October was an horrendous month for Ross County. They lost five of six league games and looked doomed. Crucially, most of these games were against teams in the bottom half of the table; they took a point at home to Dundee United but lost to Kilmarnock and Motherwell left Dingwall with a 0-5 win.
A run of form like that can be difficult to recover from. Jack Ross was unable to do so at United before being emptied out. Malky MacKay hung in there and responded with a transformational performance and result against St Mirren, overcoming a halftime deficit to take the win. On Tuesday they plunged Hibs into crisis by deservedly winning at Easter Road.
Those two wins moved them three points clear of the relegation spots. No side in Scotland is more experienced at battling relegation better than Ross County, it has been their daily chore for 10 of the last 11 seasons. They pick up points when not expected, you will not need reminded of which team came to Celtic Park and stopped out run of consecutive Trebles at four.
There will be a demob mood around Celtic Park tomorrow, our last game for a month as football breaks for the World Cup. Some players are off to the tournament, the rest will pack their bags after the game and within days will land in Sydney.
Can you imagine the difference in perspective the County players will have to the game? They have nothing on the roster but to give their all in an effort to frustrate Celtic and take something from the game. Their performance level against Hibs was a new peak for the season and miles ahead of where they were when they came within six minutes of taking a point off Celtic in August.
Celtic have talent in abundance, yet struggled against bottom side Dundee United on Saturday, then had to manage their way through the final minutes at Motherwell. Nothing can be taken for granted tomorrow.
An SFA statement this morning addressed the Jota ‘goal’ at Motherwell on Wednesday, confirming the VAR camera which should have been pointing at play “did not capture an appropriate view of the incident”. We read elsewhere it was trained on the managers at the near touchline, which itself begs many questions, but back to the SFA statement.
Having confirmed the only Hawkeye camera at that side of the field was not looking at play, the SFA nonetheless vaguely imply VAR got the decision right. What they actually said was that VAR determined “the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position”. Offside has nothing to do with when a player receives the ball, it is only active the instant a forward pass is made. On this matter, the SFA statement makes no comment, but they would like you to think everything worked out for the best anyway.
They then try to divert blame away from themselves by saying “We have provided feedback to the host broadcaster”. “Host broadcaster” is a term you only hear when a UK commentator abroad attributes pictures (or the lack of) to the TV company covering the game. The SFA are the effective host on this occasion and their Hawkeye system does not even broadcasting. This was a shabby attempt at diversion.
Celtic, who campaigned for VAR, must be wondering why they bothered. I doubt in the history of the technology any other club had a goal disallowed when the VAR camera was inconveniently looking elsewhere. One level of conduct for Celtic, it seems.
321 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- »
I’m sure ole Pete lawwell said Maxwell is someone he could work with 🤔
Gene
What larks
VAR from the madding crowd…….
Be afraid be VARy afraid
A bridge too VAR
Coneybhoy @ 1.31pm 👍
Sydney Carton CSC
The VAR situation is a disgrace but the timing might be advantageous.
First off – we won the game, so perfect time to complain.
Secondly – there will be no more football for five weeks so no opportunity for the SFA to either
– improve the process
– oversee more bad practice (thus risking our complaint disappearing among the others)
Keep the pressure up Celtic.
TOM MCLAUGHLIN @ 12:20 PM,
The fact is, the linesman raised his flag for offside and the referee disallowed the goal. If the var check was rendered inoperable, regardless of the reason, the offside could not be overruled.
This is not the case.
The rules change regarding offside when VAR is used.
This was clarified by Sol Kitts this morning on Sentinel Celts – a contributor with over twenty years experience as a referee.
https://sentinelcelts.com/2022/11/11/geezabrek/#comment-246259
My understanding…
The rule was that when there is a close call on an offside decision then the assistant referee gives the benefit of the doubt to the attacker and only flags offside if he is certain on an infringement, he flags as soon as possible.
With VAR the rule is that on a close call the assistant referee allows play to continue and at the end of that sequence of play will put his flag up to indicate he wants the decision to be made by VAR.
The referee does not disallow the goal, rather he waits for VAR to determine whether the player is onside or not.
The theory being the VAR makes the decision based on the analysis by the technology. The VAR can look at the exact time the ball was played (Not Received) look at the position of the attacker(s) and defender(s) relative to each other and the field of play, draw accurate cross field lines and determing very accurately whether the attacking player(s) were “over the onside line”
Due to the relevant technology not being available this could not happen in Jota’s case on Wednesday evening.
What the correct course of action on these circumstances should be I can only surmise.
My thoughts would be the VAR should tell the referee the technology is inconclusive and it’s up to the referee to make the call.
The referee may feel he had seen enough of the action to make a call or if not discuss the decision with the assistant referee to determine how certain he was the player was offside then make the decision based on that.
Hail Hail
Steven McLean having used VAR three times is being allowed to take the monitor home.
The truth is the SFA has been caught with their pants down and are digging
a bigger hole for themselves
If there is or was no available picture showing a line indicating Jota was
offside then why can the VAR team justify giving an offside decision
A decision from their hun heart
While we are it, Nicholson needs to ask for the handball decisions to be reviewed and an explanation from the refs and VAR refs as to what they are going to award or not award.
Beaton’s decision not to award the penalty at Ibrox when he was looking straight at it makes no sense based on the Bernabei call and the non-penalty at Hearts.
It is incredible that Hearts, who would then probably have equalised, are not screaming about it.
BOURNESOUPRECIPE @1.12pm
The BBC’s official line is that 2 mistakes were made on the filming of the 1957 League Cup Final ( 7-1 ,I was there ) .
The first is that the camera lens cover was not removed for part of the filming therefore not all of the game was captured.
The second and much more widely known is that back in the day a match would be filmed in several parts and the reel would be removed from the camera and biked to Queen Margaret Drive. Guess what happened next in the case of Celtic7 Rangers 1. The critical reel fell of the bike in transit and was lost.
And so it goes on down through the years till new generations of Celtic supporters watch the penalty incident at Tynecastle, a penalty awarded against. Elric when the player was in the air and had his back to the play and now the critical VAR camera pointing at the coaches instead of the 18 yard line.
Celtic supporters of my generation listened to our fathers and grandfathers talk of the injustices perpetrated against Celtic . Some of it sounded far fetched and probably would even more so to the current generation – but now they are seeing some of these “ honest mistakes “ being played out . Is it incompetence. Is it an anyone but Celtic attitude or more likely a bit of both .
I mostly live in London and arguments over referee competency and VAR decisions are very topical. Those of us who know the West of Scotland are alive to another dimension at play.
All of the shenanigans going on now reminds me a good close friend and BBC journalist ( sympathetic to Celtic ) who once said to me “ we all know this anti. Elric stuff goes on but you want the Evening Times to run a banner headline- “ Truth Revealed,Conspiracy against Celtic”. It’s just not going to happen.
Jock was right- play up Glasgow Celtic- and stick the ball in the back of the net.
The SFA officials / refs don’t know the offside rule.
If only we had had a silver bullet against the SFA – oh wait a minute
Police Scotland have offered to provide SFA with footage from M74 speed cameras which prove that Jota was speeding when he passed O’Donnel.
Verdict. 3 point deduction Posthumous red card for John Lennon.
Tom . Chairbhoy is correct, If the Linesman is definite that a Player is Offside he flags immediately, if he is unsure he allows the move to continue and if a goal is scored he then raises his flag basically asking VAR to check it, So the best we can say about the Linesman is he was unsure.
Second point is was Jota offside as the ball was being kicked.
in the second the ball took to reach him, he appears to have sprinted pass the defender but he is entitled to do that, as long as he was onside the moment Ball was kicked.
It is absolutely brilliant that this is getting so much publicity, the Club must continue to highlight every dodgy call, it’s the only way to stop it.
They can’t afford this type of publicity on an ongoing basis,
We are still winning our games and the pressure is on the MIBS.
When inconvenient = convenient.
Garcia Lorca @ 1.57
Thanks for that post.
I love the one about the failure to remove the lens cover, a pure Laurel and Hardy movie moment.
The Celtic support as you already know are a separate breed having a generic higher level of faith in humanity, able to rise above perceived, and factual injustice. It’s only a game of football after all, we’re not Pure Ragin FC in any of their past or present shapes.
We’re all Jock Tamson’s bairns CSC
From the SFA VAR Q&A
Are we using offside line technology and will the virtual offside lines be shown on TV/Broadcast?
Yes. In the case of a close offside call, the assistant referee will delay his/her flag. If a goal is scored and the assistant believes there was an offside offence, he/she will only raise the offside flag after the goal has been scored. Using the virtual offside technology, the VAR will place a line on the second last defender and the attacking player who potentially committed the offside offence. If the lines do not overlap or touch and show the player was offside, the on-field decision to disallow the goal will stand. If the lines do not overlap or touch, showing the attacker was either behind or in line with the defender, and show that the player was onside, or if the two lines do overlap, the on-field decision will be overturned and the goal will stand.
How many cameras will there be?
A minimum of six cameras – two in the main stands, one on each of the 18-yard lines and one behind each goal. If there are any additional cameras at the match (e.g. Sky matches), the VAR will have access to the additional cameras.
What happens if there is a VAR system failure before or during a match?
The match referee will be informed and he/she will inform both teams, but the match will still take place or continue without VAR. No source or system other than the official VAR system may be used by the referee to review replays during a match and a failure of the VAR system shall in no way prejudice the referee’s decision.
Who is providing the technology?
We are working with Hawk-Eye Innovations, the leading provider of VAR technology in world football. We will be using Hawk-Eye equipment that is used globally by all other associations supplied by Hawk-Eye and is approved by FIFA.
Celtic40me
That is pretty damning. It appears the SFA are not implementing their own VAR procedures correctly
The statement is also incorrect over the actual offside rule. Quite bizarre
This is starting to feel like a watershed moment
Why was the Hawk-eye camera, owned by the SFA for VAR, not looking at play?
Why did they not use the broadcast pictures to get to a more accurate decision. We’ve all seen the view from the half-way line camera that has a better angle
Or, if they did, why are they saying they used the hawk-eye camera that was 50 yards away and not the broadcast pictures?
Like Paul67 says why are they blaming the host broadcaster when the failure was with one of their cameras that was looking away at the crucial moment?
Some minor lackie at Hampden will be clearing their desk for the compilation of the statement.
UNCLE JIMMY on 11TH NOVEMBER 2022 2:33 PM
Off-the-scale incompetence, either the processes are useless or the implementation is, or both, which seems the most likely.
VAR from the Madden Crowd
Where’s Crawford Allen ? He was wheeled out in front of multiple media outlets, to muddy the waters,for a very good Kyogo goal last season? Lunch at the bowling club?
Celtic40Me – The more I read the SFA statement the less sense it makes. It’s just a jumble of arbitrary statements about the operation of VAR coupled with some vague inferences.
The Hawk-Eye camera, I assume, is high definition and integrated directly with the offside software which calculates the lines etc. It’s possible the broadcast camera (which we all saw a shot of immediately after the goal) can’t in itself and automatically produce those results.
Similarly, I’m not sure they actually/openly blame the broadcaster, it’s merely inferred. “We have provided feedback to the host broadcaster”, why? What was their actual role in this mess? It’s not explained.
Also “the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position”, so what? That’s not the offside rule and the world and his/her dog knows it. This again doesn’t actually state there was an offside infringement, simply infers it.
The more I read that statement the more I feel there’s another story behind this incident, and it’s not a pretty one.
£1.2m per year for this heap of junk.
Saw this on Twitter:
The Fitbaw Gospel
Did you know: In the 1952/53 season Rangers FC and Hibernian Football Club both finished the season on the same points
As this was the first time it had happened under the new setup there was no set rule as to how the league would be decided
If goal difference, head to head, most wins or goals scored was used (or if it was 3 points for a win rather than 2) then Hibs would have been champions for the 3rd year in a row…
But the SFA decided to bring in a “goal ratio” system instead and divided the goals scored by the goals against and handed Rangers their 28th title on 0.2 goal ratio difference after they scored an equaliser to draw 1-1 with Queen of the South in the 7th minute of injury time in the last game of the season.
Rangers were awarded the title but UEFA weren’t convinced by the process and decided to invite Hibs, rather than the champions, to the inaugural European Cup.
(The only other time the two top teams had finished equal before that was the very first season in 1890 when Rangers and Dumbarton shared the title despite Dumbarton having a superior goal difference, head to head and goal ratio)
CORKCELT @ 2:14 PM, CELTIC40ME @ 2:23 PM,
Thanks for the clarification, this looks like another dogs dinner for the SFA.
They really need a change of culture and not only with their officials and partiality but the whole shebang.
Hail Hail
CHAIRBHOY
I disagree. The linesman does not need to raise his flag as an indication that he wants var to check for offside. All goals are automatically checked for offside, or any other infringement.
Linesmen are encouraged to delay raising the flag for offside until the move is completed, either by a goal or breakdown of the move. Once he raises the flag, he has advised the referee who then disallows the goal and waits for var confirmation.
If a linesman has any doubt as to whether a player is offside, he should not raise his flag. He should under no circumstances raise his flag on the basis that he’s not sure but will leave it to var. That is just plain wrong.
Finally, the referee certainly did disallow Jota’s goal based on the linesman’s flag. This is evidenced by the fact that while they awaited the var decision, the Motherwell goalkeeper was standing behind the ball which he had placed 20 yards from goal where the flag was raised, and ready to take the free kick that was awarded for offside.
It didn’t take them long to start cheating us with their new plaything ?
HOT SMOKED
I have seen that story on facebook and it is a load of made up crap.
Rangers won the title on goal average over Hibs. Goal average was the accepted worldwide measure until goal difference was introduced in the 70s.
UEFA invited champions Rangers to take part in the inaugural European Cup but as the English champions had already turned down their invitation, loyal Rangers followed suit and Hibs were invited in their stead.
Sorry, but we have enough to be paranoid about without people making up this shite.
PS This is not aimed at you personally. I am simply debunking the story.
Looks like we have to score at least 5 goals in the first 20 minutes then park the bus in the midfield if that is possible.
TOM is obviously a fifth columnist.
SONSOFERIN @ 2:46 PM,
Yes, it sounds like a lawyer’s statement rather than a communique of clarification.
What there isn’t…
A claim or proof that Jota was offside
A claim that Hawkeye endorsed the way their system was operated
Evidence to show any broadcaster was materially at fault
Clarification of; the offside rules, the rules in terms of failure of VAR
In short no ones concerns or questions are actually answered.
Part of the SFA statement…
Hawk-Eye technology is designed to calibrate an accurate offside decision from either of the two 18-yard line camera positions, with the subsequent VAR review determining that the Celtic player had received the ball in an offside position.
For me with my technology hat on, the statement on Hawk-Eye is as erroneous as the statement on the offside position.
We know what Hawk-Eye was designed to do, we don’t know why it wasn’t implemented to fulfill the purpose for what it was designed.
Person or persons unknown dont want tp be sued.
Hail Hail
John Beaton has promised to check with VAR that it really is half time
TOM MCLAUGHLIN @ 2:50 PM,
Fair enough Tom, we can agree to disagree.
Don’t want to labour anything but just one point…
Willie Collum was standing next to the Motherwell goalkeeper during the VAR review.
VAR “clarifies” his opinion over the headphones that Jota was offside, then Willie Collum signals and awards Motherwell a free kick.
Hail Hail
Grand to see GARCIA LORCA posing, always informative great read.
Hail Hail