Shankland appeal rejected

[SectionDJambo]

2 minutes ago, jamboozy said:

This is what they do, the fact Beaton was on VAR will have a huge bearing as well.

I got the impression, just from the highlights, that Beaton was talking the referee through the game.

VAR is being used to advise rookie referees  in Scotland, I think, rather like having a driving instructor sitting next to a learner driver.

[HeartsandonlyHearts]

1 hour ago, Des Lynam said:

Yeah I’ve been as incompetent as the SFA 🤣

$500 fine stands. Make it payable to me @ SFAWAN*WAN*WAN*.
Losers. Their explanation should be good.

[Pasquale for King]

14 minutes ago, jamboozy said:

This is what they do, the fact Beaton was on VAR will have a huge bearing as well.

Payback for being criticised for correct decisions against Celtic. 

[Big Drew]

GFA. 

[Pasquale for King]

8 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

I got the impression, just from the highlights, that Beaton was talking the referee through the game.

VAR is being used to advise rookie referees  in Scotland, I think, rather like having a driving instructor sitting next to a learner driver.

Spot on 

[The Treasurer]

1 hour ago, Des Lynam said:

How is it corruption in this case? 
 

I personally think if a Ross County player had done the same we’d all be highlighting how the officials got it spot on. 

No one, including Shankland, claimed for anything. In fact Shankland tried to win the ball back. Therefore there was no simulation, just a coming together of players who both just got on with the game until the ref decided to interve 

[King prawn]

All because cheating Beaton was on VAR and he’d have been questioned. 
 

Prick has had it out for us since day 1.

[Mikey1874]

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

[Gorgierools]

2 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

Absolute nonsense. If ever there was evidence needed of ineptitude or plain cheating, this is it. Even with the obvious maroon tinted goggles on, that was never simulation. I doubt there's anything the club can do or say now though. It's a wagon circling reaction to the recent flood of referee identified cock ups, perhaps also influenced by the comments of the recently retiring chief clown.

[Hearts1975]

2 hours ago, Des Lynam said:

How is it corruption in this case? 
 

I personally think if a Ross County player had done the same we’d all be highlighting how the officials got it spot on. 

I dont think its corruption, you are correct, but it looks like they have made a big mistake. 

From the replays, and slow motion, it is clear that the RC defender makes contact with his knee (I think), or upper leg, when Shanks is turning 

At that speed, it is reasonable to suggest that the impact caused him to go down. The fact that he got right up on his feet is neither, here, nor there. 

He wasnt cheating or simulating. I just dont get how they cannot see that there was contact, and why that contact wouldnt have caused him to go down.

You cant really say that a particular type of contact looks bad enough for the player to go down, or not, as the case maybe, as penalties just wouldnt be given for contact in the box. 

My understanding of the rules is that if there is contact in the box and the player goes down, its a penalty. 

AN act of simulation is an act of simulation. BUT, a yellow card is a yellow card.

Thats basically the ref saying that Shanks was cheating and deliberately trying to win the penalty, which just isnt true - imo 

I actually wonder if Shanks comments about anticipating the contact etc to the press was what cost him the decision in the first place 

[D4nny_]

More than happy for the club to go all out Rangers in our statement should they comment further!

[indianajones]

He even bounces straight back up even though it's a blatant penalty. 

 

SFA 

[Sooks]

1 hour ago, Watt-Zeefuik said:

Actually surprised. Obviously disappointed.

 

I might even blame Rodgers for this. The refs are pissed about his antics and are closing ranks against everyone.

Rodger’s and his spurious paranoid arseholery has played a big part in this imo 

[Sooks]

6 minutes ago, Hearts1975 said:

I dont think its corruption, you are correct, but it looks like they have made a big mistake. 

From the replays, and slow motion, it is clear that the RC defender makes contact with his knee (I think), or upper leg, when Shanks is turning 

At that speed, it is reasonable to suggest that the impact caused him to go down. The fact that he got right up on his feet is neither, here, nor there. 

He wasnt cheating or simulating. I just dont get how they cannot see that there was contact, and why that contact wouldnt have caused him to go down.

You cant really say that a particular type of contact looks bad enough for the player to go down, or not, as the case maybe, as penalties just wouldnt be given for contact in the box. 

My understanding of the rules is that if there is contact in the box and the player goes down, its a penalty. 

AN act of simulation is an act of simulation. BUT, a yellow card is a yellow card.

Thats basically the ref saying that Shanks was cheating and deliberately trying to win the penalty, which just isnt true - imo 

I actually wonder if Shanks comments about anticipating the contact etc to the press was what cost him the decision in the first place 

This Irvine prick is for the watching . He is either utterly hopeless or not refereeing fairly . Hopefully not see him again for a while 

[Hearts1975]

2 minutes ago, Sooks said:

This Irvine prick is for the watching . He is either utterly hopeless or not refereeing fairly . Hopefully not see him again for a while 

Agree  mate, 100%.  That said, the actual issue is his incompetence - he shouldnt be getting "coached" through the VAR system, if thats what was happening, as that isnt what it is there for. 

I guess (overall) we have been better served by VAR since its inception. Mind you, that says a lot about the standard of referreing pre VAR, than anything else.

I dont think its corruption, per se, but more a robust response (from the beaks) to try and protect referee integrity.

The problem is, as we all see it, is this way of doing things, actually calls the referees integrity into account, especially when the ratification of earlier decisions, is wrong. 

My primary frustration with VAR in the first place. Whats the point of the system, if the decisionmakers end up backtracking to protect the referees, rather than using it to maximise consistency and fairness in terms of decision making? You cant have both things - is the problem. 

If a decision is wrong, its wrong. There shouldnt have to be any backtracking in the first place. Referees will make mistakes - which is why we introduced this system.

The fact we are still pouring over and analysing decisions made, is indicative of how much better it could be, as opposed to anything else. 

 

[Sooks]

5 minutes ago, Hearts1975 said:

Agree  mate, 100%.  That said, the actual issue is his incompetence - he shouldnt be getting "coached" through the VAR system, if thats what was happening, as that isnt what it is there for. 

I guess (overall) we have been better served by VAR since its inception. Mind you, that says a lot about the standard of referreing pre VAR, than anything else.

I dont think its corruption, per se, but more a robust response (from the beaks) to try and protect referee integrity.

The problem is, as we all see it, is this way of doing things, actually calls the referees integrity into account, especially when the ratification of earlier decisions, is wrong. 

My primary frustration with VAR in the first place. Whats the point of the system, if the decisionmakers end up backtracking to protect the referees, rather than using it to maximise consistency and fairness in terms of decision making? You cant have both things - is the problem. 

If a decision is wrong, its wrong. There shouldnt have to be any backtracking in the first place. Referees will make mistakes - which is why we introduced this system.

The fact we are still pouring over and analysing decisions made, is indicative of how much better it could be, as opposed to anything else. 

 

Totally agree mate 

[jackal]

You have to laugh really, they arent even trying to hide how bad they are any more. Full time refs will make difference in this country as long as the refs come from here.

 

Have a search for "grant irvine referee controversy" if you can be bothered.

 

Another wank on the fast track.

[Taffin]

Not a penalty or a yellow card imo.

 

Not surprised by the decision though.

[SectionDJambo]

44 minutes ago, jackal said:

You have to laugh really, they arent even trying to hide how bad they are any more. Full time refs will make difference in this country as long as the refs come from here.

 

Have a search for "grant irvine referee controversy" if you can be bothered.

 

Another wank on the fast track.

Crikey!

He’s attracted a fair bit of attention from other clubs for his incompetence and attitude on the pitch. And yet he’s still employed as a referee. No wonder he was being baby sat by Beaton on Saturday.

We can wonder why all those complaints seem to have been ignored by his employers. This rejection of Lawrence Shankland’s appeal will only highlight further how incompetent he is at refereeing. He should be nowhere near a top senior game.

[Jambo in Yorkshire]

2 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

From memory the Forrest booking was against County and the defenders were all trying to get him booked (hoping the penalty wouldn’t be given).

Watch the defender initially looking guilty but quickly starts waving his arms to get Shankland booked.

The County defenders have obviously been told to try and con the ref into giving them the decision.

[Doctor FinnBarr]

4 hours ago, Gorgierools said:

He's since admitted he was assuming it was about the disallowed goal

 

Thats the odd thing, has he been on Mars since Saturday. I was working 2 til 10 but I knew about it.

[henrysmithsgloves]

Now if he was playing in say ,green and white hoops,there would be a different decision from the referee 100%

[Pasquale for King]

I’ve never seen him dive yet. 

[1971fozzy]

Couldn’t get a more honest player (well Forest as well and look how that panned out). 
Scottish football is absurd. The refereeing and VAR is why I am treating our semi final as a piss up and good day out with pals.

i guarantee the ref will be either Beaton or Walsh. 100% guarantee it

[1971fozzy]

37 minutes ago, Jambo in Yorkshire said:

From memory the Forrest booking was against County and the defenders were all trying to get him booked (hoping the penalty wouldn’t be given).

Watch the defender initially looking guilty but quickly starts waving his arms to get Shankland booked.

The County defenders have obviously been told to try and con the ref into giving them the decision.

yep. I’m now hoping that shower go down . They are all at it every game. Cheating and it’s so obvious. Get them down with Livingston and the league will improve

[Jim_Duncan]

Ah, so it’s another game of Cheats or Incompetent? 
 

And the answer this week? 
 

Yes, that’s right: BOTH!

[gregzy2k7]

Same old sh!t, different day.

[Firefox]

3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

The more I watch this the more I'm astounded at this booking. anywhere else on the park this is a foul, so in the box it's a penalty, but Shankland at no time claimed a foul, and even bounced right backup to try to win the ball. He doesn't even look in the referee's direction. It's a shocking decision to book him, and even more shocking that Beaton doesn't make him aware of his clear and obvious mistake. The decision to dismiss the appeal smacks of corruption and officialdom closing ranks, just like the IPCC do for complaints against the police. 

[manaliveits105]

SFA are corrupt without doubt 

[johnking123]

Does not surprise me at all

[Jim_Duncan]

Do they publish the relevant law which they used to arrive at their decision?

[boag1874]

That was not an act of simulation, they’ve gave us one this season already and don’t want to give us a second because it makes them look incompetent 

[boag1874]

10 hours ago, Sooks said:

Rodger’s and his spurious paranoid arseholery has played a big part in this imo 

Idiots like Rodgers definitely do nobody any favours 

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

5 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

Idiots like Rodgers definitely do nobody any favours 

Exact same situation and that's a celtic appeal yesterday I'd put alot of money on celtic win that appeal

[John Findlay]

10 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

Its never a dive in a million years.

Refs might be sponsored by Specsavers, but they never use them.

[Gorgierools]

Are notes taken during these appeals? Reading those, though probably heavily redacted, could be interesting.

[thee jambo]

I can’t remember the last time a hun/tim was booked for simulation, it just doesn’t happen. 
In this pic you can clearly see he is going down before any contact with the keeper. 
This was reviewed by VAR but the penalty was still awarded. 
Clearly cheating from VAR. 
 

This post was brought to you by the letters C and the words Clearly and Cheats , feckin muppets. 

[colinmaroon]

14 hours ago, Des Lynam said:

How is it corruption in this case? 
 

I personally think if a Ross County player had done the same we’d all be highlighting how the officials got it spot on. 

 

Croffles!

 

 

[jamboozy]

Same circus different clowns 🤡 at every game in this country, Scottish, or should I say , west of Scotland referees are not fit for purpose 

[Japan Jambo]

13 hours ago, Wee Mikey said:

 

Technically, yes; morally no?

 

Had that been Goldson then the VAR team would've scrutinised it to the Nth degree, spotted the slight touch, ignored the non-claim plus him getting up pronto, and awarded a penalty regardless.

 

 

As above.

 

As someone has already pointed out, it perhaps falls in that grey area of neither a yellow card for simulation nor a penalty.

 

He didn't dive, didn't 'milk it', and made no claim. Should've simply been 'play on'?

 

Poor refereeing and a bit of a face-saving stitch up, methinks.

 

That's one of our Season Ticket renewals into the coffers of the authorities. Maybe they're skint. Actually, given the £40 price of our up-coming 🏆 semi-final, they must be needing extra £££s to pay for all the hangers on and freebies dished out to those who could otherwise well afford to stump up for their own day oot at the footie.

 

Harrumph!

 

Still not happy about that Haring shirt pull penalty at Ibrox. I appreciate that technically it was but the double standards don't half annoy me.

[Japan Jambo]

12 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Reminder of the incident. 0.41 the best view.

 

 

 

Bad decision to give the yellow and if I hadn't seen the movie so many times I'd say I was astonished it wasn't rescinded. Scottish football is shamed by this persistent bias and cheating.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ex member of the SaS]

When a player goes down in the box the ref has three choices:

 

1) Award a penalty, obvious decision

 

2) Book player for simulation, Player dived

 

3) Do nothing, If the player get straight back up and continues to play, let play continue.

 

If as has been suggested the ref was being coached by VaR then I would like the club to ask for the recording of the conversation between VaR and ref. If proved then the club has to make a fuss.

This has to be stamped on quickly before it becomes the norm.

[Bunny Munro]

2 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

If as has been suggested the ref was being coached by VaR then I would like the club to ask for the recording of the conversation between VaR and ref. If proved then the club has to make a fuss.

This has to be stamped on quickly before it becomes the norm.

 

This isn't allowed, any ref caught coaching through VAR would struggle to keep their job.

 

I hope we release another statement calling the SFA and the referee cheats. In the same way they called our player a cheat. Much more evidence one way than the other.

 

[hughesie27]

Just seen it for the first time. I'd be raging if we got a pen given against us for that. Shankland drops like a stone from basically 0 contact.

[Marvin]

Just read it. What a load of shite from the world's most corrupt football organisation. 

 

[hughesie27]

2 hours ago, thee jambo said:

I can’t remember the last time a hun/tim was booked for simulation, it just doesn’t happen. 
In this pic you can clearly see he is going down before any contact with the keeper. 
This was reviewed by VAR but the penalty was still awarded. 
Clearly cheating from VAR. 
 

This post was brought to you by the letters C and the words Clearly and Cheats , feckin muppets. 

This was overturned was it not by VAR? Don't think the ref can subsequently award a yellow for diving as per rules.

 

I may well be wrong about getting overturned.

Edited March 20 by hughesie27

[Thomaso]

So when is Shankland suspended now?

[Hackney Hearts]

47 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Just seen it for the first time. I'd be raging if we got a pen given against us for that. Shankland drops like a stone from basically 0 contact.

 

I'd be raging too - but he wasn't claiming a penalty.

Also, stones don't bounce straight up and try to win the ball. Oh and it's not 0 contact.

[Jim Panzee]

1 hour ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

 

 

If as has been suggested the ref was being coached by VaR then I would like the club to ask for the recording of the conversation between VaR and ref. If proved then the club has to make a fuss.

This has to be stamped on quickly before it becomes the norm.

on kickback - so makes it a cast iron fact....sorry.....FACT!

Edited March 20 by Jim Panzee

[brux]

3 hours ago, thee jambo said:

I can’t remember the last time a hun/tim was booked for simulation, it just doesn’t happen. 
In this pic you can clearly see he is going down before any contact with the keeper. 
This was reviewed by VAR but the penalty was still awarded. 
Clearly cheating from VAR. 
 

This post was brought to you by the letters C and the words Clearly and Cheats , feckin muppets. 

That's not cheating, that's just rangers