Ryan Jack wins red card appeal

[Dragosani 60]

i wonder how many players (not just in Scotland) have had two red rescinded on the dot?

[Rousseau 9,372]

The red card did not cause result V Killie.,it was the most dreadful penalty I've ever seen by a Rangers and the subsequent failure in defence.

 

Maybe not, but there would not have been 9 minutes added on, and we'd have another body in the centre of midfield to defend. That situation did cost us, but you're right we were poor throughout and probably didn't deserve to win.

[ian1964 10,415]

That's two red cards rescinded, I wonder when we will get an apology?, in the meantime Broon will continue to elbow and kick his way through matches with nothing being done!

[StuGers 477]

If Craig Thomson (other examples are readily available!) is the Video referee we will still be victimised. The VR is still, for a lot of decisions, making a judgement call. Was a particular tackle reckless and deserving of a red card? The answer, even after umpteen viewings is still that it is not a red card for Scott Brown but it is for Ryan Jack. Scott Brown's weekly off the ball elbow will still be ignored. Louis Moult still gets away with breaking Cardoso's nose.

 

However there is more chance of getting obvious errors right at a time when it can still influence the game if a VR is in play, which I support. Offside goals etc are a matter of fact.not judgement. I would take that small comfort at least, as well as Tony getting his well-earned P45.

 

At least a VR would make it harder for them to lie about why they cheat us. For now it is easy to say that it was hard for the red to see. If there was a VR then it’s harder to justify the fact that someone watched the event again and still fabricated decisions against us.

[StuGers 477]

The red card did not cause result V Killie.,it was the most dreadful penalty I've ever seen by a Rangers and the subsequent failure in defence.

 

Not directly but it had a huge impact.

[craig 5,195]

The red card did not cause result V Killie.,it was the most dreadful penalty I've ever seen by a Rangers and the subsequent failure in defence.

 

It had a part to play though, given the ridiculous amount of time between awarding of the penalty and the taking of it. That CAN put players off.

[JFK-1 1,674]

Obviously happy this card has been rescinded but Jack does indeed walk a tightrope at times. But then isn't that what many of us expect? We demand that the team show some 'fight' (aggression) which he does.

[ian1964 10,415]

Obviously happy this card has been rescinded but Jack does indeed walk a tightrope at times. But then isn't that what many of us expect? We demand that the team show some 'fight' (aggression) which he does.

 

In both instances Jack was being man handled/stamped, I don't see how he avoids it when being targeted?, both decisions were proven wrong.

[onevision 1,443]

In both instances Jack was being man handled/stamped, I don't see how he avoids it when being targeted?, both decisions were proven wrong.

 

I know it's easier said than done Ian but Jack needs to think of the team and walk away from these confrontations as next time the card will stick....

[ian1964 10,415]

I know it's easier said than done Ian but Jack needs to think of the team and walk away from these confrontations as next time the card will stick....

 

See I don't get that mate!, he was being targeted and done nothing wrong so find it difficult to understand how you can avoid it?, it seems since he moved to us from the sheep he is suddenly an aggressive player!