Livingston v St.Mirren.Wednesday.

[sergie's no1 fan]

1 hour ago, Menga Bus said:

What’s awkward here is the way you’ve screenshotted a blurry image to paint the challenge a certain way. He isn’t out of control, and connects just above the boot with Baccus’ left ankle, not the right like this picture makes out, hence the contact is lower than this picture makes out. The real issue for me is the pish camera quality, the fact we’ve all seen countless replays and there’s still a very large majority of folk saying it’s not a red leans me towards saying a yellow isn’t a clear and obvious error so var shouldn’t be used.

He also follows through with 2 feet and studs showing.

Could have done some serious damage to Baccus, whilst it wasn't intentional.

[FTOF]

2 hours ago, Menga Bus said:

What’s awkward here is the way you’ve screenshotted a blurry image to paint the challenge a certain way. He isn’t out of control, and connects just above the boot with Baccus’ left ankle, not the right like this picture makes out, hence the contact is lower than this picture makes out. The real issue for me is the pish camera quality, the fact we’ve all seen countless replays and there’s still a very large majority of folk saying it’s not a red leans me towards saying a yellow isn’t a clear and obvious error so var shouldn’t be used.

I was just joining in the fun.

I can see the sending off from both perspectives.

VAR, despite what some thought, was never going to make matters black and white.

Referees seem to penalise players for the sort of challenge made last night, even if they win the ball first. It happened to us v Ross County with Shaughnessy receiving his marching orders. I was somewhat aggrieved at the time, but could just about see why it was deemed a red. I seem to remember that it was the fourth official that spotted it. Collum. Wee walloper. 

Last night, the VAR official clearly did think it was a clear error on the ref's part and, on review, the referee, having had a closer look, agreed.

Rightly or wrongly, this is the world we've voted in for ourselves.

I do disagree that the tackle wasn't out of control. If the player wins the ball by sliding in without his studs raised and foot off the ground and catches Baccus then it's a simple foul, with little controversy. However, I think we'll probably agree to differ on that,which is all in the name of healthy debate!

Edited December 29, 2022 by FTOF

[Shuggie_Murray7]

Having only seen the Sky highlight package, the O'Hara second booking isn't even a foul nevermind a booking.

Strangely, they haven't included his first booking in the highlights. Is this a new thing to not show the first booking of a player who is later sent off for a second booking in the highlights? It feels odd to not show it.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Shuggie_Murray7

[Arch Stanton]

3 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said:

Having only seen the Sky highlight package, the O'Hara second booking isn't even a foul nevermind a booking.

Strangely, they haven't included his first booking in the highlights. Is this a new to not show the first booking of a player who is later sent of for a second bokking in n the highlights? It feels odd to not show it.

The YouTube highlights show both O'Hara yellows.

[crispy]

3 hours ago, FTOF said:

Especially if it's an out of control stamp off the ground with studs showing just about ankle height.

Nothing to see here.

Agree this frame makes it look like he connected on the right leg, higher than where he did on left. If we are digging out the freeze frames can we see exactly when the contact was made. Pittman defo gets booted in the shin, you can see it’s coming from the blurred st mirren players excessive force(?)(swinging for a ball that’s long gone?).

3 hours ago, Menga Bus said:

What’s awkward here is the way you’ve screenshotted a blurry image to paint the challenge a certain way. He isn’t out of control, and connects just above the boot with Baccus’ left ankle, not the right like this picture makes out, hence the contact is lower than this picture makes out. The real issue for me is the pish camera quality, the fact we’ve all seen countless replays and there’s still a very large majority of folk saying it’s not a red leans me towards saying a yellow isn’t a clear and obvious error so var shouldn’t be used.

 

2 hours ago, houston_bud said:

These two things would seem to contradict.

I don’t know about that. In this contact sport you can contact people on every part of the body and it isn’t necessarily a foul. Force plus area of contact would be the combo.

25 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said:

Having only seen the Sky highlight package, the O'Hara second booking isn't even a foul nevermind a booking.

Strangely, they haven't included his first booking in the highlights. Is this a new thing to not show the first booking of a player who is later sent off for a second booking in the highlights? It feels odd to not show it.

I think that second yellow is soft. The Sportscene highlights were weird as they didn’t show Anderson’s 1 on 1 which was closer to being a goal than Brophy’s blaze over from outside the 18 yard box.

Edited December 29, 2022 by crispy

[btb]

IMO the Pittman sending off shoulda been yellow but you can see why the ref changed his decision to red. 

It'll be interesting to see if this becomes the new criteria for a sending off, if so we're gonna see a lotta them.

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

2 hours ago, Arch Stanton said:

You finally made it over from BAWA, have a Charles. 

Ha Ha. Been lurking unseen for a while.  

[crispy]

1 minute ago, btb said:

IMO the Pittman sending off shoulda been yellow but you can see why the ref changed his decision to red. 

It'll be interesting to see if this becomes the new criteria for a sending off, if so we're gonna see a lotta them.

It is frustrating after a solid return to action against Celtic away we’ve had debatable first half sending offs in two consecutive games. 

[Bobby_F]

I see Livvy are appealing.  

Thing that gets me about appeals in the VAR world is that we’ve already had at least two referees look at every angle possible before coming to a decision.  

What other ref is able to over rule that, and on the basis of what?

[Shuggie_Murray7]

The Pittman red is one of those you'd likely have gotten away with 10/15 years ago, but as the game has become softer, it's unfortunately a red card all day long.

I'd be amazed if the VAR and the ref have looked at it and decided it's a red and then it gets overturned.

[VincentGuerin]

30 minutes ago, Bobby_F said:

I see Livvy are appealing.  

Thing that gets me about appeals in the VAR world is that we’ve already had at least two referees look at every angle possible before coming to a decision.  

What other ref is able to over rule that, and on the basis of what?

Is it not a slightly different standard they're holding the decision to?

For VAR to intervene, the VAR guy might think it's incorrect, but not 'clearly and obviously' so. In which case, I believe he leaves it alone.

But on appeal, is it not much more clear cut 'I disagree'? So, a borderline call has more chance of being overturned on appeal than by VAR.

 

Edited December 29, 2022 by VincentGuerin

[ATLIS]

If that’s not overturned then the game is gone. Bacchus is the one that kicks Pittman’s foot ffs 

[Buddie Holly]

1 minute ago, ATLIS said:

If that’s not overturned then the game is gone. Bacchus is the one that kicks Pittman’s foot ffs 

the game is already gone,var is ruining it

[LiviLion]

1 minute ago, Buddie Holly said:

the game is already gone,var is ruining it

I bet Martindale feels like a bit of a dick now after how much he was shouting for VAR. I couldn't even celebrate our opener properly for waiting for VAR to rule it out.

 

Watching the highlights I think the red card for Pittman was wrong, the "stamp" folk keep talking about is him getting his studs away and starting to pull away from the challenge after getting the ball away, red is extremely harsh for that. Was surprised Obileye's penalty shout didn't get a bigger look, he's dragged down to the ground and I wouldn't have complained if it was given against us. Very quickly going into OF level paranoia, maybe they're that desperate to get the plastic pitch out of the top flight.

[houston_bud]

11 minutes ago, ATLIS said:

If that’s not overturned then the game is gone. Bacchus is the one that kicks Pittman’s foot ffs 

This is a ludicrous take.

[Cptn Hooch]

14 minutes ago, houston_bud said:

This is a ludicrous take.

It's really not...the whole thing was similar to Holt's in that the opposition player arrives late to the tackle and there's no reason for them to be there as the ball is well away already.

[LIVIFOREVER]

11 minutes ago, houston_bud said:

This is a ludicrous take.

Yeah he comes in late after the ball has been cleared and kicks Pittman's leg, and gets his ankle caught at the same time. 

[elvis]

18 minutes ago, LIVIFOREVER said:

Yeah he comes in late after the ball has been cleared and kicks Pittman's leg, and gets his ankle caught at the same time. 

Got to be honest when I saw it in slow motion I was sure it was Baccus getting sent off.

[Bobby_F]

36 minutes ago, elvis said:

Got to be honest when I saw it in slow motion I was sure it was Baccus getting sent off.

And there, my friends, is 100% proof that red card for Pittman was the correct call. 

[NathanDrake88]

It’s a Livi conspiracy