League Cup 2017'18 Next: Celtic F (Hampden) 26/11/17 15:00

[Kmcalpin]

 

I can't disagree with any of the points you make, I'm just thinking from the perspective of the club. There has to be a reason why they haven't appealed, and the only one I can think of is the financial aspect.

IF this is true then the financial hit would be £2,000 I think. A drop in the ocean compared to what we've earned from our cup run. I agree though that if the club doesn't appeal there must be a reason - a question for a shareholder to raise at the next club AGM maybe?

[CoF]

Mayby he is thinking will be banned for 1st league cup section game next year so is it worth gambling clubs money for SFA to admit their top ref got it wrong which they wont . Was howling decision and yes I do think Thompson has agenda with us but time to move on we have another 2 attempts at ending this run so lets concentrate our efforts on that .

Even if it's chucked out, it's probably money well spent to keep it in the media another few days. For once, we do seem to have the backing of the whole of the media.

[Well Up For It!]

IF this is true then the financial hit would be £2,000 I think. A drop in the ocean compared to what we've earned from our cup run. I agree though that if the club doesn't appeal there must be a reason - a question for a shareholder to raise at the next club AGM maybe?

 

To be honest, as a fan run club and given the general feeling about the incident amongst the fans I will be expecting a statement explaining exactly why we are not appealing a cut and dry case.

[David]

Motherwell will not appeal the red card shown to Cedric Kipre in Sunday's League Cup final defeat to Celtic.

 

Referee Craig Thomson judged he had pulled on Scott Sinclair's arm inside the box. He chose to dismiss the defender as well as award Celtic with a penalty.

 

Speaking after his side's 2-0 win, Sinclair defended his actions.

 

He said: "I got through and felt some contact, I felt he pulled me back and I've gone down. It was definitely a penalty. I've no qualms about that."

 

Motherwell have decided it is not worth their time or money to lodge an appeal to the Scottish FA against the controversial decision.

 

Manager Stephen Robinson explained: "It's very simple. We've appealed numerous decisions and wasted a lot of time and money.

 

"Another reason is we want Cedric completely focused on tomorrow night and Saturday. We've got big, big games.

 

"And the reality is his ban is next season, in the first round of the cup and by then he could be in the Premier League, because he's a top footballer."

 

He added: "So I think we need to concern ourselves with the here and now and the here and now is Wednesday night and Saturday.

 

"What I do know is we've appealed numerous things when we thought we had good evidence and they've been turned against us so we're not going to go that way this time for that reason."

 

[Well Up For It!]

I get Robinson's logic in regards to Kipre, but not appealing because we have a poor record of winning appeals with good evidence doesn't.

 

If Kipre is deemed to have fouled Sinclair, the red card becomes a yellow.

 

When Sinclair is deemed to have dived and cheated, red card rescinded, spotlight on Sinclair & Thompson. Justice done.

 

As a side note, wonder how the SFA will react to being called out by Robinson here?

[sbcmfc]

 

As a side note, wonder how the SFA will react to being called out by Robinson here?

Perhaps not appealing and stating why could carry more weight than an appeal we are unlikely to win.

 

Im happy with the reason for not appealing. Everyone knows it was wrong, but unfortunately we cant change it.

[GazzyB]

Incredibly disappointing.

[Well Up For It!]

Perhaps not appealing and stating why could carry more weight than an appeal we are unlikely to win.

 

 

While I would agree with that sentiment normally, we are talking about the SFA here. An organisation that probably can't even spell integrity. Robinson has had a thinly veiled swipe. Watch this space.

[Andy_P]

I get what Robinson is saying about good cases being thrown out previously and some frankly laughable examples being rescinded but its that incredibly erratic nature of the outcomes that for me would ensure that I would appeal pretty much everything where there is the slightest element of doubt involved.

 

I appreciate the reasoning and understand it fully from the perspective of the club. As a supporter however it only serves to rub my nose in it that little bit further.

[wellowell]

I agree with not appealing as do not think Sfa will admit their top ref got a penalty and sending off wrong again against same team so even though 80 % of people agree not penalty or sending off would not be overturned imo so no point wasting time and money .

[sbcmfc]

I get what Robinson is saying about good cases being thrown out previously and some frankly laughable examples being rescinded but its that incredibly erratic nature of the outcomes that for me would ensure that I would appeal pretty much everything where there is the slightest element of doubt involved.

 

I appreciate the reasoning and understand it fully from the perspective of the club. As a supporter however it only serves to rub my nose in it that little bit further.

Theres been some laughable ones recently. Ryan Jacks, while hardly assault were both worthy of red cards by generally accepted standards, regardless of whether Stokes/Broadfoot were entirely innocent.

 

Was it Windass that punched a stjohnstone player last season, but apparently not hard enough and won his appeal.

 

The scott Brown one at Ross County last season where he was raging and did the boy was a farce, he only appealed it to troll Rangers as it meant he could play in the old firm game due to a quirk of a bank holiday and he won the appeal.

 

Meanwhile pretty reasonable appeals from other teams get flung out every week.

 

I always go back to the 2 wee had in quick succession 5 or so years ago, the one Higdon got cited for doing the Higdon and the one where Jim Goodwin punched Jennings and they both got a ban.

 

The system is a farce at the moment, there appears to be no logic or consistency to what appeals are won and lost and what is cited and what isnt.

[numpty]

I'd also have like to see us appeal in on principle, as you know all the Friends of Brendan will now just say "see, even youse thought it was a red card" from now to eternity.

 

Then I read his comment about Cedric probably not serving the ban as he could be playing in the English Premiership by then anyway. Advantage Robbo.

[Kmcalpin]

I think the club is totally wrong about this and it sends out completely the wrong message. If something is going on behind the scenes then be open about it. As it is there will now be a nasty smell left to hang over this whole episode for evermore.

[David]

I'd also have like to see us appeal in on principle, as you know all the Friends of Brendan will now just say "see, even youse thought it was a red card" from now to eternity.

 

Then I read his comment about Cedric probably not serving the ban as he could be playing in the English Premiership by then anyway. Advantage Robbo.

 

Not really, that's not much of a reason to be honest. Kipre won't be playing Premiership football next season, if at all.

 

It makes sense financially, but it does leave us open to the fact that if we think Kipre was wrongly sent off we should be appealing. If not, then shut the fuck up and get on with it, really.

[Well Up For It!]

I agree with not appealing as do not think Sfa will admit their top ref got a penalty and sending off wrong again against same team so even though 80 % of people agree not penalty or sending off would not be overturned imo so no point wasting time and money .

 

See this is exactly the reason why I am disappointed - the matter of wether it was a penalty or not is kinda irrelevant (it wasn't, it was as blatant a dive as you get). This issue is, for me, by the letter of the laws of the game, as per this season, if there is contact of any kind for this incident it is a penalty and a YELLOW card.

 

The issue is the SFA's "top referee" clearly doesn't know this rule and us appealing embarrasses the SFA into admitting as much.

 

This appeal process should be a 2minute conversation, followed by an apology and Craig Thomson being demoted to the juniors for not knowing the up to date laws of the game.

 

Club not appealing is saying we are OK with this level of utter incompetence and I think will actual be to our detriment when we come to appeal another decision down the road, that will never be as clear cut as this.

[sbcmfc]

 

See this is exactly the reason why I am disappointed - the matter of wether it was a penalty or not is kinda irrelevant (it wasn't, it was as blatant a dive as you get). This issue is, for me, by the letter of the laws of the game, as per this season, if there is contact of any kind for this incident it is a penalty and a YELLOW card.

 

The issue is the SFA's "top referee" clearly doesn't know this rule and us appealing embarrasses the SFA into admitting as much.

 

This appeal process should be a 2minute conversation, followed by an apology and Craig Thomson being demoted to the juniors for not know the up to date laws of the game.

 

Club not appealing is saying we are OK with this level of utter incompetence and I think will actual be to our detriment when we come to appeal another decision down the road.

The change in the rule is for a genuine attempt to win the ball, not for pulling a player back. Thats still a red if its deemed an obvious goalscoring opportunity (which is pretty subjective).

 

I know he didnt actually pull him back, he barely touched him, but if he sees it that way its a red card.

[Shaka]

With my tin foil hat on, I think appealing would be a win/win , win the appeal and Sinclair would have to be banned. Lose it and it is further evidence of unfair treatment on a "wee club" by the SFA!

 

Shameful Sinclair hasnt been cited but 100% expected.

 

I like Robbo's wee dig but Id have prefered a more direct dig such as "It is clear to everyone who has seen the incident , apart from the ref, that Sinclair dived. The fact he hasnt been cited shows the SFA's attitude toward such behaviour and so we feel any appeal on our behalf would prove fruitless,yet again"

[David]

Actually by the new rules it is a red card. If we say that there is contact, then he has used his hand/arm to stop a goal scoring opportunity. Under the new rules a penalty and red card would be correct.

It's only a yellow if the player tries to play the ball with his feet etc. Anything regarding pulling/pushing would still be a red.

 

Not that there was contact though.

 

Do we know that for certain? The more I think about us not appealing the more I think maybe Cedric has told Robinson that he did touch him, albeit ever so slightly?

 

Let's be honest, if it were as open and closed as we all seem to think we'd be appealing it, surely?

[numpty]

Not really, that's not much of a reason to be honest. Kipre won't be playing Premiership football next season, if at all.

 

Of course he won't, but that's not the point. Just another nice measured example of the boss bigging up and protecting his players in public, and a veiled dig at the Celtic fans and media who've been painting Kipre as just a violent thug for his tackle on Dembele.

[David]

Of course he won't, but that's not the point. Just another nice example of the boss bigging up and protecting his players in public, and a veiled dig at the Celtic fans and media who've been painting him as little more than a violent thug for his tackle on Dembele.

 

Veiled digs are all well & good, but the truth is that the Celtic fans and the media won't give a fuck about his digs. They'll simply report that we didn't appeal the decision, which suggests that we know Kipre was guilty.

[Kmcalpin]

 

Veiled digs are all well & good, but the truth is that the Celtic fans and the media won't give a fuck about his digs. They'll simply report that we didn't appeal the decision, which suggests that we know Kipre was guilty.

Or that the SFA has suggested that they'll cite Kipre retrospectively for his earlier tackle on Dembele if we appeal.

[Well Up For It!]

I like Robbo's wee dig but Id have prefered a more direct dig such as "It is clear to everyone who has seen the incident , apart from the ref, that Sinclair dived. The fact he hasnt been cited shows the SFA's attitude toward such behaviour and so we feel any appeal on our behalf would prove fruitless,yet again"

 

A statement like that would have been superb...and would have 100% brought the SFA out their woodwork to charge Robbo proving his very point.

[David]

Or that the SFA has suggested that they'll cite Kipre retrospectively for his earlier tackle on Dembele if we appeal.

 

Then let them do that, after all he'll be playing in the EPL next season so it's no loss. Retrospective action or not, it would still allow for the penalty incident and the referees incompetence to be called into question and challenged.

[sbcmfc]

 

Then let them do that, after all he'll be playing in the EPL next season so it's no loss. Retrospective action or not, it would still allow for the penalty incident and the referees incompetence to be called into question and challenged.

But that ban could apply to league games, Ill settle for him missing a 1st round league cup game next year if hes still here.

[Kmcalpin]

 

Then let them do that, after all he'll be playing in the EPL next season so it's no loss. Retrospective action or not, it would still allow for the penalty incident and the referees incompetence to be called into question and challenged.

100% agree. All speculation of course but it would also flush out the SFA's position and expose the truth, whatever that is.