The ref was spot on yesterday

[der Berliner 3,299]

From the Evening Times article on the game (sntached from FF in lack of a true link) ...

 

CELTIC'S Hampden record since Neil Lennon took over as manager in March 2010 now reads, played eight, won four, lost four.

 

Most importantly, only one trophy has been collected at the National Stadium, despite three finals having been contested.

 

That hurts, but not as much as the fact the club, to a man, are convinced that it has been performances not of men in Hoops but men in the middle which have caused them so much heartache and pain.

 

The 2-1 defeat by Hearts in the William Hill Scottish Cup semi-final is just the latest dagger in the back.

 

With it went the hope of a SPL championship and Scottish Cup double, just as the dream of a rare treble had disappeared on their last visit to Hampden when Kilmarnock provided the shock with a 1-0 win in he final of the League Cup.

 

Defeat in any major game cuts to the core, and the pain stays with players, management and supporters alike for years to come.

 

When dubious refereeing decisions rub salt into the wounds, the cries of anguish are only amplified.

 

In the League Cup final, it was Willie Collum who bore the brunt of the Hoops' anger after denying a penalty when Anthony Stokes went down in the box late in the game under a Michael Nelson challenge from behind.

 

Yesterday, it was Euan Norris who stole the show â?? ending Celtic's double ambition in the process â?? with his take on the handballs in the two boxes in the dying minutes.

 

It would have been much easier for the referee to wave away both claims as there is a strong case to be argued for the fact neither Victor Wanyama nor Andy Webster could reasonably be expected to get their hands out of the way of the ball from such close range.

 

The fact Norris gave Hearts a penalty â?? despite allegedly telling Celtic players it was because the ball struck the hand of Victor Wanyama after bouncing off Joe Ledley â?? but elected to ignore Hoops claims for handball against Webster only adds fuel to already smouldering resentment within the Parkhead camp that they do not get a fair crack of the whip when it comes to big decisions.

 

And the fact that Gary Hooper's equaliser could have been ruled offside had the main stand linesman, Willie Conquer, been more alert does nothing to dilute the belief within Celtic that the men in the middle are having too big a say â?? and a negative one at that â?? in determining the outcome of on the big occasions.

 

Of course, the age-old argument that, if they took their chances, Celtic could afford to ignore such intrusions, does hold good.

...

It was not just the penalty calls which upset the Celtic squad. The decision only to yellow card Ian Black for his first-half foul on Joe Ledley which Thompson claimed could have left the midfielder with a broken leg, was another bone of contention which added to the belief that the referee's performance had not matched the occasion.

...

Like the result, itself. Now the challenge is to control the feeling of injustice, no matter how compelling, and ensure it is not allowed to overwhelm the feeling of achievement which should be swamping a club who have brought the SPL title back to Parkhead for the first time in four years

 

Cully or McConnell pandering to the masses. It was all the bad refereeing, as we know. Even after the reporters had 24 hours to watch and study it all, they continue with that garbage and further the myth.

[calscot 0]

The ref's decision may be final but it doesn't mean it's correct.

 

 

 

I'm not so sure, but it's a subjective decision, which proves that it may not be technically correct

 

 

So if a game is quick and an instant decision is needed there can't be much justification for complaint, even if the decision may be wrong?

 

There was handball, deliberateness is open to interpretation - this is when a referee is needed. You may want to argue about correctness but in this case there is no ultimately "correct" decision. It's a time when the referee must use his experience, knowledge and what he has just seen to call the shot.

 

In this case the referee can't actually be "wrong". There is nothing technical to call him on as there was a hand ball, he interpreted it as deliberate, and he is therefore technically correct to call a penalty. It's maybe a 50-50 (I'd say more on the side of a penalty) call and so by definition, the referee's call becomes the de facto correct call. It's what he's there for. Teams cheat and lie all the time and also just get it wrong themselves and so the referee is there to call the shots.

 

The linesman called the offside wrongly as it was technically wrong. The player was technically offside. There is nothing to interpret in this instance. However, with the speed of the game it's easy for a human to get something that close wrong and so it's basically forgiveable and unfortunately part of the game.

 

Sorry, but from what I seen, I believe the referee could not get this one wrong either way. The decision was completely his to make and his alone. There is absolutely nothing technical to argue about. It's all about the referees interpretation. As such I can't see a basis for real complaint beyond having a petulant whinge.

 

The rules say it is the ref's opinion that counts in cases like this and so there is nothing to argue about. You can't argue about his interpretation. As long as his interpretation is his genuine one then he is correct by definition.

 

If it was against Rangers I would be indignant about not getting a penalty, if it was a penalty against us I'd maybe question it but then quickly let it go. For me, I think most referees that seen it would give a penalty and I'd have no long term complaints if it was us.

Edited April 16, 2012 by calscot

[calscot 0]

From the Evening Times article on the game (sntached from FF in lack of a true link) ...

 

 

 

Cully or McConnell pandering to the masses. It was all the bad refereeing, as we know. Even after the reporters had 24 hours to watch and study it all, they continue with that garbage and further the myth.

 

That reads like a Celtic fanzine. Is it no wonder that we have no respect for the football press these days.

[GovanAllan 0]

That is probably one of the worst pieces of journalism I've read, was he even on the planet yesterday.

[craig 5,199]

It was not just the penalty calls which upset the Celtic squad. The decision only to yellow card Ian Black for his first-half foul on Joe Ledley which Thompson claimed could have left the midfielder with a broken leg, was another bone of contention which added to the belief that the referee's performance had not matched the occasion.

 

Yet Lennon felt Wanyama's red against us was unfortunate..... They really dont do irony. Wanyama's tackle could have broken Whittaker's leg. The yahoos still believe Whittaker went over the ball and was the one who should have walked.

 

And then they have this.....

[Davy 0]

Wanyama was clearly playing basketball!!...how any one can say it was harsh is beyond me???...As for the offside goal?.. it was tight in actual play,but he was offside when you look at the replay...which the Ref hasn't got.....But as is normal with Celtc,never defeated allways cheated!!

[der Berliner 3,299]

They ... actually believe that Fortune scored a good goal against us when he man-handled McGregor's arm out of the way.

[Max Rebo's Big Blue Nose 0]

They ... actually believe that Fortune scored a good goal against us when he man-handled McGregor's arm out of the way.

 

Remember that? Oh how we laughed. They have the worst case of selective amnesia of any fans on the planet

[der Berliner 3,299]

I call that the Disfunctional Reality Perception syndrom.