Jump to content

Red Card Statement


Kmcalpin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well done to the club for issuing this statement. It covers a lot of the discussion we have been having on these boards of late. The key will be in interpreting the law and broad guidelines, which are very broad and perhaps worse than useless. There's so much inconsistency between games and within the same game. Referees have to be given specific advice and apply it consistently.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The forthcoming meeting with the head of refereeing sounds welcome and one that should be held with all clubs. Indeed, it would be interesting to see the explanations given as I personally feel I don't know the rules anymore. If only the SFA could be as far-sighted as to release a YouTube video with a similar explanation for fans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Motherwell Football Club today (Wednesday) released the following statement in relation to Carl McHugh’s red card during Saturday’s match with Heart of Midlothian.

The club decided not to appeal the red card shown to Carl McHugh on the 53rd minute of last Saturday’s match at Fir Park.

The recent experience with Scott McDonald’s appeal for a similar sort of offence, with the onus being on the club to prove an obvious refereeing error, convinced management that, although we greatly respect the process and the individuals involved, any further appeal would not only be futile, but also a waste of the club’s time and money.

The club has subsequently written to the Scottish FA’s Head of Referee Operations to seek clarity on the guidelines surrounding serious foul play and in particular, “excessive force”.

Given a fairly broad set of criteria has been issued by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) when judging a challenge during the intensity of a match, it’s now so open to individual interpretation by each match official it could and has lead to significant inconsistencies across games.

A number of challenges in various SPFL Premiership matches (and high profile matches in other major leagues) over the last few weeks would more than meet the criteria both Scott McDonald and Carl McHugh were judged by, and subsequently ordered off for, but only cautions were issued.

This causes a great deal of confusion and frustration for our playing staff, coaching staff and supporters, and it is making it increasingly difficult to say with any certainty what is and isn’t a red card offence when talking about ‘excessive force’.

Everyone involved in football understands that, at times, clubs will be on the end of honest mistakes or incorrect calls, it is part and parcel of the game. In addition, it is also acknowledged and accepted that match officials do not set the laws of the game, only enforce them.

However, that means they need to be applied consistently across the board and any law or criteria that allows for such a broad scope of individual interpretation is, in Motherwell FC’s view, a flawed one.

In addition, the club has also asked for, and has been granted, time with the Scottish FA’s Head of Referee Operations to go through with the playing squads some of the recent examples which have merited a red card and those that, for what look like identical offences, have only been issued with a caution to explain what, if any, differences there are and detail fully what IFAB advise when considering excessive force.

Motherwell FC very much appreciates this time and look forward to that meeting in the coming weeks.

 

For anyone unable to go check it out just now: http://www.motherwellfc.co.uk/2017/02/08/statement-carl-mchughs-red-card/

 

Cracking statement, and exactly what's needed in my opinion. We can't change what's happened, but by drawing attention to it we are highlighting the issue of inconsistency and addressing the fact that our players have not been treated the same as others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought it was a sensible statement from the club in so much as they're lodging their objection and making it known to the fanbase without wasting time and money appealing on something they know from recent experience won't be overturned. The fact they've indicated that they've requested and are getting time with the Head of Refereeing Operations means that this serves a bit of a broader purpose than a "it's not fair" whinge and moan. It also ties in quite well with McDonald's assertion on Sportsound that the players hadn't been advised on any change in approach from the referee's point of view.

 

I'm interested to see what sort of groundwork this is laying though, the point about the rule being consistently applied is something that would benefit the whole of Scottish football however is Motherwell making this case going to facilitate that? If Willie Collum's in the same situation in another fixture will he send a Rangers player making a similar challenge to Rob Kiernan's off and reduce them to 9 men with 80 mins still to play? I'd be surprised if that happened. Is it likely that the club initiating a meeting and opening a dialogue with the SFA/refereeing body is likely to be helpful for any future appeal? I suppose if nothing else it'd save further waste of time, money and resources.

 

Ultimately we know why some decisions are given and some aren't, it's down to inconsistency with refereeing. Chances are that if the club show the Head of Refereeing Operations examples of red card offences that have only been given yellow cards then all that can be said is "the referee has made a mistake there, it should have been a red card." that can't be appealed retrospectively and a result will still stand, regardless of the fact we won ICT should have been down to 10 after Cole's challenge but weren't, Rangers should have been down to 9 vs 11 but weren't, Bob Malcolm was able to stamp on Said Chiba's head and stay on the park to score a winning goal. After the fact it can be pointed out that a ref got a decision wrong, fair enough, but that mistake still has an effect on the potential outcome of a game.

 

I'm genuinely curious as to where the argument goes if there's no real distinction between examples of tackles using "excessive force" and, as I'd suspect is the case, the difference between yellow and red card awards is simply subjective and/or down to an individual referee's interpretation. I think it was steelboy who said in the Hearts thread that it seemed to be the case that the point of this is to make it more difficult to appeal and overturn refereeing decisions, for me there's definitely something in that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think the day any referee sends 2 old firm players off in a single game let alone in the first 20 minutes is a helluva long way away.

 

I'd be inclined to think that they'd just go the whole hog and send another 3 off just so he can stop the game and get away from the abuse it'd be coming his way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Rangers finished the league cup final v St Mirren with 9 men in 2010.

 

I tried to find a video online of the Kevin Thomson red, as it was the most telegraphed red card challenge you'll ever see. The video lead me to a couple of others.

Check these 2 "hard but fair" challenges, certainly in the mound of the Mchugh red...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would need to see it from different angles and closer up but the first tackle in that video looks very similar to McHugh's. Not chance an Old Firm player is getting a straight red for a tackle like McHugh's, or McDonald's.

 

When a non Old Firm player gets a straight red card I ask myself "would Scott Brown get a straight red for that?" and there's your answer! No chance he would've got a straight red for either McHugh's or McDonalds's and probably wouldn't even have had the foul given against him for McHugh's.

 

The fall out from Scott Brown getting a straight red for McHughs tackle, with the game at 0-0, and Celtic then going on to lose the game, would be felt for weeks!

 

O'Halloran only got a straight red because it was simply so bad (and high) the ref had no option. A Rangers player could've came at someone with an axe in that game after O'Halloran was sent off and still remained on the pitch, hence why Kiernan wasn't sent off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would need to see it from different angles and closer up but the first tackle in that video looks very similar to McHugh's. Not chance an Old Firm player is getting a straight red for a tackle like McHugh's, or McDonald's.

 

When a non Old Firm player gets a straight red card I ask myself "would Scott Brown get a straight red for that?" and there's your answer! No chance he would've got a straight red for either McHugh's or McDonalds's and probably wouldn't even have had the foul given against him for McHugh's.

 

The fall out from Scott Brown getting a straight red for McHughs tackle, with the game at 0-0, and Celtic then going on to lose the game, would be felt for weeks!

 

O'Halloran only got a straight red because it was simply so bad (and high) the ref had no option. A Rangers player could've came at someone with an axe in that game after O'Halloran was sent off and still remained on the pitch, hence why Kiernan wasn't sent off.

Not to forget the yellow card amnesty in the 1st ten minutes of old firm games.

 

Scott Brown is pretty high up the league table in the bookings in the stats posted above, imagine the rules applied to him. He gets 3 of Mchughs tackle per game before he's spoken to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would need to see it from different angles and closer up but the first tackle in that video looks very similar to McHugh's. Not chance an Old Firm player is getting a straight red for a tackle like McHugh's, or McDonald's.

 

When a non Old Firm player gets a straight red card I ask myself "would Scott Brown get a straight red for that?" and there's your answer! No chance he would've got a straight red for either McHugh's or McDonalds's and probably wouldn't even have had the foul given against him for McHugh's.

 

The fall out from Scott Brown getting a straight red for McHughs tackle, with the game at 0-0, and Celtic then going on to lose the game, would be felt for weeks!

 

O'Halloran only got a straight red because it was simply so bad (and high) the ref had no option. A Rangers player could've came at someone with an axe in that game after O'Halloran was sent off and still remained on the pitch, hence why Kiernan wasn't sent off.

We still got the usual sectarian chants about the ref after O'Halloran's sending off. Some of them seemed to think it was a harsh decision (or just like indulging in a bit of bigotry).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was just watching the QotS v Morton highlights there. Higgins the QotS #6 challenge on Gary Oliver btw...clean through the back of him, nowhere near the ball the Morton boy is subbed off and it's a yellow card from Bobby Madden.

 

Incident here: https://youtu.be/V7iCSa6csFE?t=3m38s

 

Presumably because he doesn't exactly fly in it's not viewed as "excessive force"?

 

This one's even worse!!! https://youtu.be/V7iCSa6csFE?t=7m7s

 

(cracking ball in from Dom Thomas for Queens opener incidentally)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was just watching the QotS v Morton highlights there. Higgins the QotS #6 challenge on Gary Oliver btw...clean through the back of him, nowhere near the ball the Morton boy is subbed off and it's a yellow card from Bobby Madden.

 

Incident here: https://youtu.be/V7iCSa6csFE?t=3m38s

 

Presumably because he doesn't exactly fly in it's not viewed as "excessive force"?

 

This one's even worse!!! https://youtu.be/V7iCSa6csFE?t=7m7s

Both of them look like bookings to me, but the 2nd was worse than McHughs and more forceful than McDonald's. It was still an attempt to win a ball that was there to be won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both of them look like bookings to me, but the 2nd was worse than McHughs and more forceful than McDonald's. It was still an attempt to win a ball that was there to be won.

 

I'd agree with that.

 

I'm genuinely not a fan of whataboutery but I'd be really interested to hear how the Head of Refereeing Operations would differentiate between McHugh & McDonald's tackles and that 2nd one to justify the latter being a yellow card offence compared to the Motherwell players red cards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd agree with that.

 

I'm genuinely not a fan of whataboutery but I'd be really interested to hear how the Head of Refereeing Operations would differentiate between McHugh & McDonald's tackles and that 2nd one to justify the latter being a yellow card offence compared to the Motherwell players red cards.

Indeed.

 

Or better still, why was Kiernans only a yellow yet McDonalds not long after a red?

 

I think we know the answer to that.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its difficult to understand, as mere fans, what has gone on behind the scenes. If as seems likely there has been some kind of recent SFA guidance issued to referees, then it certainly didn't reach our club and I suspect others. A meeting with the Head of Refereeing Operations should therefore prove helpful. However it also seems very likely that something has failed in the SFA communication to its employees ie the referees, if such inconsistencies are occurring. Its worrying that the SFA doesn't seem to recognise this. Whether it likes it or not there is a problem and that august body does need to examine its procedures. Any organisation should take external feedback seriously especially on issues relating to potential organisational failings and should examine matters.

 

It seems to me that our club is querying inconsistent application of these new guidelines or whatever they are. Most of us would agree that refereeing inconsistencies have occurred as shown by examples on this forum. Its simply not good enough for the SFA to hide its head in the sand and effectively say "Nothing to do with us".

 

Its interesting that the club has said that the onus is on clubs to prove an obvious refereeing error. I take it from that that its not enough to show, in an appeal, that the referee made an error, it has to be obvious. This suggests that it has to be proved, beyond all reasonable doubt that an error was made ie the burden of proof is the same as that required in a Court of Criminal Law, not a Civil Court. If the club could prove that the probability of error in a case was say 90% that would not be deemed to be sufficient to win an appeal.

 

The SFA should not sidestep this issue and must examine its own procedures to promote consistency in refereeing decisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I think the club (presumably Flow) deserves a bit of credit for, again, standing up for themselves & fighting their corner on this one. Looking at some of the responses from fans of other clubs it's not been a particularly popular step i.e.: "it was a nailed on, obvious red card, how very dare Motherwell complain".

 

With that in mind they definitely deserve a bit of acknowledgement for putting forward a coherent and, in my opinion, rational argument that sets out their case and highlights the very obvious inconsistencies with the application of this rule.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I think the club (presumably Flow) deserves a bit of credit for, again, standing up for themselves & fighting their corner on this one. Looking at some of the responses from fans of other clubs it's not been a particularly popular step i.e.: "it was a nailed on, obvious red card, how very dare Motherwell complain".

 

I think they're missing the point. The club is not complaining about the red cards per se but rather about them in the context of other decisions in similar or identical situations. It really is about consistency. We have been on the receiving end twice recently whilst other similar fouls were not punished to the same extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they're missing the point. The club is not complaining about the red cards per se but rather about them in the context of other decisions in similar or identical situations. It really is about consistency. We have been on the receiving end twice recently whilst other similar fouls were not punished to the same extent.

Oh, they're absolutely missing the point. There's no doubt about that! In the case of a couple of the sports media pieces, wilfully so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...