Motherwell v Rangers 29/12/2024

[brainier]

31 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

 

As for the 2nd incident it's Casey who is off with the 1st header, he is leaning forward so head and shoulder is offside, again it might only be millimetres but when they draw the lines it's offside

The still picture with the lines drawn on appears to show that the ball is already in the air so the lines are not drawn at the point of contact. I think he would possibly still be offside but it would be a much tighter decision. 

[wellup83]

9 hours ago, MFCL84 said:

A bit off topic, but the Sportscene coverage was absolutely appalling.  All about Rangers, no real analysis of the key points in the game. Completely amateurish production and presentation. 

Sportscene has been going down the tubes since Jonathan Sutherland reduced his appearances. Always thought he was a decent presenter who represented our game well. Thomson is never a presenter. He looks uncomfortable any time he's on TV. The guest pundits last night were laughable, looked like the BBC pulled two guys off the street. Sheridan looks like nothing less than a tramp. No offense to tramps intended.

[Happy Dosser]

Calmed down enough to watch Sportscene this morning: pretty dreadful with C-List pundits and no worthwhile  analysis of the incidents while the programme quickly moved on to other games in a "nothing to see here" kind of way. Like another poster  above (sorry, can't remember who) I felt The Ox could have been impeded by an offside Rangers player at their first goal. Had it been at the other end I think it would have been looked at more closely.

Makes me wonder if there is any point in attending games against the OF. The shiny new  techology is often used selectively, imo. Miller was even under red card scrutiny for a brilliant tackle where he won the ball. No wonder he looked bemused.

[Spiderpig]

24 minutes ago, brainier said:

The still picture with the lines drawn on appears to show that the ball is already in the air so the lines are not drawn at the point of contact. I think he would possibly still be offside but it would be a much tighter decision. 

I agree, but when when VAR is being used to actively look for reasons to disallow every goal, instead of its main purpose of clear and obvious errors, we are going to get this nonsense week in week out.

[sinjy]

The inconsistency of decisions is what infuriates fans. Watch Crystal Palace score against Southampton. There is much more contact on the Southampton keeper than Watt on Buckland but the goal was given.

 

[wellsince75]

7 minutes ago, sinjy said:

The inconsistency of decisions is what infuriates fans. Watch Crystal Palace score against Southampton. There is much more contact on the Southampton keeper than Watt on Buckland but the goal was given.

 

9 out of 10 times the keeper will be protected . 

fwiw I thought the ref got most of the decisions right yesterday .

on a bad day goal 1 would have been chopped off and in todays game miller could have been sent off. 
 

I’d love the team to focus more on attack minded footy and give us more to cheer about . Was awesome going 2 goals up in the first half - more attack minded footy welcome 

[David]

12 hours ago, Kmcalpin said:

A fair bit of merit in what you say. However Sevco and Celtic are big enough and powerful enough to intimidate the SFA/SPFL, their officials and the media.  Referees cannot stand up to them and consciously or otherwise tend to favour them, maybe for understandable reasons.  The media is scared stiff that if they upset them they will be denied access to them for reporting and that in turn will affect their sales.  Its a different story, in varying degrees,  however for the other clubs. In terms of VAR and refereeing you'd hope that any complaints would be met with indifference but more likely than not they're met with covert hostility. 

It might look good to the fans if SK sounds off aggressively and might make him feel better, but its only going to elicit a stubborn reaction from many officials. That said he's only human and I'd probably do the same in his situation.  The problem is that its our players and we fans who'll suffer when referees and VAR officials kickback. Again being human, its a very detached emotionless individual who can go out of their way to be fair to someone who's made a very public complaint againt them. 

I completely understand your perspective, but I’d much prefer having a manager like Kettlewell who refuses to doff his cap and simply accept the status quo. In my view, the more he calls out the shambles that is officiating in action, the better.

It’s worth noting that his approach could easily boost morale and foster an "us vs the world" mentality in the dressing room, which is no bad thing.

I’m not referring to you here, but the reality is that Kettlewell can’t seem to win in the eyes of some fans. If he manages with passion, wears his heart on his sleeve, and kicks every ball like we do in the stands, he’s labelled a "twat." Yet, if he kept quiet about the poor decisions, avoided making waves, and let it all slide, he’d likely be called a "twat" for that as well.

What I hope is that fans recognise a manager and team who are clearly on the same page, putting in the effort and having a decent season. We should be backing them, supporting the manager and club when they call out dodgy decisions, not tearing them down for it.

[wellfan]

20 minutes ago, sinjy said:

The inconsistency of decisions is what infuriates fans. Watch Crystal Palace score against Southampton. There is much more contact on the Southampton keeper than Watt on Buckland but the goal was given.

 

Neither were fouls. However, Butland initiated the contact with Watt; therefore, by the referees logic yesterday, it should've been a penalty to Motherwell. But no, the keeper is overprotected and can shove players out of the way without being penalised, and even more so because they play for the rangers. The referees in Scotland are pathetic. 

[SteelmaninOZ]

 

[SteelmaninOZ]

 

[cambo97]

49 minutes ago, David said:

I completely understand your perspective, but I’d much prefer having a manager like Kettlewell who refuses to doff his cap and simply accept the status quo. In my view, the more he calls out the shambles that is officiating in action, the better.

 

While I don't disagree with what you're saying, Gannon got crucified in the media and on here for pointing out far more obvious wrongs, including when we won the game.

[joewarkfanclub]

This is the image VAR used to decide the offside.

They have clearly drawn the red line on Casey's elbow. He cant be offside with that as you cant score with your elbow.

The blue line, which goes through his shoulder is in line with the defenders foot and is the onside line.

Ive no idea whether Casey was or was not offside. It was very close. But he cant be offside on the basis of the still they have used.

Yet more evidence of absolute incompetence and why VAR should be binned. (I know it wont be).

[mfc88]

For me, the frustration around the butland goal comes from the way the game was reffed in general, with clancy leaving pretty much everything else yesterday to var, yet taking the decision there and var having to overturn it. It's not one they were going to overturn whatever the on field decision IMO.

Personally I am fed up of var. Players can't play the game in slow motion, a striker cant time a run to millimetres, yet the game is now being judged frame by frame and not in real time. Yesterday we had about 17-18 mins added on time across the two halves, mostly due to var stoppages. It affects the entertainment value spending 10-20% of a football match waiting on officiating. A better way of using it needs to be implemented before people start walking away.

[mfc88]

8 minutes ago, joewarkfanclub said:

This is the image VAR used to decide the offside.

They have clearly drawn the red line on Casey's elbow. He cant be offside with that as you cant score with your elbow.

The blue line, which goes through his shoulder is in line with the defenders foot and is the onside line.

Ive no idea whether Casey was or was not offside. It was very close. But he cant be offside on the basis of the still they have used.

Yet more evidence of absolute incompetence and why VAR should be binned. (I know it wont be).

That is insanity.

In addition, we continually hear "clear and obvious"... the moment you have to start drawing lines when the two players in question are next to each other, is the moment you can conclude its not "clear and obvious".

[Kmcalpin]

4 hours ago, Richie said:

A bit simplistic, but if we press a yard harder on Cerny and don't allow him to cross the ball with impunity, then they don't score so early in the second half and we arguably win the game.

Its one of my biggest bugbears along with not showing for throw-ins and just launching it up the line... Going out to press/stop a cross, but stopping 3/4 of the way needed to do it effectively.

Obviously there are dangers in diving in, but this wasn't the case here as Cerny was pretty much stationary at the time IIRC.

That's nit-picking a bit, but those are the fine margins.

One of my bugbears too  which we witness week week out. Just watched the highlights and it was evident from early on. Rangers' first goal was a defensive disaster. Wilson fails to  or more likely doesn't even try to stop the cross. Cerny was given all the time and space he wanted to pinpoint his target  which does. Why oh why do we do this? Opponents don't afford us this generosity. 

The ball then finds its completely unmarked target, a few feet from goal  who picks his spot. Harry Paton  although nearby, covering nobody. 

Typical of many goals we lose. 

[texanwellfan]

1 hour ago, joewarkfanclub said:

This is the image VAR used to decide the offside.

They have clearly drawn the red line on Casey's elbow. He cant be offside with that as you cant score with your elbow.

The blue line, which goes through his shoulder is in line with the defenders foot and is the onside line.

Ive no idea whether Casey was or was not offside. It was very close. But he cant be offside on the basis of the still they have used.

Yet more evidence of absolute incompetence and why VAR should be binned. (I know it wont be).

If that’s true the VAR team need sacked. I don’t know what red line and blue lines indicate but if they are using his elbow then someone needs fired. 

[wellfan]

8 minutes ago, texanwellfan said:

If that’s true the VAR team need sacked. I don’t know what red line and blue lines indicate but if they are using his elbow then someone needs fired. 

I think the blue line represents the part of the defenders body closest to the goal and the red line indicates the part of the attackers body closest to the goal. But for the attacker, as the other poster pointed out, it has to be a part of the body that you can score from for it to be offside. Therefore, the image above shows that Casey was not offside as he cannot score from his elbow, and his shoulder, which he can score from, is in line with the blue line (defenders toe or knee), which makes him onside. Another image from this decision shows that the lines were drawn once the ball had left the boot of our man who took the free kick. If so, this offside and no-goal is another incorrect decision that has gone against us. 

[texanwellfan]

1 minute ago, wellfan said:

I think the blue line represents the part of the defenders body closest to the goal and the red line indicates the part of the attackers body closest to the goal. But for the attacker, as the other poster pointed out, it has to be a part of the body that you can score from for it to be offside. Therefore, the image shown above shows that Casey was not offside as he cannot score from his elbow, and his shoulder, which he can score from, is in line with the blue line (defenders toe), which makes him onside. Another image from this decision shows that the lines were drawn once the ball had left the boot of our man who took the free kick. If so, this offside and no-goal is another incorrect decision that has gone against us. 

If correct then MFC need to request an official response with regard to those two points. It’s either gross incompetence or cheating…….. over to you Mr Collum, which one is it? 

[David]

2 hours ago, cambo97 said:

While I don't disagree with what you're saying, Gannon got crucified in the media and on here for pointing out far more obvious wrongs, including when we won the game.

Not by me he didn't.

[Spiderpig]

4 hours ago, wellfan said:

Neither were fouls. However, Butland initiated the contact with Watt; therefore, by the referees logic yesterday, it should've been a penalty to Motherwell. But no, the keeper is overprotected and can shove players out of the way without being penalised, and even more so because they play for the rangers. The referees in Scotland are pathetic. 

It seems the KMI panel agree with you re the Butland incident, another incorrect VAR call in their opinion.

Motherwell - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/motherwell

[brainier]

3 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

This is the image VAR used to decide the offside.

They have clearly drawn the red line on Casey's elbow. He cant be offside with that as you cant score with your elbow.

The blue line, which goes through his shoulder is in line with the defenders foot and is the onside line.

Ive no idea whether Casey was or was not offside. It was very close. But he cant be offside on the basis of the still they have used.

Yet more evidence of absolute incompetence and why VAR should be binned. (I know it wont be).

Don't forget that the same image shows the ball was already in the air so Casey would have been slightly further back from the goal. The VAR team decide where the point of contact was to draw the lines and got it wrong. I think the English system is computerised for points of contact whereas ours is just the VAR team going " But, Rangers."

[texanwellfan]

3 minutes ago, brainier said:

Don't forget that the same image shows the ball was already in the air so Casey would have been slightly further back from the goal. The VAR team decide where the point of contact was to draw the lines and got it wrong. I think the English system is computerised for points of contact whereas ours is just the VAR team going " But, Rangers."

I really hope we follow up on this so I can hear why they overturn on field decision with the wrong timing and lines not using the correct points. For me this is worse than the other disallowed goal. 

[wellfan]

36 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

It seems the KMI panel agree with you re the Butland incident, another incorrect VAR call in their opinion.

Motherwell - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/teams/motherwell

The opinion on the KMI panel is not really that of the SFA. It’s a pointless exercise in deflection, although it does further highlight the general incompetence of the officials.

We were screwed over again yesterday and not a single thing will be done about it. 

[Happy Dosser]

So both decisions were pretty dodgy then. Never mind, I'm sure Willie Collum will clear it all up over the next few days and Rangers will produce a counter-statement which will include the words "sporting integrity" to make it all sound impressive.

As wellfan says,  the square root of feck all will be done  about and there will be no consequences for the officials.

Just another Groundhog Day in Scottish football.

Next!

[Kmcalpin]

Watched the BBC highlights earlier and there's a number of controversial decisions. I largely agree with comments above. At both Sevco's early penalty claim and the Lennon Miller's yellow card incident, their players should have been booked for simulation. Whats good for Manwhanise is good for them. The first is a clear dive in the box with no actual contact.

Lennon MIller's yellow card is a joke, given what he's had to suffer at the boots of thugs masquerading as Klmarnock and Dundee United midfielders who got off scot free. Was it even a foul?

Their first goal, apart from being a defensive disaster was an attacker not offside?

TW's 2 chalked off goals: a foul on Butland? Very soft and softer than a challenge on the Ox recently, when a goal was awarded (no VAR check). The offside call was very tight indeed, ostensibly a matter of centimetres and neither clear nor obvious.

These only serve to highlight inconsistencies in the application of rules, even with the aid of VAR.  Similar incidents have occurred in recent matches against Kilmarnock, Dundee United and Celtic with very different outcomes.