Hearts V Celtic

[Galajambo]

The tears and snotters from the dhims are just utterly delicious, the only decision the referee got wrong was the penalty for Celtic, and not sending off their thug for the lunge at McCauley Tait late in the game, I bet tin foils hat sales are through the roof in the East end of Glasgow today! 

Edited March 4 by Galajambo

[HeWhoWalksBehindTheRows]

20 hours ago, TheScarf said:

6 years since the old firm both lost on the same weekend is fucking mental.

Always find it mental, facts like Wells win at the weekend being first there in decades, while we were beating the old firm in our early years.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

2 hours ago, TheScarf said:

Again, Celtic obviously get as many as Rangers do, it's the game scenario in which Rangers seem to get them is what fucks everyone off.

Of the 13 penalties Celtic have had, 7 have come at nil nil, 2 at 1-1 and  1 at 1 nil up. The rest have been at 2 up. None at all when behind in a game

Rangers have had 3 at 1 nil down, 1 at nil nil, 1 at 1-1 and 5 when in front.

So both teams largely get them when the game is in the balance

[Jinky67]

2 hours ago, bennett said:

celtic haven't got any openers through penalties or won any games through penalties,  just Sevco. 

That’s not what he said. 

 

[Galajambo]

17 hours ago, Craigie Jambo said:

Oh, the knives are out, eh?

 

Sure it wasn't a corkscrew with a knife attached?  

[AJF]

3 hours ago, TheScarf said:

I think the issue everyone has is the game situation where Rangers always get one.  It's either when they're losing by a goal or drawing so the officials appear to be 'helping' them. Celtic seem to get theirs when they're already 4-0 at home to someone so they don't get highlighted as much.

 

1 hour ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Of the 13 penalties Celtic have had, 7 have come at nil nil, 2 at 1-1 and  1 at 1 nil up. The rest have been at 2 up. None at all when behind in a game

Rangers have had 3 at 1 nil down, 1 at nil nil, 1 at 1-1 and 5 when in front.

So both teams largely get them when the game is in the balance

So 70% of Celtic's penalties have come at a time when they are not winning compared to 58% of ours coming at a time when we are not winning.

So Celtic have received more penalties than us, conceded less penalties than us and have had a higher percentage of penalties awarded at a time when they were not winning. Seems as though you may need to rethink that theory @TheScarf

(please note: I am not intending to suggest any type of bias here)

[Crùbag]

4 hours ago, TheScarf said:

Yes, all your players turning into Fort William strikers when placing the ball on the penalty spot doesn't help.

[54_and_counting]

8 hours ago, HeartsOfficialMoaner said:

I wouldn't put it past Beaton to cheat but the final decision is with the referee and Beaton did chop off a Hearts goal for offside.

Beaton also never encouraged a review of the celtic penalty, which rodgers seems to forget about

[54_and_counting]

7 hours ago, TheScarf said:

I think the issue everyone has is the game situation where Rangers always get one.  It's either when they're losing by a goal or drawing so the officials appear to be 'helping' them. Celtic seem to get theirs when they're already 4-0 at home to someone so they don't get highlighted as much.

 

5 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

Of the 13 penalties Celtic have had, 7 have come at nil nil, 2 at 1-1 and  1 at 1 nil up. The rest have been at 2 up. None at all when behind in a game

Rangers have had 3 at 1 nil down, 1 at nil nil, 1 at 1-1 and 5 when in front.

So both teams largely get them when the game is in the balance

And this shows just how much pish is talked in the media circles, and how it can affect a fans thinking

Guys like sutton hartson lennon and pretty much all the SSB crew constantly going on about Rangers penalties while nothing said of the celtic penalties gives fans a narrative of rangers getting help with theirs while celtics are meaningless, 

When in reality both clubs have roughly the same amount of meaningless penalties 

[LuboMoravcik]

29 minutes ago, 54_and_counting said:

 

And this shows just how much pish is talked in the media circles, and how it can affect a fans thinking

Guys like sutton hartson lennon and pretty much all the SSB crew constantly going on about Rangers penalties while nothing said of the celtic penalties gives fans a narrative of rangers getting help with theirs while celtics are meaningless, 

When in reality both clubs have roughly the same amount of meaningless penalties 

How about the stat where your lot went nearly two seasons worth of games without conceding one in the league? Huge anomaly.

[54_and_counting]

45 minutes ago, LuboMoravcik said:

How about the stat where your lot went nearly two seasons worth of games without conceding one in the league? Huge anomaly.

Totally different subject to the post i quoted, but you know that and the cynic in me would say you are using it a deflection tactic from the fact that celtic get just as many, if not more important penalties than rangers do

Which is never highlighted in the media 

[LuboMoravcik]

Just now, 54_and_counting said:

Totally different subject to the post i quoted, but you know that and the cynic in me would say you are using it a deflection tactic from the fact that celtic get just as many, if not more important penalties than rangers do

Which is never highlighted in the media 

I don't think penalties awarded vs penalties conceded is a massive gap in subject, and the latter was a huge concern that massively benefitted your club.

However if you just want to focus solely on penalties awarded, I'm sure we'll agree that as more dominant sides in the league both Celtic and Rangers will spend more time attacking, so there's a higher likelihood of either club being involved in claims for penalties.

The main difference for me is that Rangers will be awarded a penalty for the opposition simply breathing near their player. We'll inevitably receive some penalties that folk will call 'soft' too, but nowhere near as often as your club does.

[AJF]

11 minutes ago, LuboMoravcik said:

I don't think penalties awarded vs penalties conceded is a massive gap in subject, and the latter was a huge concern that massively benefitted your club.

However if you just want to focus solely on penalties awarded, I'm sure we'll agree that as more dominant sides in the league both Celtic and Rangers will spend more time attacking, so there's a higher likelihood of either club being involved in claims for penalties.

The main difference for me is that Rangers will be awarded a penalty for the opposition simply breathing near their player. We'll inevitably receive some penalties that folk will call 'soft' too, but nowhere near as often as your club does.

Aye, your penalty yesterday was a right stone-waller

[54_and_counting]

10 minutes ago, LuboMoravcik said:

I don't think penalties awarded vs penalties conceded is a massive gap in subject, and the latter was a huge concern that massively benefitted your club.

However if you just want to focus solely on penalties awarded, I'm sure we'll agree that as more dominant sides in the league both Celtic and Rangers will spend more time attacking, so there's a higher likelihood of either club being involved in claims for penalties.

The main difference for me is that Rangers will be awarded a penalty for the opposition simply breathing near their player. We'll inevitably receive some penalties that folk will call 'soft' too, but nowhere near as often as your club does.

And you actually typed that out after watching the penalty you received at the weekend

The full blown meltdown from celtic and their fans after getting and missing one of the dodgiest penalties seen this season, having just conceded their first penalty in all domestic competitions (its now march with 12 domestic games left out of a maximum of 44 this season for celtic) and getting a red card is mental

Had celtic scored their penalty and went on to win yesterday would you have even batted an eyelid at hearts being shafted? 

[LuboMoravcik]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

Aye, your penalty yesterday was a right stone-waller

Tripping a player is a foul, regardless of where it happens on the pitch. The Hearts defender kicks the back of Yang's calf when both are running at speed and anyone who has played football knows that it doesn't take a lot to trip you up running quickly. I'm aware many will disagree, but it was a foul.

Edited March 4 by LuboMoravcik

[54_and_counting]

1 minute ago, LuboMoravcik said:

Tripping a player is a foul, regardless of where it happens on the pitch. The Hearts defender kicks the back of Yang's calf when both are running at speed and anyone who has played football knows that it doesn't take a lot to trip you up running quickly. I'm aware many will disagree, but it was a foul.

Away with yourself, theres more contact in the supposed harsh sending off than their is for the penalty lol

[LuboMoravcik]

1 minute ago, 54_and_counting said:

And you actually typed that out after watching the penalty you received at the weekend

The full blown meltdown from celtic and their fans after getting and missing one of the dodgiest penalties seen this season, having just conceded their first penalty in all domestic competitions (its now march with 12 domestic games left out of a maximum of 44 this season for celtic) and getting a red card is mental

Had celtic scored their penalty and went on to win yesterday would you have even batted an eyelid at hearts being shafted? 

Yesterday's penalty was a foul, as explained above. If the Hearts defender hadn't made contact then you'd maybe have a point, but he did.

 

[LuboMoravcik]

Just now, 54_and_counting said:

Away with yourself, theres more contact in the supposed harsh sending off than their is for the penalty lol

The red card was the correct decision too, imo.

[bennett]

 

 

BRENDAN RODGERS could face an SFA punishment after his comments about referees.

The Celtic boss was raging at the involvement from VAR John Beaton in Sunday’s loss to Hearts.

He hit out after the Hoops’ 2-0 defeat but could now find himself in hot water.

It’s thought compliance officer Martin Black hasn’t yet decided whether to cite the Parkhead boss.

But SunSport understands the club will be contacted at the very least following Rodgers’ uncharacteristic post-match outburst.

Rodgers blasted Beaton, claiming his decisions could cost the Hoops the title

 

[54_and_counting]

Just now, LuboMoravcik said:

Yesterday's penalty was a foul, as explained above. If the Hearts defender hadn't made contact then you'd maybe have a point, but he did.

 

Okay if we are going by the letter of the law (absolute minimal contact at best but hey ho) then whats all the fuss about the hearts penalty, the defender clearly makes his body bigger with his arm out, letter of the law and all that