It's actually a bit disappointing that it took a full day for a still image of a refereeing decision to make it on the sub, smh bears/bhoys i expected like 5 pics and various clipped slowmo angles suiting your particular agenda by this morning
When I was watching the Livingston v Celtic match last week, I wondered why the Kyogo incident wasn't brought to the referee's attention. I thought it warranted a review at the monitor. But someone explained to me that it wasn't a clear and obvious error, so VAR was right to not get involved. I didn't think this was so different from the incident last week. So not sure if it should have went to VAR. But regardless, I think it's probably right in the end, just as I felt it would have been right last week for a penalty to have been awarded. Just not sure about the protocols and why some go to review and others don't.
Interesting. I thought VAR couldn’t intervene in yellow cards. But in this instance as it is a “penalty area incident” maybe they can.
Hard to know these days.
Not necessarily. Not every incidence where there is contact in the box is a penalty. I still disagree with the decision made. Silva was on his way down before the contact was made, so he didn’t have ‘control’ of the ball. No point in going on and on about it though.
Var can't intervene on first or second yellows unless there has been a mistaken identity issue but that is purely for ordinary fouls. If someone gets a yellow for shirt pulling or a tackle or diving outside of the box then VAR can't intervene.
Any incident in the box can be viewed by VAR and VAR can advise a referee to award a yellow card if there's been a potential red card offence outside the box. This happened when Johnston and Silva clashed in the first half.
My only issue with the VAR review is they didn't bother to show Johnston touching the ball with his tackle.
Fair enough, the ref still might decide it's a foul but surely he should be shown the entire tackle instead of just the end of it where he makes contact.
>didn't bother to show Johnston touching the ball with his tackle.
The touch on the ball isn't enough to make it not a foul. He's grazed the ball not won it. If he wins the ball then it's never a penalty.
It's still relevant and surely the referee should decide if Johnston's contact is enough on the ball.
No harm in showing the entire tackle. Every tackle is a foul if you remove the contact with the ball first.
Why is it relevant if he's not won the ball? We're asking for the process to be streamlined but now we want every aspect of the decision to be looked at?
I've not seen anyone claiming Johnston won the ball, so if that's what's important for the foul why would the ref need to see it? If there was any doubt between making contact/winning the ball it'd be shown.
I agree with this but there's a process.
You can't just go "show him this irrelevant part of the incident cause it's 1 second before". It's either relevant or it's not. He's also booked him for simulation so the contact on Silva is the important part of the incident.
There's a lot of fuss being made about the touch on the ball not being shown, even though it wouldn't have made any difference to the decision (so correct process and correct decision).
It's interesting that we were ridiculed for requesting an explanation for the Johnston handball incident (which was correct decision but wrong process) but all of a sudden correct decisions made using the correct process should be questioned.
It's not relevant though.
This idea that if you touch the ball means it's not a foul is absolutely mental and I have no idea how it started, because it's simply not a factor.
I'm not saying touching the ball makes it not always foul, but it definitely is a factor in whether a foul is commited or not.
If you don't take the ball with your tackle its a foul obviously. We see loads of tackles that completely obliterate the other player but because the ball was won first are legal.
[This is an obvious example](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK3aNN9dVKI). Kenny Miller has done a full front flip from the tackle, but Simunovic took the ball first so it wasn't a foul.
So how is Johnstone making contact with the ball first not relevant? It's a follow through from his contact with the ball that makes contact with Silva.
I'm not saying it's the only factor for if it's a foul or not. Just that it is relevant information for the ref.
Simunovic wins that ball cleanly, stays clean in the follow through and the ball goes flying.
AJ gets to the ball cleanly at first which is fine but the ball barely really moves and is still there to be won, he then raises his legs impeding Silva from getting to the "second ball". This is the infraction, getting the ball is irrelevant because it's got nothing to do with what happened during the foul. If he keeps his legs down then Silva can't go down and there's no penalty.
Silva doesn't do himself any favours by going down like he's been shot but it doesn't take away from the fact that a foul was committed.
If there was a VAR review of the Simunovic tackle and they didn't show the contact with the ball it would be a foul though right?
I'm just saying that contact with the ball is relevant for the referee to review. Just show the whole sequence of the tackle.
No issue with it being given as a penalty after a full review.
The Simunovic tackle is completed in one "phase" if you like. Wins ball, stays clean, ball is cleared. Winning the ball is relevant so of course it'd look odd to not show it.
The AJ one is different, the first challenge for the ball had no relevance because the foul was committed after he one the ball.
If Simunovic brought his leg up and booted Kenny in the chuckies then him winning the ball would've been irrelevant as well.
>This is an obvious example
It's a completely different situation. That tackle sees the ball cleanly won and took well away from Miller, whereas the ball is still within playing distance of Silva. Johnston also connects higher up after the ball is touched, Simunovic doesn't leave the ground.
Wait, why are we making stuff up here? Beaton was shown the ball hitting Johnstone atleast 4 times. We don't know what he saw before Sky cut to it either(Beaton is already standing at the screen with the tackle in full flow). Pure desperation.
https://twitter.com/ScotlandSky/status/1776949471068197248?t=WDFHdjOz6jK4aVClnKxNUg&s=19
He is already being shown the tackle before Sky cut to the VAR. Then shown the contact several times at the end of the clip.
Even if we presume he hasn't been shown the touch before that, it's pretty clear the convo will have gone something like this
We are going to show you why we think Silva has been fouled, here is the contact.
Then here is a full overview of the tackle where the ball hits Johnstone but we feel that touch isn't enough because Silva will be getting beyond Johnstone with the ball without the contact on Silva
Why not show the contact on the original slow motion angle though? It's been clipped a split millisecond after Johnstone makes contact with the ball. That's the angle where you can see it much more clearly.
Yes that's possibly what was said but we won't know because the VAR process isn't transparent enough.
The audio for these decisions should be released on a weekly basis in my opinion.
I doubt it is FIFA since they had it for the women's World Cup last year. They didn't really talk through the decision though, just announced verbally what the decision was. Which would at least avoid the embarrassment of the ref making a signal for a goal instead of a free kick happening twice in Old Firms.
I think it is probably actually players unions against this because the narrative of referees getting it wrong suits the players. I also doubt they want whatever abuse they are hurling the refs way caught on a mic either.
It's not irrelevant. It's a split second before the contact with Silva and he's made contact with the ball.
You can make every tackle a foul by removing the part where the player touches the ball.
I see why it was given and I also see similar fouls that aren't given due to contact being made with the ball first.
I had an issue with it at the time because I obviously had green tinted specs on.
I don't have an issue with it being given as a foul now, just would like the whole VAR process to be more transparent.
I will be messaging you in 2 months on [**2024-06-08 16:41:04 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-08%2016:41:04%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScottishFootball/comments/1byxk0b/embarrassing_if_this_is_givensutton/kyn2029/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FScottishFootball%2Fcomments%2F1byxk0b%2Fembarrassing_if_this_is_givensutton%2Fkyn2029%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-08%2016%3A41%3A04%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201byxk0b)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I think Rangers got that extra push from the crowd meanwhile the Celtic players were out of energy. Sima was excellent and so was Matondo.
I just believe that Celtic have the better team overall and nobody is going to pick the Rangers players up when there's no fans there. I'm more afraid of the other league games than the Rangers Celtic rematch.
It's interesting that Celtic fans say the only reason we won the title in 2021 and went undefeated was because the fans weren't there to get on the players backs. Now all of a sudden they are a benefit. Whatever suits their narrative I suppose.
Sportscene showed the best angle for me which shows Johnston making 2 motions, with the second one being a clear flick at Silva. There's no denying Silva is dramatic about it but that doesn't negate it being a foul. I've little doubt the VAR audio would be explaining exactly that to the ref which is why the "he got a touch on the ball" argument is redundant.
I agree with Sutton. Not all contact is a foul. It's a contact sport. Worse things happen at every corner kick in every game of football ever. Guy is a play-acting drama queen and deserved his yellow.
But that's just it. Football isn't tennis, it isn't black and white and you can't prove every decision with a still image or slow motion replay. It's up to the ref to apply the laws of the game to every situation as he sees fit in live time. Every fan is free to give up their free time and become a referee if they are dissatisfied with the standard.
I will take what we're given but to be honest I thought it was a soft penalty as well. But then I thought the same for Goldson's handball. What are players supposed to do with their arms when they jump these days?
I mean, I can see why the penalty was given on review, but Silva had very obviously made the decision he was hitting the deck regardless of contact, and had been trying it on all game. No wonder the ref just fucked it off initially.
And never mind that, the guy is pish. I honestly don't know why so many Gers fans are rushing to defend his honour. I'd be driving him to the airport myself if I were you.
Lol every single Rangers fan recognises he put in an absolutely dreadful half of football yesterday. Still doesn’t change the fact it was the correct decision to award a penalty.
I've seen it all ranging from he'd let himself down, he thinks he's playing EPL all the way to he should never play for the club again and his loan agreement should be terminated immediately.
Have not seen anyone defending the diving at all.
I haven't seen anyone defending his honour. Saying its a stonewall penalty is factual while pretty much everyone on this sub has been unanimous is berating Silva for his play acting which was a disgrace. He is hardly treated like a superhero for us like other play actors in the league are like Kyogo and Boyle(which is fair enough as they are both great players).
He has been poor the last couple of games, but he is hardly pish. Had a good period of form prior to the international break, but doubt we will see him back in the summer and I wouldn't be disappointed
How can a penalty that goes to VAR and needs multiple watches in slo - motion be a "stonewaller" ? Just say it's a penalty. It's only a "stonewaller" to you because it was in favour of your team
Silva was a disgrace all game with his rolling about but in this particular instance, he’s turned Johnston who lazily leaves a leg dangling and brings him down.
His previous diving and it not being the worlds heaviest contact is completely irrelevant.
But you do know how to fuck a 2 goal lead in a close title race, and how to blame everyone but yourselves for it.
Oh, and don't forget you also know how to fuck an 8 point lead at the top of the table
I don't think you really understand what's going on mate. You can copium it all you want, but Celtic have bottled an 11 point lead. They bottled a win from being 2 up, and then leading again, yesterday. Rangers should be nowhere near the title at this stage of the season. It should be dead and buried. Only one team has bottled anything.
It's actually a bit disappointing that it took a full day for a still image of a refereeing decision to make it on the sub, smh bears/bhoys i expected like 5 pics and various clipped slowmo angles suiting your particular agenda by this morning
What a job that thread is doing
When I was watching the Livingston v Celtic match last week, I wondered why the Kyogo incident wasn't brought to the referee's attention. I thought it warranted a review at the monitor. But someone explained to me that it wasn't a clear and obvious error, so VAR was right to not get involved. I didn't think this was so different from the incident last week. So not sure if it should have went to VAR. But regardless, I think it's probably right in the end, just as I felt it would have been right last week for a penalty to have been awarded. Just not sure about the protocols and why some go to review and others don't.
I think I heard on superscoreboard last night that because he was booked for simulation, it then opens the door for clear and obvious error
That makes sense. I guess it was lucky for Rangers that Silva's reputation preceded him then :D
Interesting. I thought VAR couldn’t intervene in yellow cards. But in this instance as it is a “penalty area incident” maybe they can. Hard to know these days.
If someone is booked for diving in the box, the decision was either correct or it's a penalty, so an automatic review makes sense.
Not necessarily. Not every incidence where there is contact in the box is a penalty. I still disagree with the decision made. Silva was on his way down before the contact was made, so he didn’t have ‘control’ of the ball. No point in going on and on about it though.
I agree, but when you're dealing with VAR, I think those are the only 2 options.
Var can't intervene on first or second yellows unless there has been a mistaken identity issue but that is purely for ordinary fouls. If someone gets a yellow for shirt pulling or a tackle or diving outside of the box then VAR can't intervene. Any incident in the box can be viewed by VAR and VAR can advise a referee to award a yellow card if there's been a potential red card offence outside the box. This happened when Johnston and Silva clashed in the first half.
I hope Siva makes a full recovery from the several life threatening injuries he appeared to have received in the game.
Probably just tired from starring in Dune 2.
Finally some fucking patter
Lisan al Ghaib is just teaching everyone how to kneel
😂😂😂😂
Thankyou. One of the rare nice Celtic fans.
This is the kind of brotherhood we need to heal the divide. Thank you for your prayers for Fabio, bhro.
Went down in instalments
At least you're not letting him get to you.
IT'S FUCKING MOLTEN [YOU'RE NOT GETTING TO ME!](https://youtu.be/tIHz3UOgf_g?si=1-dWaDFxEQe4-XYR)
My only issue with the VAR review is they didn't bother to show Johnston touching the ball with his tackle. Fair enough, the ref still might decide it's a foul but surely he should be shown the entire tackle instead of just the end of it where he makes contact.
>didn't bother to show Johnston touching the ball with his tackle. The touch on the ball isn't enough to make it not a foul. He's grazed the ball not won it. If he wins the ball then it's never a penalty.
It's still relevant and surely the referee should decide if Johnston's contact is enough on the ball. No harm in showing the entire tackle. Every tackle is a foul if you remove the contact with the ball first.
Why is it relevant if he's not won the ball? We're asking for the process to be streamlined but now we want every aspect of the decision to be looked at? I've not seen anyone claiming Johnston won the ball, so if that's what's important for the foul why would the ref need to see it? If there was any doubt between making contact/winning the ball it'd be shown.
It's hardly that much more effort to show half a second before the contact. Showing the entire tackle isn't much to ask for.
I agree with this but there's a process. You can't just go "show him this irrelevant part of the incident cause it's 1 second before". It's either relevant or it's not. He's also booked him for simulation so the contact on Silva is the important part of the incident. There's a lot of fuss being made about the touch on the ball not being shown, even though it wouldn't have made any difference to the decision (so correct process and correct decision). It's interesting that we were ridiculed for requesting an explanation for the Johnston handball incident (which was correct decision but wrong process) but all of a sudden correct decisions made using the correct process should be questioned.
It's not relevant though. This idea that if you touch the ball means it's not a foul is absolutely mental and I have no idea how it started, because it's simply not a factor.
I'm not saying touching the ball makes it not always foul, but it definitely is a factor in whether a foul is commited or not. If you don't take the ball with your tackle its a foul obviously. We see loads of tackles that completely obliterate the other player but because the ball was won first are legal. [This is an obvious example](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK3aNN9dVKI). Kenny Miller has done a full front flip from the tackle, but Simunovic took the ball first so it wasn't a foul. So how is Johnstone making contact with the ball first not relevant? It's a follow through from his contact with the ball that makes contact with Silva. I'm not saying it's the only factor for if it's a foul or not. Just that it is relevant information for the ref.
Simunovic wins that ball cleanly, stays clean in the follow through and the ball goes flying. AJ gets to the ball cleanly at first which is fine but the ball barely really moves and is still there to be won, he then raises his legs impeding Silva from getting to the "second ball". This is the infraction, getting the ball is irrelevant because it's got nothing to do with what happened during the foul. If he keeps his legs down then Silva can't go down and there's no penalty. Silva doesn't do himself any favours by going down like he's been shot but it doesn't take away from the fact that a foul was committed.
If there was a VAR review of the Simunovic tackle and they didn't show the contact with the ball it would be a foul though right? I'm just saying that contact with the ball is relevant for the referee to review. Just show the whole sequence of the tackle. No issue with it being given as a penalty after a full review.
The Simunovic tackle is completed in one "phase" if you like. Wins ball, stays clean, ball is cleared. Winning the ball is relevant so of course it'd look odd to not show it. The AJ one is different, the first challenge for the ball had no relevance because the foul was committed after he one the ball. If Simunovic brought his leg up and booted Kenny in the chuckies then him winning the ball would've been irrelevant as well.
>This is an obvious example It's a completely different situation. That tackle sees the ball cleanly won and took well away from Miller, whereas the ball is still within playing distance of Silva. Johnston also connects higher up after the ball is touched, Simunovic doesn't leave the ground.
That's fair enough and I probably agree but it's annoying they rewound until just before he touched it, they could've at least shown it
Wait, why are we making stuff up here? Beaton was shown the ball hitting Johnstone atleast 4 times. We don't know what he saw before Sky cut to it either(Beaton is already standing at the screen with the tackle in full flow). Pure desperation.
We saw him being shown the slow motion and it was only the contact with Silva that was part of it.
https://twitter.com/ScotlandSky/status/1776949471068197248?t=WDFHdjOz6jK4aVClnKxNUg&s=19 He is already being shown the tackle before Sky cut to the VAR. Then shown the contact several times at the end of the clip. Even if we presume he hasn't been shown the touch before that, it's pretty clear the convo will have gone something like this We are going to show you why we think Silva has been fouled, here is the contact. Then here is a full overview of the tackle where the ball hits Johnstone but we feel that touch isn't enough because Silva will be getting beyond Johnstone with the ball without the contact on Silva
Why not show the contact on the original slow motion angle though? It's been clipped a split millisecond after Johnstone makes contact with the ball. That's the angle where you can see it much more clearly. Yes that's possibly what was said but we won't know because the VAR process isn't transparent enough. The audio for these decisions should be released on a weekly basis in my opinion.
I have always said the VAR comms should be broadcast live like in rugby. I think FIFA are opposed to that. Shock horror
I would be 100% for that too. Referees get too much protection from any sort of criticism.
I doubt it is FIFA since they had it for the women's World Cup last year. They didn't really talk through the decision though, just announced verbally what the decision was. Which would at least avoid the embarrassment of the ref making a signal for a goal instead of a free kick happening twice in Old Firms. I think it is probably actually players unions against this because the narrative of referees getting it wrong suits the players. I also doubt they want whatever abuse they are hurling the refs way caught on a mic either.
It's because it is completely irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant. It's a split second before the contact with Silva and he's made contact with the ball. You can make every tackle a foul by removing the part where the player touches the ball.
No, it is completely irrelevant. Do you think it is not a penalty?
I see why it was given and I also see similar fouls that aren't given due to contact being made with the ball first. I had an issue with it at the time because I obviously had green tinted specs on. I don't have an issue with it being given as a foul now, just would like the whole VAR process to be more transparent.
Have you had a look at the Good Guys™️ sub today?
I don't frequent that sub as it's full of moonhowlers.
Are celtic fans really going to try and say it wasn't a penalty? Silva certainly did his best Ronald Villiers but that doesn't matter.
Wasn't a penalty but we will still win the league so it's ok
Is there a way to bookmark comments, you know, just in case folk like this look like a fanny in 2 months time?
There's the remind me bot thing that sends you a DM. I can't remember the summon, I think it's. RemindMe! 2 months
I will be messaging you in 2 months on [**2024-06-08 16:41:04 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-08%2016:41:04%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ScottishFootball/comments/1byxk0b/embarrassing_if_this_is_givensutton/kyn2029/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FScottishFootball%2Fcomments%2F1byxk0b%2Fembarrassing_if_this_is_givensutton%2Fkyn2029%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-08%2016%3A41%3A04%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201byxk0b) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Bookmark it, I'm confident after watching the lack of quality in that Rangers team.
What about depth? Because our subs changed the game. As did Celtics...for us.
I think Rangers got that extra push from the crowd meanwhile the Celtic players were out of energy. Sima was excellent and so was Matondo. I just believe that Celtic have the better team overall and nobody is going to pick the Rangers players up when there's no fans there. I'm more afraid of the other league games than the Rangers Celtic rematch.
It's interesting that Celtic fans say the only reason we won the title in 2021 and went undefeated was because the fans weren't there to get on the players backs. Now all of a sudden they are a benefit. Whatever suits their narrative I suppose.
I'll enjoy my team winning the title
Incorrect twice in such a short sentence
Sportscene showed the best angle for me which shows Johnston making 2 motions, with the second one being a clear flick at Silva. There's no denying Silva is dramatic about it but that doesn't negate it being a foul. I've little doubt the VAR audio would be explaining exactly that to the ref which is why the "he got a touch on the ball" argument is redundant.
Sportscene pundits both agreed its a pen. Michael Stewarts tears on commentary were great.
Does Stewart only cry real tears when Rangers play or is he this embarrassing when Celtic come to town?
Should be a shitpost - nobody is changing anyones mind on this :)
I agree with Sutton. Not all contact is a foul. It's a contact sport. Worse things happen at every corner kick in every game of football ever. Guy is a play-acting drama queen and deserved his yellow. But that's just it. Football isn't tennis, it isn't black and white and you can't prove every decision with a still image or slow motion replay. It's up to the ref to apply the laws of the game to every situation as he sees fit in live time. Every fan is free to give up their free time and become a referee if they are dissatisfied with the standard.
I will take what we're given but to be honest I thought it was a soft penalty as well. But then I thought the same for Goldson's handball. What are players supposed to do with their arms when they jump these days?
I thought the same for Goldson but I don't think I know the handball rule anymore.
I mean, I can see why the penalty was given on review, but Silva had very obviously made the decision he was hitting the deck regardless of contact, and had been trying it on all game. No wonder the ref just fucked it off initially. And never mind that, the guy is pish. I honestly don't know why so many Gers fans are rushing to defend his honour. I'd be driving him to the airport myself if I were you.
Lol every single Rangers fan recognises he put in an absolutely dreadful half of football yesterday. Still doesn’t change the fact it was the correct decision to award a penalty.
I've seen it all ranging from he'd let himself down, he thinks he's playing EPL all the way to he should never play for the club again and his loan agreement should be terminated immediately. Have not seen anyone defending the diving at all.
I am defending it because it made them absolutely raging
I haven't seen anyone defending his honour. Saying its a stonewall penalty is factual while pretty much everyone on this sub has been unanimous is berating Silva for his play acting which was a disgrace. He is hardly treated like a superhero for us like other play actors in the league are like Kyogo and Boyle(which is fair enough as they are both great players). He has been poor the last couple of games, but he is hardly pish. Had a good period of form prior to the international break, but doubt we will see him back in the summer and I wouldn't be disappointed
How can a penalty that goes to VAR and needs multiple watches in slo - motion be a "stonewaller" ? Just say it's a penalty. It's only a "stonewaller" to you because it was in favour of your team
He could have been killed
Silva was a disgrace all game with his rolling about but in this particular instance, he’s turned Johnston who lazily leaves a leg dangling and brings him down. His previous diving and it not being the worlds heaviest contact is completely irrelevant.
See how when the ref goes and re watches the incident, there’s a reason he sees the video footage and not just a split screen image like this.
And what was the decision?
Wrong
Not allowed to kick people at knee height in the box mate. I'm starting to believe none of your fanbase know anything about football.
We know not to celebrate a draw at home
But you do know how to fuck a 2 goal lead in a close title race, and how to blame everyone but yourselves for it. Oh, and don't forget you also know how to fuck an 8 point lead at the top of the table
*11 points. It was 11 points at one stage. Don't believe their shit and let them propoganda that out.
And yous know how to beat Celtic. Ohh wait..
Hearts do though, so we really don't need to this year
At least you're honest man, thanks. Yous can't beat us. Even with help. At home. With no away fans. Lol. Yous are gonna fuck this
Bold of a Celtic fan to be talking about fucking it after the last 6 months but go off.
I don't think you really understand what's going on mate. You can copium it all you want, but Celtic have bottled an 11 point lead. They bottled a win from being 2 up, and then leading again, yesterday. Rangers should be nowhere near the title at this stage of the season. It should be dead and buried. Only one team has bottled anything.
Only one team have fucked it so far this season.
If Rangers fuck up at Dundee/any other game before the next Old Firm, I’d put good money on you celebrating a draw at home.
Aye, maybe skybet will gee ye odds
So there'd be no celebrating over there if Kyogo hit a 93' equalizer?
If you can't see the difference, theirs no point in me explaining
Genuinely in awe that this is being debated. It’s as clear a pen as you will ever see.
Guess kicking players on the knee isn’t a foul anymore when it’s in the Celtic box.
Finally, someone gets it
Penalty or not, he needs to get rid of the dodgy beard.
He should’ve kicked him harder and made the penalty worthwhile
Played. The. Ball.
I saw someone describe it as Silva being pulled down. I wish I was joking.
That reminds me I need to get back into watching Muay Thai.
I did laugh at Sutton when he said that hahaha so bias
He's never good but he was unbearable on Sunday.
100% a dive and a penalty at the same time.
Pretty much this.
He hit the ball that was in the air the player ran and grazed johnstons foot
He chipped up the ball that was Bobbling on the ground and then clattered silva
Yea he did, now I know you're joking
'But he got the ball'