Sky saying it was a harsh red card

[Valley Bluenose]

This is what gets me with the likes of Miller on Sky, and I'm only going by posters on here as I was wathcing RTV.

Miller, McInnes, Sky pundits (no sniggering at the back there) they all know the rules but are basically pedalling the lie that Rangers got the benefit of dodgy refereeing decisions yesterday, when nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, it's the exact opposite.

Now is it a harsh rule? Maybe in some cases it is, but as it stands just now the rule is what it is.

Maybe it's up to the clubs to push for change. And I don't even know if they can do that anyway.

In fairness to McInnes - not something I say too often - when asked about it on the radio he said that his first instinct was that it was harsh but his staff had subsequently informed him that, as per the Rules, it was the correct decision. Basically acknowledging his own lack of understanding of the current Rules.

I've not heard what they said on Sky either.

 

[wee bud's pit boots]

In fairness to McInnes - not something I say too often - when asked about it on the radio he said that his first instinct was that it was harsh but his staff had subsequently informed him that, as per the Rules, it was the correct decision. Basically acknowledging his own lack of understanding of the current Rules.

I've not heard what they said on Sky either.

I watched on RTV and can only go with the comments of those watching SKY on the match thread.

It seemed to be littered with posts about Miller keeping harping on about how it was a harsh red throughout the remainder of the game.

 

[The U.S. Male]

Their player cut it back so it would probably have been a pen, at least in the spfl as any arm not inside the silhouette seems to get penalised (except the one in the first couple of minutes) but not a red unless they had a player getting on the cross, which didn't seem to be the case.

cheers mate, wasn't sure if the header was goal bound. Was shite defending anyway as usual. Swear to god, anytime the ball is near our 18 yard line I get the fear as feel we are so vulnerable to any pass getting slipped in.

 

[douzpwa]

It maybe harsh but it was the right decision!

 

[Chocolateleftfoot]

It was harsh, but it's also the rules.

 

[Aragorn]

It prevented a goal and thems the rules.

 

[jimbear]

Letter of the law its the correct decision, its one of them had it gone against us and say it was Souttar I'd be claiming the ruling was shite and harsh, defender knows very little about the ricochet that rebounds off Sterling however a clear goal was stopped due to the position of his arm, unfortunate that the ruling deems it a red through no fault of the defender deliberate or not, that being said girfuy to all those trying blindside the rulebook.

In a way we were actually quite fortunate with the Killie goal. The ball struck Tav's hand near the goal line and had it not gone into our net then Killie would have been awarded a penalty and Tav given a straight red card. For once - in my opinion - a freak own goal against us turned into a lucky break.

 

[sheddensbear]

It prevented a goal and thems the rules.

I suspect if Killie had been given that penalty and we had a player red carded, we may have questioned the rules.

 

[Flesher's Haugh]

In a way we were actually quite fortunate with the Killie goal. The ball struck Tav's hand near the goal line and had it not gone into our net then Killie would have been awarded a penalty and Tav given a straight red card. For once - in my opinion - a freak own goal against us turned into a lucky break.

Absolutely jimbear, fine margins etc its a ruling that can go for and against, Killie player didn't know anything about it, end of the day we will all take it however had Tav not put the ball in our own net as you say we'd have been in the same position.

 

[Sticky]

Is there not some stupid double punishment thing?

Double jeopardy only if you attempt to win a tackle

 

[Sticky]

I suspect if Killie had been given that penalty and we had a player red carded, we may have questioned the rules.

Why? - 100% correct decisions. Probably the worst post ever on here.

 

[Sticky]

Killie will feel hard done by considering what the rat faced right back from celtic got away with against them.

Totally different. In the rat faced incident he was falling down not acting like a keeper!

 

[Arminius]

Red card all day, every day.

Again, we needed VAR to make the decision because the ref gave offside initially

That’s the scandal.

How often we DON’T get the penalties we should at the first whistle.

The greenyin cartel ref community are shit scared of ever awarding us that which see are plainly due.

 

[Maida Vale Bear]

The easiest red card that fanny with the whistle will have in his career.

Yup and he still needed VAR to keep him safe. I mean stopping the ball with his arm to stop a goal, tick - red card and pen. Wiping a player out, tick - red card and pen. Take your pick Dickinson.

 

[Number Six]

Rules are rules

Harsh imo but that’s the rule

Handball rule as we all know is just a complete clusterfuck

That being said, he stopped a goal and we missed the pen. If he’s still on the park we’re playing against 11 men and don’t have the goal that we were guaranteed if he doesn’t stop it with his hand