmyCant said: He didn’t flag mate. You can’t escape that fact. Even if he flags it’s still getting checked. Every single marginal goal is checked. He clearly doesn’t think it’s offside. I get all that, but in the past he would’ve flagged and rather been wrong than make a mistake that cost Celtic a goal. Do people not remember how much more biased officials were before VAR? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henryheart Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 7 minutes ago, JimmyCant said: Mate there was a late flag for the Celtic goal and the guy is at least a yard off. There is no flag for the Hearts goal and but for VAR it would have stood. Both officials thought it was a ‘good’ goal That is exactly correct. The linesman has to let the move continue to its conclusion before raising his flag. This is aimed at eliminating the possibility of an incorrect raised flag preventing a legitimate goal. As you said, it was obvious from my position in the Main Stand that the Celtic goal would be pulled back for offside and this happened very quickly. Like everyone else in the ground, including the linesman, I saw nothing wrong with Shankland's goal and it took a lengthy check before deciding it was offside. The process worked exactly as it is meant to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said: I get all that, but in the past he would’ve flagged and rather been wrong than make a mistake that cost Celtic a goal. Do people not remember how much more biased officials were before VAR? Exactly - folk should remember that. VAR might not be perfect, but it’s sorted out a fair amount of the bias nonsense that used to go on with certain officials. There’s no hiding place for them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 In real time from my angle in lower Q the Alistair Johnston hand ball was clear and obvious. Again in Scotland poor number of camera angles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 Notice of Complaint | Brendan Rodgers, Manager, Celtic FC Wednesday 6 March 2024 Alleged Party in Breach: Brendan Rodgers, Manager, Celtic FC Date: Sunday 3 March 2024 Competition: Scottish Premiership Match: Heart of Midlothian FC v Celtic FC Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 72. No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or microblogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this Rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a match official for Misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material. Hearing date: Thursday 28 March 2024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 (edited) Helpful of Brendan to use the word 'incompetent'. Possible reason they have been unusually quick. These things usually take weeks. Edited March 6 by Mikey1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HMFC01 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 16 minutes ago, Luckies1874 said: Big game Brenda, beat on VAR decider by Beaton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 14 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: Sorry If you couldn’t understand what my point is, no change of logic, as I said without VAR he flags Shankland offside as has happened many times in the 50 years I’ve been watching us play the uglies. You said that after I quoted you! So you did change logic. And I'm no the only one who pointed it out yet I am the one you're rude to in your reply? Pointless continuing this with you tbh 👋 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 13 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said: Notice of Complaint | Brendan Rodgers, Manager, Celtic FC Wednesday 6 March 2024 Alleged Party in Breach: Brendan Rodgers, Manager, Celtic FC Date: Sunday 3 March 2024 Competition: Scottish Premiership Match: Heart of Midlothian FC v Celtic FC Disciplinary Rule allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 72. No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or microblogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this Rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a match official for Misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material. Hearing date: Thursday 28 March 2024 Any idea of the potential length of punishment? Brendan away from the touchline might help them 🙊 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highlandjambo3 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Hackney Hearts said: Jeez! No wonder their appeal was rejected... https://www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/yang-celtic-appeal-details-revealed-28763748?utm_source=football_scotland_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Edinburgh+Live+-+Hearts+Newsletter_newsletter&utm_content=&utm_term=&ruid=971ab7b3-148d-4dbc-b720-4cb8031e15a3 A brief response should be all that's required: "You don't know the rules" So why does this opening picture not show the full extended leg? If you didn’t see the match and had heard all the media and septic shenanigans, then went on to view that picture you could argue the point that AC was cheating and they were hard done by………..🤬🤬 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 36 minutes ago, WDJ87 said: You said that after I quoted you! So you did change logic. And I'm no the only one who pointed it out yet I am the one you're rude to in your reply? Pointless continuing this with you tbh 👋 Read my first post again, where you rudely thought you should correct me when you misunderstood what I said. There was no change at all, I said it would 0-0 if VAR was involved meaning our offside goal would’ve been flagged as they have many times in the past. But yeah 👋🏿. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 18 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said: So why does this opening picture not show the full extended leg? If you didn’t see the match and had heard all the media and septic shenanigans, then went on to view that picture you could argue the point that AC was cheating and they were hard done by………..🤬🤬 I was sitting with a group of folk on Sunday night when the highlights were on and all gasped and agreed that it was a red card, none of them were Hearts supporters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highlandjambo3 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 16 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: I was sitting with a group of folk on Sunday night when the highlights were on and all gasped and agreed that it was a red card, none of them were Hearts supporters. Exactly but, my point was the media chose to “find” a less aggressive looking picture to align with the victims narrative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDJ87 Posted March 6 Share Posted March 6 3 hours ago, Pasquale for King said: No way would he have red carded him without VAR, he let them away with bookable offences the whole game and gave a dodgy penalty and didn’t give us a one which was. Without VAR they have 11 men and the 2nd half starts at 0-0. Where did you say Shanklands goal would have been flagged? 🤔 How can you expect anyone to get that from what you wrote? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.