Celtic FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15 Mod Warning post #6011

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 04:46PM

Dempsey wrote: »

The commentators shíting on about the ball not being on the spot, it clearly was! Clearly them and Forster etc need to read the rulebook and not be picking up stupid yellow cards for protesting things they should know better about!

Looked well off the spot to me. Whats the exact rule?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zmfj1rOuiAA

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 04:52PM

Any part of the ball on or over the line or spot counts. The edge of the ball is clearly over the spot which is perfectly fine

A Dub in Glasgo · 02-01-2013 04:54PM

Finished 1-0

Hooper goal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnrYUB4Hums

A Dub in Glasgo · 02-01-2013 04:55PM

That was a shocking penalty decision by the ref

ColeTrain · 02-01-2013 04:56PM

I knew Forster was going to save that. Gem of a keeper.

BhoscaCapall · 02-01-2013 04:58PM

Good win despite the best efforts of the cheat with the whistle. Too many shocking decisions have gone against us this season that have been ignored because we've played crap and "didn't deserve" to win. We had 4 players booked today and only one was for a bad foul. Motherwell dived twice and committed 7 fouls, one of which could have been a straight red. Two yellows. Prícks.

I'm glad we won because when we don't these decisions get swept under the rug as excuses and being sore losers.

A Dub in Glasgo · 02-01-2013 05:13PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Any part of the ball on or over the line or spot counts. The edge of the ball is clearly over the spot which is perfectly fine

Looks very borderline to me

donfers · 02-01-2013 05:20PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Any part of the ball on or over the line or spot counts. The edge of the ball is clearly over the spot which is perfectly fine

I couldn't give a flying one if the ball was touching the spot or not, it should never have been given in a million years, a disgraceful decision

young hately and Mccall and Murphy may well all be hurting in a big way right now after almost being gifted a win against a team they all hate, only to be denied in the end by a class goal and a brilliant penalty save - league is all but over despite the best efforts of the man in the middle, a good way to start the new year and an immensely satisfying result

murphy should have been sent off yet mccall says in the post-match interview he should have had two penalties, laughable stuff and tells you what kind of world these guys operate in, to be honest with the ref they had (is it true his cousin used to play for rangers?) i am not surprised he expected two pens for two dives but iin the end justice was done

A Dub in Glasgo · 02-01-2013 05:24PM

When Forster saved, I was almost expecting the ref to order the penalty to be retaken for the ball not being on the spot!

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 02-01-2013 05:28PM

donfers wrote: »

I couldn't give a flying one if the ball was touching the spot or not, it should never have been given in a million years, a disgraceful decision

young hately and Mccall and Murphy may well all be hurting in a big way right now after almost being gifted a win against a team they all hate, only to be denied in the end by a class goal and a brilliant penalty save - league is all but over despite the best efforts of the man in the middle, a good way to start the new year and an immensely satisfying result

murphy should have been sent off yet mccall says in the post-match interview he should have had two penalties, laughable stuff and tells you what kind of world these guys operate in, to be honest with the ref they had (is it true his cousin used to play for rangers?) i am not surprised he expected two pens for two dives but iin the end justice was done

Really we aren't even in the same league yet this nonsense continues. It was the same today in our match when the commentator mentioned an Annan player was a Celtic fan. It makes no difference he was playing for Annan and wanted to do his best for the team that he plays for. But a cousin that played for Rangers wow I thought I had seen some silly stuff on Boards but that takes the biscuit

ColeTrain · 02-01-2013 05:29PM

Lasley's tackle on Charlie was disgraceful and Murphy had no problem taking another dive in the box.

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 05:30PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Looks very borderline to me

The part of the ball which doesnt contact the ground is clearly over the spot to me

ColeTrain · 02-01-2013 05:31PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Really we aren't even in the same league yet this nonsense continues. It was the same today in our match when the commentator mentioned an Annan player was a Celtic fan. It makes no difference he was playing for Annan and wanted to do his best for the team that he plays for. But a cousin that played for Rangers wow I thought I had seen some silly stuff on Boards but that takes the biscuit

You're only taking a few words from his post and discounting everything else. The officiating in Scotland can be very poor at times and today was a prime example.

Broxi_Bear_Eire · 02-01-2013 05:34PM

ColeTrain wrote: »

You're only taking a few words from his post and discounting everything else. The officiating in Scotland can be very poor at times and today was a prime example.

I am taking a few words because they deserve to be ridiculed.

I am certain it was not a penalty I also think the ball was just on the spot but very close and none of these things happened because the refs cousin may have played for Rangers:p

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 05:39PM

Kelvin Wilson speaking to media: 'A stonewall penalty. Can't argue with it but great save from Fraser. Was a relief.'

I wasnt sure how much contact was make with Murphy but when you impede a player and dont get the ball in the box, you are giving the referee food for thought. Same type of thing as Udinese last year.

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 05:39PM

Dempsey wrote: »

The part of the ball which doesnt contact the ground is clearly over the spot to me

and so what?

Thats not on the spot. The rule is:

Position of the ball and the players
The ball:
• must be placed on the penalty mark

Open to interpretation i suppose but ive never seen a ref allow a placing thats so blatantly borderline

BhoscaCapall · 02-01-2013 05:41PM

Dempsey wrote: »

The part of the ball which doesnt contact the ground is clearly over the spot to me

I think you're right re. the rules but it wasn't clear cut, it was like 1mm over the edge of the spot, so Forster was entirely justified in asking the referee to have a look, just like how Wanyama was justified in protesting the penalty. Murphy will be weaseling out of retrospective punishment as he slinks off to piss away his career at some nothing club in England but Victor's booking should be rescinded at least.

ColeTrain · 02-01-2013 05:41PM

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

I am taking a few words because they deserve to be ridiculed.

I am certain it was not a penalty I also think the ball was just on the spot but very close and none of these things happened because the refs cousin may have played for Rangers:p

His brother, not cousin I'm led to believe.
This may or may not have affected his decisions but we can all agree he had a shocker.

Re. The ball on the spot

In my opinion it's over but very close either way.

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 05:50PM

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

and so what? Thats not on the spot. The rule is:

Open to interpretation i suppose but ive never seen a ref allow a placing thats so blatantly borderline

Any part of the ball on or over the line/spot is the rule. 'All of the ball' includes the part that doesnt be in contact with the ground.

Forster was right to ask the referee to check it but that doesnt mean you saying at it until you are booked!

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 05:56PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Any part of the ball on or over the line/spot is the rule. 'All of the ball' includes the part that doesnt be in contact with the ground.

The rule says it must be 'on' the penalty mark, the rule does not say ]Any part of the ball and hovering over it is not 'on' it.

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 05:59PM

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

The rule says it must be 'on' the penalty mark, the rule does not say ]Any part of the ball and hovering over it is not 'on' it.

Explain to me at what point the ball is no longer considered 'on' the penalty spot?

If its to be consistent with the rest of the rules regarding the ball & pitch markings, its any part of the ball counts. The whole of the ball has to be away from the spot to be considered 'off' of the penalty spot.

BhoscaCapall · 02-01-2013 06:03PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Forster was right to ask the referee to check it but that doesnt mean you saying at it until you are booked!

It's not like he went ape over it, he literally just pointed at the ball and said something to the ref, and the ref walked over and booked him without even checking the ball.

Anyway why is this even the focus? At least let's moan about the two shocking dives, the shocking Lasley foul etc :pac:

To be fair the game was a drab affair up until that point. If we need a bit of cheating to make the season more of a challenge, well we're in no better league for it!

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 06:03PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Explain to me at what point the ball is no longer considered 'on' the penalty spot?

It means the whole object imo, and not as you have said, part of it.

Dempsey wrote: »

Any part of the ball on or over the line/spot is the rule.

Dempsey wrote: »

If its to be consistent with the rest of the rules regarding the ball & pitch markings, its any part of the ball counts.

well thats not the case regarding a goal being scored is it?

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 06:12PM

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

It means the whole object imo, and not as you have said, part of it.

well thats not the case regarding a goal being scored is it?

So by your interpretation of the rules, any part of the ball not on the marking is considered to be off the spot? No referee operates like that.

It is the case in every other part of the game whether the referee gets the call correct during play is another thing.

The other part of the game where you see this rule pushed to the limit is at corners, especially if the corner area has no grass.

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 06:19PM

Dempsey wrote: »

So by your interpretation of the rules, any part of the ball not on the marking is considered to be off the spot? No referee operates like that.

It is the case in every other part of the game whether the referee gets the call correct during play is another thing.

The other part of the game where you see this rule pushed to the limit is at corners, especially if the corner area has no grass.

Your direct quote was "Any part of the ball on or over the line/spot is the rule." and this is clearly not the case. In terms of of a penalty i think, yes the ball should be on the spot not hovering on it or touching it.

And a goal is not scored if part of the ball is over the line which is the logical end result of your argument though of course i realise this not waht you are saying.

Coillte_Bhoy · 02-01-2013 06:27PM

Look maybe you're right and im wrong, fair enough, im not looking for an argument on this so i'll leave it.

Dempsey · 02-01-2013 06:38PM

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Your direct quote was "Any part of the ball on or over the line/spot is the rule." and this is clearly not the case. In terms of of a penalty i think, yes the ball should be on the spot not hovering on it or touching it.

And a goal is not scored if part of the ball is over the line which is the logical end result of your argument though of course i realise this not waht you are saying.

I realise that saying over the line is confusing my explanation, bad choice of words.

An auld diagram to help!

Once any part of the ball is 'over' the pitch marking in question, its considered to be inside of it.

Lennonist · 02-01-2013 08:26PM

Liverpool bought Sturridge:pac:. They were supposed to be interested in Hooper, I was worried if they came for him that he might be swayed to go there. I don't see Hooper going to Southampton or Sunderland in January with Celtic still in the CL and the Juve game coming up. We don't need to sign anyone this window so long as we keep what we have - especially Hooper and Wanyama.

BhoscaCapall · 02-01-2013 08:29PM

Lennonist wrote: »

We don't need to sign anyone so long as we keep what we have - especially Hooper and Wanyama.

We need cover at left back and a striker. Lennon didn't trust Lassad at home against Motherwell to start or even to come off the bench.

Then again Stokes is back soon and will hopefully remind people how good he is with Hooper.

Dempsey · 03-01-2013 03:48PM

celtic better not sell kayal to norwich!

Celtic FC Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 2014/15 Mod Warning post #6011

Comments