£31 v £30 Rangers v St Johnstone

[Radford]

Surely an avenue to appeal if the club can put a proper case together? Do we have someone that can do that?

[Dundee Hibernian]

6 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said:

Having seen this back on Sportscene… was it a VAR red or not? Collum doesn’t go to the monitor? So how does the red come about?

Also sportscene had a far better angle than the clips posted above from pretty much straight on that shows Clark’s left leg - the one that looks high from side on - doesn’t actually connect with Jack, it’s his much lower right knee that collided with Jack’s left shin, which explains why Jack appeared to be holding the “wrong” leg as alluded to by other posters in the aftermath of the tackle. That is an absolute nonsense of a red.

I don't think it was a red either, but doesn't the ref judge it on whether he thinks the player is reckless? Contact doesn’t have to be made.

[Honest Saints Fan]

3 minutes ago, Radford said:

Surely an avenue to appeal if the club can put a proper case together? Do we have someone that can do that?

Hahahaha. 

No.

[gannonball]

9 minutes ago, Radford said:

Surely an avenue to appeal if the club can put a proper case together? Do we have someone that can do that?

I'm sure VAR red cards have been overturned in England, surely saints will appeal it, no chance it was a red for me imo.*

ETA - *When you get to see the replays

 

Edited January 28 by gannonball

[Honest Saints Fan]

8 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said:

Having seen this back on Sportscene… was it a VAR red or not? Collum doesn’t go to the monitor? So how does the red come about?

Also sportscene had a far better angle than the clips posted above from pretty much straight on that shows Clark’s left leg - the one that looks high from side on - doesn’t actually connect with Jack, it’s his much lower right knee that collided with Jack’s left shin, which explains why Jack appeared to be holding the “wrong” leg as alluded to by other posters in the aftermath of the tackle. That is an absolute nonsense of a red.

Said this to Ruggy when I was watching. The red card came a minute later from nowhere. It didn't seem to be a VAR decision and he didn't go to the monitor to check.

[Jamie_Beatson]

4 minutes ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

I don't think it was a red either, but doesn't the ref judge it on whether he thinks the player is reckless? Contact doesn’t have to be made.

Theoretically but there are several issues with that, mostly around the fact Collum never looked at the monitor and if he had there would be no possible way to think anything about it was reckless.

You could make a reckless argument if he’d flown in at speed on the run or he’d actually connected at knee height, but he’s literally falling backwards, having taken one step from being at a standstill and doesn’t make contact at all with the leg that’s off the ground.

Edited January 28 by Jamie_Beatson

[gannonball]

1 minute ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

I don't think it was a red either, but doesn't the ref judge it on whether he thinks the player is reckless? Contact doesn’t have to be made.

For it looks like he's falling on his arse and trying to avoid contact, can't see how that could be seen as reckless for me. I get why Collum may see it as different in real time though.

[RandomGuy.]

10 minutes ago, Honest Saints Fan said:

Said this to Ruggy when I was watching. The red card came a minute later from nowhere. It didn't seem to be a VAR decision and he didn't go to the monitor to check.

It definitely came up on the screens saying VAR was checking for a red card offence while Jack was getting treated.

[RandomGuy.]

9 minutes ago, gannonball said:

For it looks like he's falling on his arse and trying to avoid contact, can't see how that could be seen as reckless for me. I get why Collum may see it as different in real time though.

Collum played play on until he saw an injured player.

It seems like Nick Walsh, the VAR, told him it was a straight red and Collum decided to just nod his head and agree rather than review the footage.

Funnily he was willing to review when, presumably, he got told he'd got the Jack booking wrong and it should be a red.

[Jamie_Beatson]

1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said:

Collum played play on until he saw an injured player.

It seems like Nick Walsh, the VAR, told him it was a straight red and Collum decided to just nod his head and agree rather than review the footage.

Funnily he was willing to review when, presumably, he got told he'd got the Jack booking wrong and it should be a red.

That’s not a legitimate thing to do though, is it? If a ref doesn’t give an on field decision for a red card and VAR think it is a red the ref has to go and look at it, unless it’s a factual thing like whether a foul was inside/outside the box affecting whether double jeopardy comes in to play.

Saints need to make a noise about this.

[RandomGuy.]

1 minute ago, Jamie_Beatson said:

That’s not a legitimate thing to do though, is it? If a ref doesn’t give an on field decision for a red card and VAR think it is a red the ref has to go and look at it, unless it’s a factual thing like whether a foul was inside/outside the box affecting whether double jeopardy comes in to play.

Saints need to make a noise about this.

Thats how I thought it worked for card decisions, the VAR can simply tell them to have another look and the decision falls to the ref himself after reviewing it on the screen.

Quite why Collum didn't bother is beyond me.

[tree house tam]

2 minutes ago, Jamie_Beatson said:

That’s not a legitimate thing to do though, is it? If a ref doesn’t give an on field decision for a red card and VAR think it is a red the ref has to go and look at it, unless it’s a factual thing like whether a foul was inside/outside the box affecting whether double jeopardy comes in to play.

Saints need to make a noise about this.

Who though? Flax doesn't have the minerals to get it right and Callum squeaking and grunting to journalists who he walks out of interviews on isn't an ideal platform to be shouting from.

[Jinky67]

3 big decisions to be made, all 3 of them wrong with VAR in play....laughable

Edited January 28 by Jinky67

[Steve McQueen]

23 minutes ago, gannonball said:

For it looks like he's falling on his arse and trying to avoid contact, can't see how that could be seen as reckless for me. I get why Collum may see it as different in real time though.

Ok, seen this a few times. a reckless challenge is a yellow a dangerous tackle is a red.

 

Main difference is likely to cause injury.

Not sure Clark is even in the reckless category.

[PSJ.84]

16 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

It definitely came up on the screens saying VAR was checking for a red card offence while Jack was getting treated.

Came up saying red card before Collum had brought the card out, iirc. Wasn’t a big gap between the two though 

[RandomGuy.]

9 minutes ago, gannonball said:

Usually they tell you when it's under review though and not so quick? My money is on Collum just being Collum. We're talking about a man who has given a penalty whilst facing the wrong way once.

Yeah it definitely came up saying it was under review.

Jack was getting treatment and the players were just walking about talking with it on the screen behind them. Then Collum just whipped out the red card.

[Virtual Insanity]

Should be a prolonged period in the seaside leagues for Collum, absolute disgrace of a performance and seems to have blatantly breached the VAR procedures.

[StellarHibee]

Congrats to William on his first half hat-trick at Ibrox today. A true British patriot and an inspiration to all those servicemen.

[Menga Bus]

Not sure if any other livi fans have commented but the red today was very similar to both Holt and Pittman’s last month for us. Both won the ball and naturally followed thru, and an opposition player arriving late to the challenge ended up being “fouled”. We appealed both and lost, not worth the time or money for st J to try appeal, sfa won’t budge.

[Steve McQueen]

14 minutes ago, Menga Bus said:

Not sure if any other livi fans have commented but the red today was very similar to both Holt and Pittman’s last month for us. Both won the ball and naturally followed thru, and an opposition player arriving late to the challenge ended up being “fouled”. We appealed both and lost, not worth the time or money for st J to try appeal, sfa won’t budge.

Think it's worth so he can play against Motherwell midweek & if lost its only Celtic he misses.