Busta Nut Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 It wasn't even a fucking foul. McAusland it the one who's late, turns his back and connects with Casey. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayWell Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Oh well, if former terrible referee Bobby Madden says it's a red then that settles it eh? We getting to the stage where visiting teams aren't allowed to compete for loose balls or tackle at Ibrox? Would that just be easier? Not only is Casey not late, he's early! It's a loose ball that he has every right to go for. Shame a player got hurt but this debate is laughable. Have Rangers fans considered crying more? That might help. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 The highest boot in that tackle belongs to McAusland. Casey plays the ball which is absolutely there to be played in the way he played it. He then puts his foot back on the ground as soon as he can. His studs are never in any danger of going into McAusland. I have absolute no idea why anyone is talking about the "speed he went in at". He was going fast enough to beat his opponent to a loose ball. What else would anyone expected . If anything, he makes an effort to ensure McAuslands safety and also avoid giving away a foul. It's an objectively good bit of play. Absolute fucking grievance junkies looking for a red card for something that can barely be called a foul, and very telling g re the client media reaction . 19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 McAusland is half-heartedly contesting a ball he has no prospect of winning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 (edited) Look, look, look! I can post still images without context or depth perception as well: And opinions from pundits who call it a "late tackle" when he wins the ball cleanly before McCausland even reaches him are null and void. How on earth can it be late? If anything McCausland is the late one. The ball there is miles away from either of them and he catches Casey on the thigh. Edited March 4 by StAndrew7 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al B Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 It's certainly a very late studs up challenge, but not by Dan Casey. It's actually a foul to us. Look how far apart they are when Casey plays the ball. Bennett's screenshot above actually has a full yard in between them. By the time they reach each other, Casey has played the ball and his foot is flat on the ground. The Rangers guy arrives there long after the ball has gone with his back turned, his leg in and his studs up, and that leg goes into Casey's knee. 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Just now, Al B said: By the time they reach each other, Casey has played the ball and his foot is flat on the ground. The Rangers guy arrives there long after the ball has gone with his back turned, his leg in and his studs up, and that leg goes into Casey's knee. Basically this. The ball has already been won and is cleared by the time McAusland wafts his pipe cleaner leg at Casey. It's not even like it's a 50/50. The whole discourse about it is just weird. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 It's completely wild that's anything but a foul to Motherwell 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well fan for life Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 A disgusting challenge from McCausland imho. Horrendously late and well after the ball had been won. I would hope the authorities take this very seriously indeed. See. We can all play the still images game. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 6 minutes ago, Al B said: It's certainly a very late studs up challenge, but not by Dan Casey. It's actually a foul to us. Look how far apart they are when Casey plays the ball. Bennett's screenshot above actually has a full yard in between them. By the time they reach each other, Casey has played the ball and his foot is flat on the ground. The Rangers guy arrives there long after the ball has gone with his back turned, his leg in and his studs up, and that leg goes into Casey's knee. Just now, well fan for life said: I would hope the authorities take this very seriously indeed. The club should top off what's been a great weekend by publicly asking for a retrospective red card for McAusland. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Kirk Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 51 minutes ago, bennett said: Casey should have been sent off for tackle vs Rangers INCIDENT: Rangers were unhappy there was no card for Dan Casey for a challenge on Ross McCausland which took him out of the game. DERMOT SAYS: "I don't know why. I think it is a red card. The pace he goes in, not a nice tackle." STEPHEN WARNOCK SAYS: "It's a poor tackle." SUE SMITH SAYS: "It has to be a red card. It's late, aggressive..." Oh well if Bobby Madhun says it’s a red perhaps you can ask for the game to be replayed? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted March 4 Author Share Posted March 4 33 minutes ago, Bairnardo said: I have absolute no idea why anyone is talking about the "speed he went in at". He was going fast enough to beat his opponent to a loose ball. What else would anyone expected . If anything, he makes an effort to ensure McAuslands safety and also avoid giving away a foul. It's an objectively good bit of play. Absolute fucking grievance junkies looking for a red card for something that can barely be called a foul, and very telling g re the client media reaction . I’ll assume this is directed at me here given my earlier comments. I’ve already said it’s not a red, but the speed of a challenge is absolutely a factor when considering if a player has fouled or not. It’s the reason we were told Sterling’s red card against Aberdeen was dangerous, the speed at which he went into the tackle. It’s a rather moot point given I don’t believe it’s a red card, but it’s wrong to suggest the speed at which a player makes a challenge should not be considered. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 4 minutes ago, AJF said: I’ll assume this is directed at me here given my earlier comments. I’ve already said it’s not a red, but the speed of a challenge is absolutely a factor when considering if a player has fouled or not. It’s the reason we were told Sterling’s red card against Aberdeen was dangerous, the speed at which he went into the tackle. It’s a rather moot point given I don’t believe it’s a red card, but it’s wrong to suggest the speed at which a player makes a challenge should not be considered. Not specifically. Theres been nore a than a few mentions of speed of challenge. He didn't go into a challenge at speed. He ran towards, and arrived at, a loose ball at speed. There was no challenge because he beat his opponent to the ball by about a full yard. His actions thereafter were perfectly safe. His opponent however, I have no idea what he was doing, but there is no foul play whatsoever from Casey. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vietnam91 Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 You guys have now secured 10 in a row of being the paranoia champions, overtaking your cross town symbiots. Only thing missing is Butland engineering a concussion. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 32 minutes ago, Swello said: The club should top off what's been a great weekend by publicly asking for a retrospective red card for McAusland. 3,000 'Well fans pledging £100 each to the Society if we do that basically halves the finding gap. More seriously, it shows how comically strong the Old Firm can be in setting the agenda that folk in the media (I'll ignore the more rabid element of their fanbase as there are loonies everywhere) can seriously suggest our guy should be red carded for winning the ball so early he can fully ground his foot before being clattered by a late tackle. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 Is there a different speed limit for different positions on the park, presumably wingers are allowed to go faster? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayWell Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 A lot of the rhetoric around this, particularly from Sky's hilariously unbalanced Ref Watch, seems to be "the lad went home on crutches", as if there has never been a recorded incident of a footballer getting injured when no foul has occurred. Pish for the guy getting hurt but it's not a foul. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 On one hand we have several experienced ex referees giving their opinions. On the other hand we have Bairnardo. PnB goes with...... -3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 9 minutes ago, bennett said: On one hand we have several experienced ex referees giving their opinions. On the other hand we have Bairnardo. PnB goes with...... @ me next time shitebag 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brightside Posted March 4 Share Posted March 4 It's not Dan Casey's fault that McCausland is a wee shitebag. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.