alwaysthereinspirit Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Didn't Rankgers appeal first. They must be having a really good look at the Pacac video to have come up with a Falkirk decision first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartsfc_fan Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 ...there's a surprise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossmor38 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Didn't Rankgers appeal first.They must be having a really good look at the Pacac video to have come up with a Falkirk decision first. The Papac one has been referred to the SFA review panel as the Ref has admitted he made a mistake with that one which to be fair was never a red card either. As for the Cregg one. A bit on the harsh side but it looks like we are going to follow the EPL in banning all two footed tackles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Are rangers the only spl team to successfully appeal a red card this season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albishop Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Are rangers the only spl team to successfully appeal a red card this season? Surprised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambojim52 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Cregg did get the ball first tho, so it was never even a foul!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 sounds to me like the GFA out to get Hearts as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 sounds to me like the GFA out to get Hearts as usual. My thought also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted January 21, 2009 Author Share Posted January 21, 2009 sounds to me like the GFA out to get Hearts as usual. First time Hearts got a mention was . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveofthegame Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Are rangers the only spl team to successfully appeal a red card this season? Not sure. Certainly Csaba won a touchline appeal, don't know about on the pitch though. Both cards should have resulted in successful appeals, but i guess the ref didn't want to make himself look too incompetent by putting his hands up and admitting that both where mistakes. So he picked the (albeit more obvious mistake) Rangers sending off to let off... Shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Not sure. Certainly Csaba won a touchline appeal, don't know about on the pitch though. Both cards should have resulted in successful appeals, but i guess the ref didn't want to make himself look too incompetent by putting his hands up and admitting that both where mistakes. So he picked the (albeit more obvious mistake) Rangers sending off to let off... Shock. Got it in one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Well I'll try and maintain some perspective and say the appeals procedure does ( or should I say CAN ) indeed work So basically it was just a pesh poor decision then ? "The referee accepted that the player had not been guilty of serious foul play, " an SFA spokesperson said. Well the ref needs a refresher course then if he INITIALLY saw that as SFP and now doesnt ? What made it SFP in the first place then ? The SFA said the review panel has the power to reduce the offence to a caution "or completely expunge the offence from the player's record". Dont even think about it Guy will get a yellow now I imagine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Got it in one. I agree. The sad thing is that Falkirk lose out as he HAD to overturn the R@ng*rs one as, and I quote the bastion of all footballing knowledge Billy Dodds, it is the worst red card that has been seen. Honestly, VR is partially correct. I don't think that referees set out to do non Glasgow teams, I think they are simply petrified of upsetting the football power of our country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scallywag Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I might be alone here but I thought Papic was the worse of the two tackles. It was a cynical and professional foul although admitadley only a booking. Cregg wins the ball. What makes a joke of this is that I am not in the slightest bit suprsised that Rangers are the only team who are succesful wit their appeal. The SFA are a disgrace ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 So referee's can refer red card decisions for rangers benefit but thus far have failed to do this for hearts, bairns etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 anti-lithuanian decision IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Utterly disgusting behaviour Both should have been rescinded, Papac's possibly downgraded. Falkirk should send the footage to a top Fifa Ref and get a report confirming the utter incompetence and corruption of the SFA and pay a top legal firm to take it all the way. Would be quite happy for hearts and any other club to make a financial contribution to doing so. The papac decision is fair enough but if the Ref has watched footage of these decisions no reasonable man could say the decision was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groatallar Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Having watched them both I reckon Cregg deserved a red as it was an extremely dangerous tackle. The Papac one who be argued as a red for deliberately kicking an opponent. However it wasn't an overly aggressive or dangerous foul and in my opinion most times players would only be booked for it. Whilst I would love to see Papac being given a lenghty ban given who he plays for it would be fair to down grade it to a yellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Having watched them both I reckon Cregg deserved a red as it was an extremely dangerous tackle. The Papac one who be argued as a red for deliberately kicking an opponent. However it wasn't an overly aggressive or dangerous foul and in my opinion most times players would only be booked for it. Whilst I would love to see Papac being given a lenghty ban given who he plays for it would be fair to down grade it to a yellow. How is it dangerous ? Its not even two footed, Cregg gets to the ball first, only connects with one foot as well. Mendes follows through and lands on Cregg Not even a foul, I agree Papac should get a yellow at most but if Collum has honestly watched them he is a corrupt biased ***** who should be set loose in parkhead with a rangers top and UVF tatoo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 We will now see the size of John Hughes's nuts. More Pea than Brazil will be my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 We will now see the size of John Hughes's nuts. More Pea than Brazil will be my guess. One thing is for sure - this ridiculous agreement not to criticise referees soon won't be worth the paper it wasn't written on. How long did they think it would last? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I hope hughes takes it all the way and doesnt bottle it like Levein did. No one watching those incidents could suggest it is anything other than corrupt and to think Willie Collum is the best prospect in scottish refeeing, sickening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 We will now see the size of John Hughes's nuts. More Pea than Brazil will be my guess. that agreement must have sounded very noble and high minded at the time when they had their cosy wee summit. from the outside it just looked hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 anti-lithuanian decision IMO. More like anti-diluvian! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambojambo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Zaliukas appeal - bumped! Cregg appeal - bumped! Papac appeal - upheld! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
givememychoice Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 just watched the highlights for the first time. Cregg - No foul Papac - Cynical foul designed to stop a break. Yellow card. Of the zaliukas, cregg and Papac incidents, the first two should have been completely rescinded, and Papac reduced to a yellow. Remember Takis only had his red card reduced to a yellow (due to the fact maloney wouldnt have got the ball). Please can we have an independent review panel made up of refs from outside Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil R Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 It was a harsh red, but I can understand why the ref has given it. I compare it to the Fletcher tackle - if you go in at any point with both feet, the ref will always be able to interpret it as dangerous. Like i said, it was harsh, but then so was fletchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 just watched the highlights for the first time.Cregg - No foul Papac - Cynical foul designed to stop a break. Yellow card. i'd agree with this. Papac, morally could be a red ( just cynically took the guy out cause they were on a break, not even bothering to attempt to get the ball) , but by the rules, technically a yellow is about all the ref could give. Cregg - not even a foul. Him and Mendes both went in a bit wholeheartedly, but it was Mendes who got there too late, after Cregg had won the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 More like anti-diluvian! Just reminded me that I have not had a pint in the R.A.O.B. club for a wee while! I shall need to pay a visit asap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveofthegame Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 i'd agree with this. Papac, morally could be a red ( just cynically took the guy out cause they were on a break, not even bothering to attempt to get the ball) , but by the rules, technically a yellow is about all the ref could give. Cregg - not even a foul. Him and Mendes both went in a bit wholeheartedly, but it was Mendes who got there too late, after Cregg had won the ball. Don't agree with the bit on Papac, it was what i guess you'd call a ''clever'' foul, taking the Falkirk player down when they are on the break. An instant yellow yes but never ever a red. It happens every week at all levels. Agree with the Cregg bit, definitely got the ball, the only criticism i'd give is he did appear to slightly jump in, but then so did Mendes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Fact is, the Falkirk one was a sending off, similar to Fletchers IMO, the Rangers FC one wasn't. I think opinions are perhaps clouded because It's Rangers FC who are involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rawrrrrrrr Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Fact is, the Falkirk one was a sending off, similar to Fletchers IMO, the Rangers FC one wasn't. I think opinions are perhaps clouded because It's Rangers FC who are involved Except if you open your eyes and watch the replays as Willie Collum is meant too, you will see that Cregg more than beat Mendes too the ball, and got a clear foot on it with no contact with the player until he arrived late. I wonder if some opinions are maybe clouded because its Patrick Chregg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Fact is, the Falkirk one was a sending off, similar to Fletchers IMO, the Rangers FC one wasn't. I think opinions are perhaps clouded because It's Rangers FC who are involved The Falkirk player won the ball. Fletcher was nowhere near the ball. So in actual FACT... They are not in anyway similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ba Baracus Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 How is it dangerous ? Its not even two footed, Cregg gets to the ball first, only connects with one foot as well. Mendes follows through and lands on Cregg Not even a foul, I agree Papac should get a yellow at most but if Collum has honestly watched them he is a corrupt biased ***** who should be set loose in parkhead with a rangers top and UVF tatoo. I dont think he can complain the 'got the ball first' arguement is a nonsense very similar to tackle that nailed neil mccann at kile, irrelevant if ball played first if the follow through was dangerous and probably deliberate . Agree red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
givememychoice Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 i'd agree with this. Papac, morally could be a red ( just cynically took the guy out cause they were on a break, not even bothering to attempt to get the ball) , but by the rules, technically a yellow is about all the ref could give. Cregg - not even a foul. Him and Mendes both went in a bit wholeheartedly, but it was Mendes who got there too late, after Cregg had won the ball. yeah, Papac deliberately stopped what could have been a goal scoring opportunity. Its not clever. Ideally this would be red, but as the law stands, its a yellow. Agree that if anything, mendes fouled cregg. It is nothing like the fletcher incident (but that wasnt appealed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMA MAROON Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I dont think he can complain the 'got the ball first' arguement is a nonsense very similar to tackle that nailed neil mccann at kile, irrelevant if ball played first if the follow through was dangerous and probably deliberate . Agree red card. I don't think it was delibrate but was definately dangerous. Two footed and studs up. He can have no complaints. Papac is a yellow card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The Falkirk player won the ball. Fletcher was nowhere near the ball. So in actual FACT... They are not in anyway similar. So as long as you touch the ball first, you can follow through and break someone's leg, as long as you win the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Just reminded me that I have not had a pint in the R.A.O.B. club for a wee while! I shall need to pay a visit asap. Which one? Watson Crescent or up by the Guildford? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nade the elephant Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Are rangers the only spl team to successfully appeal a red card this season? More than likely:108::108::108:in a row Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossmor38 Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 yeah, Papac deliberately stopped what could have been a goal scoring opportunity. Its not clever. Ideally this would be red, but as the law stands, its a yellow. Agree that if anything, mendes fouled cregg. It is nothing like the fletcher incident (but that wasnt appealed) What a clear goal scoring opportunity when the foul was like 60 yards from the Rangers goal inside Falkirk half with 3 or 4 defenders in covering positions and no players supporting the player that was fouled? That is just absolutely ridiculous to say that is a red card. Fact is neither was a red card but the referee done Cregg on intent as it was an initial two footed tackle. Personally i don't believe if a player gets the ball he should be sent off but we've all seen the sendings off from the premiership this season for same sort of incidents and maybe that the way the game is going. As for Paranoid on here please get a grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Jambo Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Watch the highlights on the BBC website of the Cregg sending off and from the second replay you will see that it isn't even two footed. His second leg is bent to the side. Given his leading leg plays the ball I'd say not even a foul. Another shocking example as to why the appeals process doesn't work. Just taken a still from the BBC footage. Not very good quality, but think it shows my point regarding non-two footed challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Which one? Watson Crescent or up by the Guildford? Up by the Guildford. As close to a regular boozer as I have ever had tbh. Cracking place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWL Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 So as long as you touch the ball first, you can follow through and break someone's leg, as long as you win the ball? Does there not come a time when you actually bore the arse of yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I certainly think Cregg's is worth discussing, although I wouldn't give the ref a lambasting for awarding it either. Cregg was going for a ball that was 'open' He wasn't going straight into Mendez himself at speed / with force ( ala Fletcher ) but he and Mendez unfortunately arrived at the ball around about the same time, each clattering the other to some degree ? However that's with the benefit of numerous replays and I've seen many more that looked quite innocuous at first but were really quite sinister when replayed ! The mention of McCann's tackle at Killie brings up an interesting point. I think McCann had the ball in his possession ( could be wrong ) and while the guy certainly got the ball first .............he went through Terry like a dose of salts in the process. Now I don't know if that could be considered 'unnecessary roughness' as they say in Ice Hockey ? ..........but that tackle got diddly squat from the ref ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.