Rangers to appeal Rob Kiernan's red card ahead of Celtic clash

[BrahimHemdani 1]

The refereeing the other night was atrocious (not for the first time from Clancy at Ibrox this season) so I'm glad the club are defending the player here.

 

I still think it's a very soft red card. A stupid challenge no doubt but I'm not convinced it was worthy of anything more than a booking.

 

The challenge is indefensible.

 

If the same challenge had been made on a Rangers player, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be saying that; and that seems to be Rangers point; albeit it is one with which I do not agree.

[Frankie 8,148]

The challenge is indefensible.

 

If the same challenge had been made on a Rangers player, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be saying that; and that seems to be Rangers point; albeit it is one with which I do not agree.

 

No, if the same challenge had been made on our player I'd analyse it the same.

 

Whilst I'd tend to agree with your statement about the stuff on McKay not really being applicable to Kiernan's challenge, twice (perhaps thrice) in the first half, Clancy chose not to book St J players for obvious yellow card offences. Twice I think he played advantage and only once did he call the offending player back at the next available stoppage - to warn him only. In the second half, Toral made a late challenge and was (rightly) booked after the play stopped a short time later.

 

In that sense, Rangers are entitled to question the official's inconsistency when it comes to his interpretation of the rules and associated leniency.

[Uilleam 5,409]

I do not believe that there is any possibility of an appeal winning, but perhaps the Machiavellian in me is considering whether there isn't another purpose in this i.e. highlight the general poor standard of refereeing in Scotland. No doubt they will show the tackles on McKay in the same match as mitigating circumstances. Although I do not believe that there is a plot for all referees in Scotland against Rangers, there is no question that we are not getting our share of the 50/50 decisions and when it comes to Clancy and Thompson in particular, it does appear that there is an agenda. Just too many 'mistakes'.

 

For all the contempt that I hold towards Lennon and Celtic, they have had very few marginal decisions going against them since the time of the Refs strike. Perhaps as we continue with our dignified silence mentality we may be trying to find a more measured approach?

 

The point to bear in mind is that the referees lost the strike. Once a strike is lost, it can take years to recover. Referees are now shit scared to give marginal calls against fhilth fc ( for the avoidance of doubt, I mean those referees who would give such a call, other things being equal).

[stewarty 1,876]

Hopefully they increase his ban to cover the rest of the season... reprehensibly stupid of Kiernan to give such a poor referee a chance to send you off. When you consider the game situation and the pitch location... deary me.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Hopefully they increase his ban to cover the rest of the season... reprehensibly stupid of Kiernan to give such a poor referee a chance to send you off. When you consider the game situation and the pitch location... deary me.

 

This is actually a very fair point . Not only only does the doomed appeal mean uncertainty as to the CB pairing for possibly our most difficult match of the season; but it also runs the risk of the sentence being increased.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

No, if the same challenge had been made on our player I'd analyse it the same.

 

Whilst I'd tend to agree with your statement about the stuff on McKay not really being applicable to Kiernan's challenge, twice (perhaps thrice) in the first half, Clancy chose not to book St J players for obvious yellow card offences. Twice I think he played advantage and only once did he call the offending player back at the next available stoppage - to warn him only. In the second half, Toral made a late challenge and was (rightly) booked after the play stopped a short time later.

 

In that sense, Rangers are entitled to question the official's inconsistency when it comes to his interpretation of the rules and associated leniency.

 

 

I can only reiterate that any inconsistency on the part of the referee perceived or otherwise is not a mitigating factor for Kiernan's offence, which will be judged on its merits, and there can be only one outcome.

[Little General 80]

It seems there's Judge Jury and black cap on this thread all due to the fact that they don't like Kiernan.

 

I personally did not think it was a sending off, but what do I know.

[boabie 230]

It seems there's Judge Jury and black cap on this thread all due to the fact that they don't like Kiernan.

 

I personally did not think it was a sending off, but what do I know.

 

I've stated that I think Kiernan is a liability with very little ability.

It doesn't mean that I am wrong in saying that a player diving into a tackle like he did the other night deserves to get sent off LG.

It was a sending off every time.

[Little General 80]

I've stated that I think Kiernan is a liability with very little ability.

It doesn't mean that I am wrong in saying that a player diving into a tackle like he did the other night deserves to get sent off LG.

It was a sending off every time.

 

Not imo It wasn't. The point I'm trying to make is if any another favourite player had made the tackle the clamour to exonerate him would have been loud and clear.

 

It was not a sending off tackle.

[Little General 80]

I've stated that I think Kiernan is a liability with very little ability.

It doesn't mean that I am wrong in saying that a player diving into a tackle like he did the other night deserves to get sent off LG.

It was a sending off every time.

 

That's got hew haw to do with it.