Callum McGregor

[Scott Leitch]

I know it was mentioned in the match thread but I'm surprised there's not been a thread regarding him stamping on Vargas. ****ing animal. That's deliberate. If this was the other way round it's a red at the time and a 3 match ban. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/callum-mcgregor-unseen-celtic-challenge-29120909.amp

[boag1874]

Definitely should have been off for that. Absolute ***** move

[saxondale]

39 minutes ago, Scott Leitch said:

I know it was mentioned in the match thread but I'm surprised there's not been a thread regarding him stamping on Vargas. ****ing animal. That's deliberate. If this was the other way round it's a red at the time and a 3 match ban. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/callum-mcgregor-unseen-celtic-challenge-29120909.amp

 

There's literally no way on earth you can say for sure that's deliberate or a red.

 

FWIW, McGregor doesn't seem like that sort of player. But I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, it's just impossible to tell from such little/crap footage.

[Bazzas right boot]

6 minutes ago, saxondale said:

 

There's literally no way on earth you can say for sure that's deliberate or a red.

 

FWIW, McGregor doesn't seem like that sort of player. But I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, it's just impossible to tell from such little/crap footage.

 

If you ever played football you know that he meant that, there's many ways to avoid doing that and only one way to make sure you catch the player.

 

For me it's obvious, he even exaggerates the landing to make sure he caught him.

That's on top of the fk gven when 2 celtic players clashed and got a fk.

Absolutely howling.

 

 

Another thing, if that's Devlin on a celtic player, it's seen by the ref or VAR and at least reviewed.

 

 

 

[Mac80]

4 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

Whether it’s deliberate or not doesn’t matter. He stamped on Vargas. 
 

McGregor has got himself a few red cards. 

This for me. 
 

Compliance officer should be looking at this for a retrospective ban but they won’t. 

[Le Chat]

They've got Rangers at the weekend.  No danger the Compliance Officer is getting involved.

 

Sweep sweep.

[RustyRightPeg]

Club should be making a fuss over this. Anyone who’s played the game knows you don’t land like that unless you mean it. 

[chubby1973]

7 minutes ago, Mac80 said:

This for me. 
 

Compliance officer should be looking at this for a retrospective ban but they won’t. 

Do we even still have a compliance officer?

[Mac80]

Just now, chubby1973 said:

Do we even still have a compliance officer?

No idea 🤷‍♂️ 

 

Var should really be doing that job at the time I suppose 

[TexasAndy]

That's deliberate all day long.  If that had been picked up at time and gone to VAR it's a definite red.  

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

1 hour ago, Scott Leitch said:

I know it was mentioned in the match thread but I'm surprised there's not been a thread regarding him stamping on Vargas. ****ing animal. That's deliberate. If this was the other way round it's a red at the time and a 3 match ban. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.footballscotland.co.uk/spfl/scottish-premiership/callum-mcgregor-unseen-celtic-challenge-29120909.amp

Haven't seen the clip, but as the Celtic captain isn't he above the laws of the game that apply to mere mortals? Much like Broon before him.

[kila]

VAR would've looked at that and decided no action was needed. Reverse the roles and it's guaranteed that would be reviewed and a red card for the opposition.

 

The bias hasn't gone away with VAR, it's just selective as to what they choose to get involved with and what they sweep under the carpet.

 

As we see in Europe, Celtic and Rangers really struggle with being refereed fairly.

[Jambo in Bathgate]

40 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

Whether it’s deliberate or not doesn’t matter. He stamped on Vargas. 
 

McGregor has got himself a few red cards. 

That was deliberate! He could have avoided Vargas but you can see him jump over him and bring his boot down on Vargas. He knew what he was doing.  Red card to any other team bar Rangers. 

[hereford_hearts]

I used to play with a striker who had perfected the accidental stamp. Make it look like he was tangled with the defender then stamp on him. Always very apologetic to the player straight after, telling the ref there was no way to avoid standing on him. Got away with it every time! 

[If carlsberg did rivals...]

35 minutes ago, kila said:

VAR would've looked at that and decided no action was needed. Reverse the roles and it's guaranteed that would be reviewed and a red card for the opposition.

 

The bias hasn't gone away with VAR, it's just selective as to what they choose to get involved with and what they sweep under the carpet.

 

As we see in Europe, Celtic and Rangers really struggle with being refereed fairly.

Then they've got the cheek to complain because the European refs aren't at their beck and call!

[OTT]

I'm wondering if the club - all clubs, have a duty to overreact to this kind of thing. 

 

VAR has been brought in at considerable expense and we're still making pretty bad errors. 

 

It should have gone to VAR so the ref could review.

 

As others have said, its telling the amount of cards Celtic/Rangers get in Europe vs Domestically. 

[Dayman]

I've seen the Full HD footage on Wyscout and I'm pretty positive that he doesn't make contact with him whatsoever. He lands inside his legs. Even from the grainy footage, it would be near impossible for him to get solid footing to push off into a sprint without so much as a stumble if he was using Vargas' shin as the floor. Vargas goes down holding his head as when he falls, he collides with McGregor's knee. No clue if that was intentional mind...

[saxondale]

2 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

If you ever played football you know that he meant that, there's many ways to avoid doing that and only one way to make sure you catch the player.

 

For me it's obvious, he even exaggerates the landing to make sure he caught him.

That's on top of the fk gven when 2 celtic players clashed and got a fk.

Absolutely howling.

 

 

Another thing, if that's Devlin on a celtic player, it's seen by the ref or VAR and at least reviewed.

 

 

 

 

I've played football at a decent level (as if that makes any difference...), so I know how it works. 

 

What you describe is indeed something footballers do tend to do, particularly players like Roy Keane, Neil Lennon and Scott Brown.

 

My point is though that a) the footage and angle of the 'stamp' is terrible and therefore it would be ludicrous to say, with certainty, the stamp was deliberate, and b) it would be out of character for McGregor to do that.

 

If it was a Lennonesque footballer, then it would be more reasonable to assume he did stamp on the player deliberately, but it wasn't.

 

I do still think it should have been checked by Var, regardless.

[New Town Loafer]

2 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

If you ever played football you know that he meant that, there's many ways to avoid doing that and only one way to make sure you catch the player.

 

For me it's obvious, he even exaggerates the landing to make sure he caught him.

That's on top of the fk gven when 2 celtic players clashed and got a fk.

Absolutely howling.

 

 

Another thing, if that's Devlin on a celtic player, it's seen by the ref or VAR and at least reviewed.

 

 

 

That was a clear foul. There was a push.

[The Black Prince]

I wouldn't have thought McGregor was capable of that sort of shit but it does look bad.

 

No doubt I'm in a minority here but I'd rather hope that was an accident.

 

If it wasn't he'd deserve weeks out.

[Bazzas right boot]

17 minutes ago, New Town Loafer said:

That was a clear foul. There was a push.

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/TUH8aNpRxmuYCCeQ/

 

By who?

 

 

[New Town Loafer]

6 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

https://www.facebook.com/share/r/TUH8aNpRxmuYCCeQ/

 

By who?

 

 

Not loading for me, mate.

[Bazzas right boot]

34 minutes ago, saxondale said:

 

I've played football at a decent level (as if that makes any difference...), so I know how it works. 

 

What you describe is indeed something footballers do tend to do, particularly players like Roy Keane, Neil Lennon and Scott Brown.

 

My point is though that a) the footage and angle of the 'stamp' is terrible and therefore it would be ludicrous to say, with certainty, the stamp was deliberate, and b) it would be out of character for McGregor to do that.

 

If it was a Lennonesque footballer, then it would be more reasonable to assume he did stamp on the player deliberately, but it wasn't.

 

I do still think it should have been checked by Var, regardless.

 

 

Nothing is certain,  but that looks like an stamp all day.

Only Mcgregor will know for 100%, looking at that he did nothing to avoid it and did everything to stamp on the player.

 

Your defence seems to be is that because its McGregor it's not 100% but if it was another player you mention you would be 100%.

That's the most ridiculous line of argument I've heard. Really is.

 

 

The video is right in front of you and because you think McGregor is nice you think he never meant it.

The new  evidence suggests he can be nasty and he was, you are ignoring it for some reason.

 

That's a red card all day, you can easily avoid standing on a player in that manner, it's a conscious decision to land and therfore stamp on a player that way.

 

 

You'd make a good OF ref!

Send Devlin aff, but shake Mcgregors hand and tell him to be careful for the same foul.

Edited May 7 by Bazzas right boot

[Bazzas right boot]

3 minutes ago, New Town Loafer said:

Not loading for me, mate.

 

Google it, it was sent to me, no idea how the tech works.

 

There was no push.

Edited May 7 by Bazzas right boot

[Midloth_Iain]

1 hour ago, Dayman said:

I've seen the Full HD footage on Wyscout and I'm pretty positive that he doesn't make contact with him whatsoever. He lands inside his legs. Even from the grainy footage, it would be near impossible for him to get solid footing to push off into a sprint without so much as a stumble if he was using Vargas' shin as the floor. Vargas goes down holding his head as when he falls, he collides with McGregor's knee. No clue if that was intentional mind...

 

Agreed, I think he lands on the turf between Vargas' legs. Vargas reaction came immediately McGregor clipped his head with his knee.

 

A stamp with that force on his knee / leg would instigate an immediate further reaction from Vargas.  

[The Treasurer]

IMO McGregor is one of the less offensive sellik players (a very low bar, admittedly) so I'd be surprised if he was to stamp on an opponent deliberately. 

As has been suggested I think his knee accidentally caught Vargas on the head. 

 

[busbyfth]

Little sh1t appears to slightly stamp down with his left leg 

[wavydavy]

3 hours ago, chubby1973 said:

Do we even still have a compliance officer?

 

Below is a quote from an article in The Herald. It would seem that you don't need to know anything about football more the Law.

 

 

 

The Scottish Football Association have appointed Martin Black as their new compliance officer.

It means Andrew Phillips, who was given the job last March, is departing the role after 20 months in charge.

He joins from the Office of the Advocate General, where he was a solicitor in charge of constitutional litigation.

In a statement, the SFA said that Black has: "a wealth of legal experience, having worked as a specialist criminal lawyer in private practice for more than a decade, while he also held an advisory role during the COP26 conference in Glasgow".

It is the first time a compliance officer will operate solely in with VAR in play.

"Having gained considerable and varied experience as a criminal court practitioner before taking on positions in-house and in government, I believe I am perfectly placed to take this next step in my career with the role of Scottish FA Compliance Officer," he commented.

"It’s an exciting time for Scottish football, which plays an integral part in life throughout the country, and I fully understand the importance of this unique position’s role in the game.

"I look forward to building on the excellent work conducted by Andrew in the role and shall continue to strive to ensure that focus remains on the spectacle of the football itself."

[TheBigO]

Is there video of this, I can only see a still pic of it in the article....

[OmiyaHearts]

I would not be surprised to see our board do absolutely nothing about this. As usual.

[OmiyaHearts]

However, we got away with this one. Maybe evens out, I guess?

[kila]

7 minutes ago, OmiyaHearts said:

However, we got away with this one. Maybe evens out, I guess?

 

[Bazzas right boot]

22 minutes ago, OmiyaHearts said:

However, we got away with this one. Maybe evens out, I guess?

 

Got away with what, kicking the ball?

 

 

[saxondale]

1 hour ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

 

Nothing is certain,  but that looks like an stamp all day.

Only Mcgregor will know for 100%, looking at that he did nothing to avoid it and did everything to stamp on the player.

 

Your defence seems to be is that because its McGregor it's not 100% but if it was another player you mention you would be 100%.

That's the most ridiculous line of argument I've heard. Really is.

 

 

The video is right in front of you and because you think McGregor is nice you think he never meant it.

The new  evidence suggests he can be nasty and he was, you are ignoring it for some reason.

 

That's a red card all day, you can easily avoid standing on a player in that manner, it's a conscious decision to land and therfore stamp on a player that way.

 

 

You'd make a good OF ref!

Send Devlin aff, but shake Mcgregors hand and tell him to be careful for the same foul.

 

Okay, let me try and make this as clear as I can for you because you're flailing all over the place at the moment:

 

- I cannot say one way or another if the stamp is deliberate or not.

- The reasoning behind it is not that, in ISOLATION, McGregor seems a decent guy and therefore it would be out of character for him to do this (that would not be a strong argument), but a COMBINATION of both this and the fact the footage is dreadful and therefore it is not clear in the slightest that it was deliberate - that to me makes it pretty clear that the decision is not CONCLUSIVE (not that it was deliberate or not - that's not what I'm arguing). Given most media outlets and pundits are saying 'it should be at least checked' as opposed to 'it's a clear red', would back up my point, as well.

 

[Bazzas right boot]

10 minutes ago, saxondale said:

 

Okay, let me try and make this as clear as I can for you because you're flailing all over the place at the moment:

 

- I cannot say one way or another if the stamp is deliberate or not.

- The reasoning behind it is not that, in ISOLATION, McGregor seems a decent guy and therefore it would be out of character for him to do this (that would not be a strong argument), but a COMBINATION of both this and the fact the footage is dreadful and therefore it is not clear in the slightest that it was deliberate - that to me makes it pretty clear that the decision is not CONCLUSIVE (not that it was deliberate or not - that's not what I'm arguing). Given most media outlets and pundits are saying 'it should be at least checked' as opposed to 'it's a clear red', would back up my point, as well.

 

 

Footage is clear to me and if it was the other way about the narrative would be very different. 

 

The media are very far up the Glasgow arsehole that I really don't care what the media outlets and pundits are saying,  most are ex OF themselves and back them to the hilt, the others are scared to piss of the vile fan bases.

 

It should definitely have been reviewed by VAR and the fact it wasn't is damning in itself.

 

The footage is clear to me, he stamps out, he might have missed him, that part is not clear, but the footage for me  clearly shows intent as he stamps out.

 

You thinking McGregor being a nice guy is irrelevant.

 

It's actually a pretty obvious Stamp, for it not to be seen by the ref looking directly at it and then not to be reviewed by VAR is baffling. 

 

 

 

Edited May 7 by Bazzas right boot

[saxondale]

1 minute ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Footage is clear to me and if it was the other way about the narrative would be very different. 

 

The media are very far up the Glasgow arsehole that I really don't care what the media outlets and pundits are saying,  most are ex OF themselves and back them to the hilt, the others are scared to piss of the vile fan bases.

 

It should definitely have been reviewed by VAR and the faxtcit wasn't is damning in itself.

 

The footage is clear to me, he stamps out, he might have missed him, that part is not clear, but the footage for me  clear shows intent as he stamps out.

 

You thinking McGregor being a nice guy is irrelevant.

 

It's actually a pretty obvious Stamp, for it not to be seen by the ref looking directly at it and then not to be reviewed by VAR is baffling. 

 

 

 

 

I couldn't have been any clearer, yet you don't appear to have understood the reasoning I have presented, or you just don't want to see it.

 

Saying repeatedly 'the footage is clear to me' means nowt, and then arguing about stuff I have not even disputed (eg that a VAR check should have happened, regardless.). Like I said before, flailing.

 

So let's just leave it at that.

[SUTOL]

50 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

Is there video of this, I can only see a still pic of it in the article....

 

 

 

[TheBigO]

20 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

 

Have to say, that doesn't look great does it.  And guessing that VAR, if used, would have other views which would maybe clear it up one way or the other.  Should at least have been looked at.  Thing is with VAR, we don't always no if it is or isn't I suppose.

 

The chat of "not that kind of player".... I agree, I don't think McGregor is particularly like that.  Actually really like him as a player and he kind of just gets on with his job quietly.  But that's not how refereeing works, or should work anyway.  Every incident is a new incident.  But we know it doesn't work like that.  I mean, look at the semi final a couple of weeks back.  Cantwell, 2 late sliding tackles, no yellow.  And you just know Cammy will be booked for his first.

[Bazzas right boot]

56 minutes ago, saxondale said:

 

I couldn't have been any clearer, yet you don't appear to have understood the reasoning I have presented, or you just don't want to see it.

 

Saying repeatedly 'the footage is clear to me' means nowt, and then arguing about stuff I have not even disputed (eg that a VAR check should have happened, regardless.). Like I said before, flailing.

 

So let's just leave it at that.

 

Let's not, since you keep saying I'm flailing,  when in fact I completely understand your points. 

 

Not flailing at all, just disagree with you.

 

Imo -Clear intent, should have been a red card. To not even review it is just incompetence. 

 

I completely understand your point,  just disagree almost completely. 

A Players history or past or them being nice should have no bearing in a individual incident.  

I also think the footage is clear in that he stamped out.

 

No flailing,  just disagree with your reasoning to mitigate McGregors stamp and lack of action from the officials.

 

We do both agree that there should have been a review,  which is strange since you don't think it was a foul.

 

 

[Ex member of the SaS]

7 hours ago, saxondale said:

 

There's literally no way on earth you can say for sure that's deliberate or a red.

 

FWIW, McGregor doesn't seem like that sort of player. But I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, it's just impossible to tell from such little/crap footage.

I disagree as he has previous from standing " accidently " on a player. A scummy Celtic player that gets away with tackles no other player would get away with simply due to how he plays for. Take the hooped jersey off him and he would get red cards virtually every second game.

[SUTOL]

1 hour ago, TheBigO said:

Have to say, that doesn't look great does it.  And guessing that VAR, if used, would have other views which would maybe clear it up one way or the other.  Should at least have been looked at.  Thing is with VAR, we don't always no if it is or isn't I suppose.

 

The chat of "not that kind of player".... I agree, I don't think McGregor is particularly like that.  Actually really like him as a player and he kind of just gets on with his job quietly.  But that's not how refereeing works, or should work anyway.  Every incident is a new incident.  But we know it doesn't work like that.  I mean, look at the semi final a couple of weeks back.  Cantwell, 2 late sliding tackles, no yellow.  And you just know Cammy will be booked for his first.

 

 

On initial watching it doesn't look good, and the ref is looking right at it. 

 

But, I'm pretty sure he doesn't land on Vargas, as Vargas would make it very obvious if he had. 

 

 

Taking the individual players and clubs out of it for a second: Does he (appear to) come down with force intentionally, as he is wanting to try and ensure he doesn't land on the player. i.e. there's a space there for my foot to land NOW! If he tried to land gentler but slower he would be more likely to catch him as the player on the ground moves. 

 

 

Good of the ref to stop for the head knock though...at least he played advantage for the original fowl and presumably had a word/booking for McGregor later...

[TheBigO]

3 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

On initial watching it doesn't look good, and the ref is looking right at it. 

 

But, I'm pretty sure he doesn't land on Vargas, as Vargas would make it very obvious if he had. 

 

 

Taking the individual players and clubs out of it for a second: Does he (appear to) come down with force intentionally, as he is wanting to try and ensure he doesn't land on the player. i.e. there's a space there for my foot to land NOW! If he tried to land gentler but slower he would be more likely to catch him as the player on the ground moves. 

 

 

Good of the ref to stop for the head knock though...at least he played advantage for the original fowl and presumably had a word/booking for McGregor later...

Yup nowt conclusive about it.  And a point you make which is probably relevant, if there was off the ball contact there, any kind of stamp, Kenny of all our players would have made us ALL aware!!!haha

[queensferryjambo]

5 hours ago, Dayman said:

I've seen the Full HD footage on Wyscout and I'm pretty positive that he doesn't make contact with him whatsoever. He lands inside his legs. Even from the grainy footage, it would be near impossible for him to get solid footing to push off into a sprint without so much as a stumble if he was using Vargas' shin as the floor. Vargas goes down holding his head as when he falls, he collides with McGregor's knee. No clue if that was intentional mind...

 

That is exactly how I saw it. Doesn't look like McGregor actually lands on him. 

 

When he jumps over Vargas it looks like he may have made slight contact with Vargas's head hence Vargas holds his head.

 

We have all seen Vargas play - had he been stamped on I guarantee Vargas would have let the ref know right away.  

[New Town Loafer]

11 minutes ago, queensferryjambo said:

 

That is exactly how I saw it. Doesn't look like McGregor actually lands on him. 

 

When he jumps over Vargas it looks like he may have made slight contact with Vargas's head hence Vargas holds his head.

 

We have all seen Vargas play - had he been stamped on I guarantee Vargas would have let the ref know right away.  

Exactly this. Accidental collision with the boy's head and clearly no stamp.

 

Let's move on and leave the victimhood to the Tims and the Huns.

[gorgie rd eh11]

100% deliberate.

Not a hope in hell the referee, linesman or VAR officials were sending off the Celtic captain before next weekends game. 

[HMFC01]

Looks like he tried to stamp on Vargas.   Hard to see if he contacted him but it looks at least a yellow for reckless behaviour.   If contact it's a red. 

 

 

 

 

[saxondale]

3 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Let's not, since you keep saying I'm flailing,  when in fact I completely understand your points. 

 

Not flailing at all, just disagree with you.

 

Imo -Clear intent, should have been a red card. To not even review it is just incompetence. 

 

I completely understand your point,  just disagree almost completely. 

A Players history or past or them being nice should have no bearing in a individual incident.  

I also think the footage is clear in that he stamped out.

 

No flailing,  just disagree with your reasoning to mitigate McGregors stamp and lack of action from the officials.

 

We do both agree that there should have been a review,  which is strange since you don't think it was a foul.

 

 

 

You've just proven you don't understand my points with your last line "...since you don't think it was a foul" - I've not said that once if you'd read my posts in full.

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt about understanding the reasoning behind why I don't think all of this is conclusive in the slightest, but it's clear you're seeing/reading what you want to see.

 

I've got no problem you disagreeing with me, but let's not pretend there is much reasoning behind it beyond repeatedly saying something is "really clear", "he 100% meant it", "it definitely is a red" etc etc, because that just wouldn't be true.

[Bazzas right boot]

19 minutes ago, saxondale said:

 

You've just proven you don't understand my points with your last line "...since you don't think it was a foul" - I've not said that once if you'd read my posts in full.

 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt about understanding the reasoning behind why I don't think all of this is conclusive in the slightest, but it's clear you're seeing/reading what you want to see.

 

I've got no problem you disagreeing with me, but let's not pretend there is much reasoning behind it beyond repeatedly saying something is "really clear", "he 100% meant it", "it definitely is a red" etc etc, because that just wouldn't be true.

 

For me it is.

It's a clear stamp out, it's actually very aggressive and there is clear intent, it's about a clear a stamp that you'll see, from the clip I've seen-  it's very clear.

 

A clear stamp out on a player is red, so if I think it's a clear stamp, whichvI do then a red shoukd follow, both are linked.

 

You think McGregor is nice and it's not his character ( no idea why that's relevant when reviewing a stand alone incident) and you do not think the clip or footage is conclusive, therefore naturally it's then not a red.

 

It really depends on the thinking, is it a stamp or not and once you decide that the action follows.

 

I think it's a clear stamp out, he jumps on our player then stamps out, clear as day to me.

I then think it should be a red.

 

There is no flailing or mus understanding,  I see a clear stamp out.

It's very aggressive,  he can't control it as he jumps on him and I see intent.

I don't know if he hit our player, but that does not matter if you are out of control and overly aggressive.

 

You think not. If I also thought there was no stamp then ofc a red card cannot follow.

 

It gets worse when you re watch it. No idea how it is unlear and McGregor,  nice guy or not was out of order.

 

 

 

 

 

[Broxburn Jambo]

17 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

For me it is.

It's a clear stamp out, it's actually very aggressive and there is clear intent, it's about a clear a stamp that you'll see, from the clip I've seen-  it's very clear.

 

A clear stamp out on a player is red, so if I think it's a clear stamp, whichvI do then a red shoukd follow, both are linked.

 

You think McGregor is nice and it's not his character ( no idea why that's relevant when reviewing a stand alone incident) and you do not think the clip or footage is conclusive, therefore naturally it's then not a red.

 

It really depends on the thinking, is it a stamp or not and once you decide that the action follows.

 

I think it's a clear stamp out, he jumps on our player then stamps out, clear as day to me.

I then think it should be a red.

 

There is no flailing or mus understanding,  I see a clear stamp out.

It's very aggressive,  he can't control it as he jumps on him and I see intent.

I don't know if he hit our player, but that does not matter if you are out of control and overly aggressive.

 

You think not. If I also thought there was no stamp then ofc a red card cannot follow.

 

It gets worse when you re watch it. No idea how it is unlear and McGregor,  nice guy or not was out of order.

 

Does not even need VAR, referee looking straight at it

 

 

 

 

[saxondale]

20 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

For me it is.

It's a clear stamp out, it's actually very aggressive and there is clear intent, it's about a clear a stamp that you'll see, from the clip I've seen-  it's very clear.

 

A clear stamp out on a player is red, so if I think it's a clear stamp, whichvI do then a red shoukd follow, both are linked.

 

You think McGregor is nice and it's not his character ( no idea why that's relevant when reviewing a stand alone incident) and you do not think the clip or footage is conclusive, therefore naturally it's then not a red.

 

It really depends on the thinking, is it a stamp or not and once you decide that the action follows.

 

I think it's a clear stamp out, he jumps on our player then stamps out, clear as day to me.

I then think it should be a red.

 

There is no flailing or mus understanding,  I see a clear stamp out.

It's very aggressive,  he can't control it as he jumps on him and I see intent.

I don't know if he hit our player, but that does not matter if you are out of control and overly aggressive.

 

You think not. If I also thought there was no stamp then ofc a red card cannot follow.

 

It gets worse when you re watch it. No idea how it is unlear and McGregor,  nice guy or not was out of order.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Christ, forget it.