Jump to content

Scottish Premiership Game 30 :Celtic (H) 18/03/18 14:15


Yabba's Turd
 Share

Recommended Posts

Now that it's been highlighted/suggested that the same ref has sent off a suspiciously disproportionate  number of Motherwell players, I'll be very surprised if the SFA choose to validate that claim further by rescinding another of his red cards. 

As for the media, I was listening to Radio Scotland yesterday and the "journalist" reporting on the incident (not a biased Pat Bonner pundit that you might at least forgive) somehow managed to not make mention of Scott Brown whatsoever.  It was as though Kipre assaulted thin air.  The only mention he made of Celtic in his whole piece was to bring up the fact that Motherwell didn't appeal Kipre's previous red card in the Cup Final loss to Celtic which was clear proof that Motherwell agreed with the decision.  I know I shouldn't be surprised but...  People talk about Brendan Rodgers influencing the media.   He doesn't need to.  Our media will happily just make it up for him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darryl Broadfoot, SFA Communications Officer (*hides all breakable objects*) was speaking about the Kipre/Brown Incident on Sportsound last night and even he was surprisingly dismissive of Thomson's decision, saying "violent conduct" simply wouldn't wash. All the other guests agreed that the sending off simply shouldn't have happened.

For all that, I'm still not convinced the panel will do the right thing. Will Thomson be hung out to dry by the authorities?

Hmmmmmmmmm........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Clackscat said:

His stamping action to justify the card hangs him out to dry as neither the tackle or the aftermath contained anything remotely resembling a stamp.
 

This sums it up for me.   For our appeal to fail Thomson has to clearly demonstrate that Kipre stamped on Brown.  In short, there was no stamp. 

Irrespective of the outcome of the appeal, anyone with half a brain in their head in the SFA will ensure, that Thomson does not referee another of our games.  Is that likely to happen?  No. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm assuming the club has waited for the official reason for the dismissal. I've read quotes saying it was for violent conduct.

As has been mentioned on various platforms violent conduct is where a player uses 'excessive force or brutality'. It has been seen that neither is the case so the club has a pretty decent case.

Again, whether they accept the case, or just protect the ref as usual, remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

 

Irrespective of the outcome of the appeal, anyone with half a brain in their head in the SFA will ensure, that Thomson does not referee another of our games.  Is that likely to happen?  No. 

I can see it now Scottish cup final, Motherwell v Celtic and that fud will be in charge, :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we get to the final and its Celtic and Thompson then Robinson should do a Brenda and remind everybody of his history against us this season at every opportunity in the run up to the game. Put pressure on him from the word go to make sure he is not going to give any debatable decisions. I don't honestly think they will give him the game if it is us V Celtic even if it his last game before retiring

COYW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said:

This sums it up for me.   For our appeal to fail Thomson has to clearly demonstrate that Kipre stamped on Brown.  In short, there was no stamp. 

Irrespective of the outcome of the appeal, anyone with half a brain in their head in the SFA will ensure, that Thomson does not referee another of our games.  Is that likely to happen?  No. 

I don't think Thomson has to clearly demonstrate anything. I think, a bit like VAR, the panel has to decide there is clear evidence his decision was wrong - which is a slightly higher bar.  I reckon our chances of success are about 50/50.

As for all the "what about Scott Brown?" chat - when our manager says he didn't think it was worthy of a card, it's unlikely the SFA cares about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Spiderpig said:

I can see it now Scottish cup final, Motherwell v Celtic and that fud will be in charge, :ph34r:

It would, of course, be epically hilarious were Thomson to have another blunder, in our favour thus denying Celtic a double Treble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not seen it mentioned anywhere, but I thought Cadden had his best half in quite a while in the first half on Sunday.  Playing in a more advanced role it meant he wasn't receiving the ball with 60 yards to run, and I thought he looked really lively.  Obviously not a direct replacement for Tanner, but I'd be happy to see him continue in there with Frear/Tait at WB.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did and will probably play there more often than not now with Tanner being out . Just watched the Jack red card again for a supposed assault on Broadfoot he kneed him very gently , went head to head , then pushed him over and that got rescinded as deemed not as excessive force or brutality so would use that as an example on Thursday as for me I agree was  not a  red card but was a lot worse than Kipre done . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lafferty on Saturday is another example -  mid-rant at the ref about not getting a penalty (he was eventually booked for diving) and he aggressively pushes a Partick player away who was trying to get involved. Far worse than Kipre. We could be plucking these out every week. 

5 hours ago, weeyin said:

I don't think Thomson has to clearly demonstrate anything. I think, a bit like VAR, the panel has to decide there is clear evidence his decision was wrong - which is a slightly higher bar.  I reckon our chances of success are about 50/50.

As for all the "what about Scott Brown?" chat - when our manager says he didn't think it was worthy of a card, it's unlikely the SFA cares about it.

Where's the 50/50 coming from? Is that to do with your lack of faith in the panel to be competent and reasonable, or do you genuinely think any reasonable person could view this either way? 

The only possible way it could be viewed as "excessive force" is if the baseline is zero contact, and any force at all is by default deemed excessive. A decision like that would I assume set a precedent which would result in multiple reds each game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Refereeing is a total joke in this country (and probably many more too).

There's a lot technology can do to improve things and bring some fairness. Off the balls for instance, which are not impacting on play, could be dealt with separate officials who would have the benefit of replays to inform decisions moments later. 

Some small sacrifices needed i. e. slows the game, but would rather have that if it meant getting decisions correct giving fans less reason to feel cheated. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kipre will 100% have his red card binned tomorrow. As has aleady been mentioned, any off the ball kick out has to show either excessive force or brutality. Neither if which were in evidence. Thomson can't claim anything to do with initial tackle as any red card has to stop play instantly, which again, he never done. Therefore he either has to have made it up (cheated) or he went purely on browns reaction (cheated) so I don't think it's about the red now, and more what punishment Thomson receives, as recinding the red card shows definitive cheating on one or both parties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, coop91 said:

Thomson can't claim anything to do with initial tackle as any red card has to stop play instantly, which again, he never done.

Referees are "instructed" to stop play for a red card, but I suppose they don't technically have to.  (Which isn't to say I think Thompson was playing advantage -- he clearly wasn't.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, numpty said:

Referees are "instructed" to stop play for a red card, but I suppose they don't technically have to.  (Which isn't to say I think Thompson was playing advantage -- he clearly wasn't.)

Well he certainly stopped it quick enough to show the red. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, numpty said:

Referees are "instructed" to stop play for a red card, but I suppose they don't technically have to.  (Which isn't to say I think Thompson was playing advantage -- he clearly wasn't.)

What was wrong with the initial challenge, can’t see any foul there never mind a card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Yabba's Turd changed the title to Scottish Premiership Game 30 :Celtic (H) 18/03/18 14:15

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...