URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 43117--------------------------------------------------
       Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: Wollongong Ref
       Date: January 18, 2022, 7:41 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Two talking points to come from this match
       Aberdeen Penalty to equalise. It is a clear penalty. But as the
       Aberdeen player takes the penalty the ball moves backwards about
       10-15cm.
       Ryan Kent is sent off. Second Yellow looks incredibly soft.
       Surely Mr Clancy will look at the replay and wish he had killed
       the shot and ordered a retake. If we are to rate Mr Clancys
       performance it must surely be low as his lack of knowledge of
       the LOTG has led to the result being affected.
       In New South Wales an error in law like this has the potential
       to see the game annulled, restarted with the penalty kick again
       and then the last 17mins replayed. That would mean Kent does not
       get his second YC. The scenario of errors in Law being replayed
       has happened three times when video evidence has been presented.
       #Post#: 43118--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: GingerReferee
       Date: January 19, 2022, 2:29 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       For me, there should have been a penalty when Mcgregor took out
       a player, waved away but personally is a penalty and I think he
       will think the same after analysing it.
       Penalty is clear no complaints, should have been retaken.
       And both yellow cards correct, aggressive attitude for 1st one,
       and a late challenge for the 2nd
       #Post#: 43121--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: Wollongong Ref
       Date: January 19, 2022, 5:11 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Hey GingerRef,  Where the difference is, the McGregor Pen/No Pen
       is a judgement call. Clancy is wrong in Law.  what happens after
       that point, the second caution is fruit of the poison tree.
       #Post#: 43122--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: GingerReferee
       Date: January 19, 2022, 5:20 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Wollongong Ref link ---
       >
       > Hey GingerRef,  Where the difference is, the McGregor Pen/No
       Pen is a judgement call. Clancy is wrong in Law.  what happens
       after that point, the second caution is fruit of the poison
       tree.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Hey, yh I get that, it is a poor mistake but thats why I think
       Scotland need to introduce VAR
       #Post#: 43128--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: adcr85
       Date: January 19, 2022, 6:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Just watched the highlights, and again far better level than I
       am working at, but some of the same logic applies.
       To me from the start of the run up to the 'outcome' of the
       penalty between the referee and the assitant they are checking -
       encroachment across the box and D, goalkepper on/off line, taker
       (make sure they don't stop last step) and then ball over the
       line. At no point, once I have confirmed the ball is spotted
       correctly would I look at the ball, and as I say watchign the
       highlights, it starts to move a maximum of a second before it is
       struck - so that's a second for the ref to spot it in their
       peripheral vision and blow.
       Not sure if it didn't make the highlights but there appears to
       be no complaint from Rangers (if there was - apologies) but to
       me if there's no major complaint, there wasn't time to blow
       before it happened - just guve the goal and move on. I feel talk
       of playign the game again is completely OTT, if not on windy
       days you will go back to look at every corner, free kick etc.
       find an incident where the ball just moves a CM before it's
       kicked and ask for the game to be replayed.
       #Post#: 43129--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: Ref Watcher
       Date: January 19, 2022, 6:14 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       It is only an error in Law not to have the penalty re-taken if
       the referee was unaware that a moving ball was contrary to Law;
       an unlikely scenario.  I suspect it wasn't re-taken because the
       officials were not aware that the ball moved, which is an error
       of judgement not Law.
       If incidents like this caused matches to be re-played from the
       offending point we would never finish a season.  Where would you
       draw the line?  Moving balls at free kicks, corners awarded
       instead of throws, throws taken from the wrong place........
       #Post#: 43168--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Aberdeen v Rangers- K Clancy
   DIR By: Affy_Moose
       Date: January 20, 2022, 1:14 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: GingerReferee link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Wollongong Ref link=topic=3294.msg43121#msg43121
       date=1642590669]
       > Hey GingerRef,  Where the difference is, the McGregor Pen/No
       Pen is a judgement call. Clancy is wrong in Law.  what happens
       after that point, the second caution is fruit of the poison
       tree.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Hey, yh I get that, it is a poor mistake but thats why I think
       Scotland need to introduce VAR
       [/quote]
       Scotland *should* have VAR from the start of next season.
       Officials are going through the various training elements.  We
       may see significant additions to Category One (development) and
       some additional SARs (also at development level) later this
       month, as well as in June.  They will be needed to help cope
       with the additional 12 officials needed every weekend for VAR to
       operate (2x additional officials per Premiership match).
       All of that said, it’s not clear that VAR would have had any
       involvement.  If Mr Clancy had viewed that the attacker
       instigated contact, and had otherwise no chance of getting the
       ball, then it may not have been reviewed.  Whilst it is my
       opinion that it was a penalty, I doubt that belief is universal.
       We have seen how VAR currently operates in England, and far
       more egregious offences have not been reviewed recently.
       With respect to the ball moving on the penalty, this was likely
       missed because it’s not a referee’s priority, and anyone who
       professes to do otherwise is missing the obvious.  The idea that
       a FIFA referee is not aware that a ball must be stationary when
       taking a penalty kick is also a fairly ludicrous one.  It’s not
       an error in law any more than a missed foul is.
       The AR’s job is the goalkeeper and the ball crossing the goal
       line, and the referee’s priority is to prevent/identify
       encroachment, and identify if there’s a clear feint when
       striking the ball.  The latter is usually obvious and doesn’t
       require total attention.  Whilst technically the penalty should
       have been retaken, the ball rolled towards the attacker and make
       a miss kick more likely.  This was nothing more than a
       technicality, and the defending team was not disadvantaged.
       The two cautions for Mr Kent were perfectly acceptable. Overall,
       the performance was fine, with a few footnotes.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1