Celtic Vs Aberdeen

[ATLIS]

3 hours ago, AJF said:

It's a difficult one to call in my opinion. Both players have made similar attempts to win the header, although Rubezic has came in at a greater pace (which ultimately leads to him winning the ball) and clatters Kyogo.

I think it would have more merit in being a red card had Kyogo won the ball and Rubezic made contact with him after the ball has gone. These challenges often come down to fractions of a second and I don't think many in the game would expect Rubezic to pull out of that if they think he has an attempt at winning the ball.

However, we had an incident at Livi on Sunday where I think it was Goldson that cleared a header out of our box. I think it was Montano who was a fraction behind ended up clashing heads with Goldson and both players took a sore one. I think it would be hard to suggest Montano should be penalised with a red card because he has been slightly late in a genuine attempt to win the ball.

Rubezic did almost the exact same against us first game of the season, absolutely blasted Bruce Anderson coming up from behind with a header. He left the park with blood pishing out his head and a few cracked ribs after Rubezic landed on him if I'm remembering correctly. Neither are a red though, but he has previous for it. The ball is there to be won, Rubezic is just a big mad b*****d  

[Melanius Mullarkey]

3 minutes ago, ATLIS said:

Rubezic did almost the exact same against us first game of the season, absolutely blasted Bruce Anderson coming up from behind with a header. He left the park with blood pishing out his head and a few cracked ribs after Rubezic landed on him if I'm remembering correctly. Neither are a red though, but he has previous for it. The ball is there to be won, Rubezic is just a big mad beautiful b*****d  

FTFY 

[Flybhoy]

1 hour ago, Sortmeout said:

You do realise you post more about me or in response to me than I do about Celtic*. Think about what that means about you. You seem to be thinking about me quite a lot.
 

 

 

 

 

*as a guess I haven’t been actually counting your posts.

How will you get by this weekend with no Celtic match thread for you to spam with your constant tedious shite?

[ATLIS]

2 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkay said:

FTFY 

Exactly the kind of player that's a villain for every other team in the league, but a hero for one. 

[Sortmeout]

3 minutes ago, Flybhoy said:

How will you get by this weekend with no Celtic match thread for you to spam with your constant tedious shite?

Probably follow your lead and talk to myself. Jinky can spend his weekend counting your multiple personalities and that way everyone will be happy.

Until the green brigade give us more to discuss of course.

[coprolite]

23 hours ago, LuboMoravcik said:

Btw, it was farcical that the Aberdeen defender wasn't given a red card for his assault on Kyogo.

Victim mode activated

[LuboMoravcik]

19 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

I don’t know if is a red technically in the laws of the game (genuinely), but it should be up for discussion. 

For all the laughable red cards you get for ‘endangering an opponent’ and ‘excessive force’, it feels strange that a challenge like that doesn’t fit those categories. 

I winced when I saw that challenge tbh. 

Oh, and we were absolutely abhorrent on Sunday. 

Any challenge that literally knocks the opponent out should be a red card. 
 

On a similar note I do believe football has an absolutely archaic attitude towards head injuries.

[AJF]

3 hours ago, LuboMoravcik said:

Any challenge that literally knocks the opponent out should be a red card. 

This is too broad a statement to be true, IMO.

Head knocks happen too frequently to apply it with any consistency. What if both players are unconscious? Do they both get sent off?

[LuboMoravcik]

54 minutes ago, AJF said:

This is too broad a statement to be true, IMO.

Head knocks happen too frequently to apply it with any consistency. What if both players are unconscious? Do they both get sent off?

What you're talking about is a 50/50, that's not what this situation was. Of course it was be a case by case basis but from the weekend I don't think knocking Kyogo unconscious in the manner he did should have been anything other than a red.

[AJF]

4 minutes ago, LuboMoravcik said:

What you're talking about is a 50/50, that's not what this situation was. Of course it was be a case by case basis but from the weekend I don't think knocking Kyogo unconscious in the manner he did should have been anything other than a red.

I was just commenting on the statement that any challenge that results in someone becoming unconscious should be an automatic red. It wasn’t specific to Kyogo’s incident as I assumed you were speaking more broadly.

I think the Kyogo one is difficult to judge, particularly since you can argue that Rubezic won the ball so was entitled to make the challenge.

[LuboMoravcik]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

I was just commenting on the statement that any challenge that results in someone becoming unconscious should be an automatic red. It wasn’t specific to Kyogo’s incident as I assumed you were speaking more broadly.

I think the Kyogo one is difficult to judge, particularly since you can argue that Rubezic won the ball so was entitled to make the challenge.

Ok sorry then, I should have been more specific because you do have a point regarding 50/50's etc.

Whether or not a player wins the ball is immaterial when you are also causing the player injury in the process.

Edited November 15, 2023 by LuboMoravcik

[Widge]

Having seen it from an unbiased point of view, it’s as close to a red card as you’ll get without it actually being one of that makes sense. Rubezic is clearly going for the ball the whole time; however he’s slightly late and comes in with some amount of force which is why it’s probably borderline. Where it falls within the reckless category is probably pertinent to this. I don’t want to see football ever stop being a physical contest, but equally what Rubezic did was fundamentally endangering another player because of the force used. Whilst the ball was there to be won 100%, sometimes you just can’t be as aggressive, then it doesn’t appear he’s got less aggressive in his locker. 

[houston_bud]

11 minutes ago, Widge said:

Having seen it from an unbiased point of view, it’s as close to a red card as you’ll get without it actually being one of that makes sense. Rubezic is clearly going for the ball the whole time; however he’s slightly late and comes in with [/b]some amount of force[/b] which is why it’s probably borderline. Where it falls within the reckless category is probably pertinent to this. I don’t want to see football ever stop being a physical contest, but equally what Rubezic did was fundamentally endangering another player because of the force used. Whilst the ball was there to be won 100%, sometimes you just can’t be as aggressive, then it doesn’t appear he’s got less aggressive in his locker. 

That's why I'm surprised he didn't get a red. He steams into it, even if they don't clash heads he would still clatter Kyogo.  

[Ooooft.]

20 hours ago, KingRocketman II said:

 

 

 

mate.....

 

[Jinky67]

12 hours ago, AJF said:

I was just commenting on the statement that any challenge that results in someone becoming unconscious should be an automatic red. It wasn’t specific to Kyogo’s incident as I assumed you were speaking more broadly.

I think the Kyogo one is difficult to judge, particularly since you can argue that Rubezic won the ball so was entitled to make the challenge.

It’s not that difficult to judge. It really boils down to if the challenge for the ball was too aggressive and was there excessive force used that could severely injure. If the answer to that is yes it should be a simple decision to make as similar rules apply in other contact sports. I’m involved in Taekwondo at an international level and my boys both compete for Scotland and such a rule applies there even though you are kicking and punching someone on the head, but if the contact is considered excessive resulting in a KO you can be disqualified. You are perfectly entitled to kick that person in the face but the aggression and contact has to be controlled 

Edited November 15, 2023 by Jinky67

[VincentGuerin]

3 hours ago, Jinky67 said:

It’s not that difficult to judge. It really boils down to if the challenge for the ball was too aggressive and was there excessive force used that could severely injure. If the answer to that is yes it should be a simple decision to make as similar rules apply in other contact sports. I’m involved in Taekwondo at an international level and my boys both compete for Scotland and such a rule applies there even though you are kicking and punching someone on the head, but if the contact is considered excessive resulting in a KO you can be disqualified. You are perfectly entitled to kick that person in the face but the aggression and contact has to be controlled 

Aside from the obvious, that the rules of a different sport are hardly relevant, the referee saw the incident and obviously did not consider the force excessive. The VAR didn't see fit to correct him. So, they did not consider it excessive.

Case closed.

[Jinky67]

12 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Aside from the obvious, that the rules of a different sport are hardly relevant, the referee saw the incident and obviously did not consider the force excessive. The VAR didn't see fit to correct him. So, they did not consider it excessive.

Case closed.

Clearly the rules (laws) are different however what I am suggesting is that you can apply them in such a way or just with general common sense in a contact sport and be both competitive and keep people safe, but I’m sure the debate will subside just because you see it in such a way. I also find it a little sad that you view players health being less important than whether or not a decision was correct.

Secondly I trust based on the above statement we will never see you complain about how referees or VAR view a decision?

Edited November 15, 2023 by Jinky67

[VincentGuerin]

9 hours ago, Jinky67 said:

Clearly the rules (laws) are different however what I am suggesting is that you can apply them in such a way or just with general common sense in a contact sport and be both competitive and keep people safe, but I’m sure the debate will subside just because you see it in such a way. I also find it a little sad that you view players health being less important than whether or not a decision was correct.

Secondly I trust based on the above statement we will never see you complain about how referees or VAR view a decision?

That doesn't logically follow.

Your argument is one based on perception, that's why I highlighted those words. But the obvious answer is the officials didn't perceive things the way you do. And you'd likely perceive them differently if it were a Celtic player making that challenge.

I posted the same thing about the Boyce penalty incident the other day. People see what they want to see, but the laws of the game are subjective. How people choose to see them is usually a matter of who they support.

[Derryboy62]

On 13/11/2023 at 18:48, lubo_blaha said:

Hold my beer, I’m away for a boogie.

Never mind the beer and the boogie....

Celtic 9 - 0 Aberdeen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case closed  

 

 

 

 

 

[lubo_blaha]

13 minutes ago, Derryboy62 said:

Never mind the beer and the boogie....

Celtic 9 - 0 Aberdeen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case closed