This Bubbling Over Celtic Getting A Decision Is Pathetic, But It Helps Us More Than Them.

Image for This Bubbling Over Celtic Getting A Decision Is Pathetic, But It Helps Us More Than Them.

When the ball hit the back of the net and Kemar Roofe turned to celebrate, the pub I was in was uproarious in blaming our defender for giving it away. I was sitting in silence, waiting on the VAR check.

I knew watching the incident in real time that VAR had to overturn the goal, and so when the ref finally walked over to do the check it was only what I had expected to happen. How anyone can say they didn’t see a clear foul astonishes me.

Still, debate rages over this and the intervention of some former officials is only adding to the noise without getting us right down to the nitty-gritty of it. If a player is allowed to physically deck another in order to get the ball then this isn’t football, it’s some weird variant of it which is going to have these kinds of dodgy goals every single week.

Some of those shouting most loudly that the Ibrox club should have got it ought to wind their necks in because we know had someone scored like that against their team that they would have raised 99 kinds of Hell over it and they’d have watched it from 100 different angles.

What angles does it need? The push on a player who is shielding the ball is as obvious as it needs to be, and I cannot understand why people are talking about who’s feet were where because the decision clearly relates to the way Dessers bundles him over and all the rest is nonsense.

Even the much-heralded quotes from Dermott Gallagher, where he starts out talking about the feet ends with him actually saying “As I say, if you look at it again all I think is they think [Dessers] has pushed him, an upper-body push, but it’s certainly not a foul with his feet.”

But as far I know only the talking heads in the media have suggested it was, and that’s nothing but a smokescreen. I will be absolutely astonished if that shove isn’t what they tell the Ibrox club the free kick has been awarded for, and then certain people should be asked to defend their daft views.

Neil McCann’s rant on BBC Sportsound is incredible. He rails against the rules themselves after someone tries to explain them to him.

But it’s no less demented than some of what has come out of other people’s mouths and I wasn’t surprised that Andy Walker had one of his own incontinent greeting faced meltdowns over it on that social media channel where he hides and gets about 200 viewers at a time. Honestly, even reading the transcript of it you get the impression that he’s hysterical and needs to go and have a wee lie down for his own good. It’s absolutely barmy.

“You have to go back and see what VAR was introduced for,” he says, and then promptly makes it clear that he that he doesn’t know what it was introduced for. “I was at the presentation which I thought was really slick and professional. I distinctly remember asking the question ‘If I think it’s a foul and I am the referee, and you don’t think it’s a foul and you are VAR, oh, VAR won’t get involved.’ I didn’t think there was any need for VAR to get involved, I thought it was a coming together. There was a tangle of legs and I think you are just getting someone else’s opinion. I thought the referee was in a good position to see what took place and he didn’t give a foul.”

What part of it is this clown failing to understand? VAR has to get involved because it’s a situation where a goal has been scored, and that incident is what led directly to that happening. VAR does not get involved for general fouls, but only in those circumstances where there is either a goal or an incidence of serious foul play which might result in a red card.

Everyone was clear on this point at the start, so what the Hell is this eejit on about? He continues, and it gets more deranged from there.

“Had he given a foul, no problem, as you wouldn’t have had that forward play where (they) get a goal and the whole stadium erupted. But I thought it was a poor use of VAR as it is very subjective.”

And this is one of the nonsensical things being argued here, that it’s a decision which belongs in some grey area. But it’s either a foul or it isn’t, and there’s no grey area to be had here. This is an attempt to muddy the waters and pretend that there’s some complexity here when in fact this is as black and white, as binary, a choice as you’ll get.

“I don’t understand why VAR wanted to get involved,” he says, although that’s obvious to all but the stupidest person.” Because it’s not right and it’s not wrong, it’s just another opinion. You should always leave the big decisions to the referee on the field of play and I don’t think there was a clear and obvious error for VAR to get involved with and that is what we were sold.”

There was a clear and obvious foul in the run-up to the goal. The ref did not give that foul. So of course, VAR was right to get involved. If the ref has gotten a decision wrong and that decision leads to a goal that’s the nailed-on definition of exactly the sort of thing VAR was introduced for, and if he doesn’t know that he shouldn’t be opening his trap.

The Ibrox club is complaining on those same grounds, that it wasn’t a clear and obvious error, and the SFA must be awaiting their submission with a certain amount of sniggering because they, like Walker, are arguing against common sense and logic.

But common sense and logic always go out the window when Celtic get a decision or one goes against the Ibrox club. Every decision we’ve had in recent years has generated outpourings of lunacy. Every decision that goes against Ibrox results in complaints and demands for an explanation. You could have set your watch to this. It was inevitable.

Celtic fans should sit and watch all this wry amusement. Ibrox has been making a big thing out of supporting VAR and standing by decisions for an age now, and suddenly their forums are in melt-down, and all this does is focus their club on external enemies rather than on the problems they have inside their own walls … that works in our favour.

Our own club has complained about decisions several times, and we’re always told to just get on with it. Telling Ibrox that just increases their belief that they are facing a wide-ranging conspiracy. And that, too, focuses them on the wrong issues.

Celtic deserved the win. Tom English summed it up when he said that even if you accept the Ibrox complaints, even if the goal should have stood, there were 60 odd minutes left when it was chopped off and thus plenty of time to win the match. He scorned the idea that it was some sort of game-defining decision. It certainly was not that.

The defining moment of the game at the weekend came the moment Brendan Rodgers named his team. It was an expression of his confidence in himself and his decision making and it would have been as inspiring to the players themselves as 7000 of our fans would have been. The Mooch was utterly outclassed by Rodgers, not just in the game itself but in the run up to it when the biggest decisions were being made.

So all the whingeing in the world does not matter a damn. In fact, it is a distraction. The Ibrox allies in the media, as well as those who are paid to comment on a guy they don’t really understand, do them no favours.

It is glorious to observe this from our position at the top of the league.

Share this article


  • Jack says:

    I agree with you James. The foul was a push on our players upper back with a slight whiff of jersey pull. VAR did its job well for a change.

  • Martin says:

    Outing myself as a referee (not in Scotland here), but here goes.

    1. It was a foul. Lagerbielke was lucky that he was fouled because I reckon Dessers could’ve got the ball cleanly if he was a better footballer. Push and there’s the foul with the foot.

    2. In the lead up to a goal there is no “clear and obvious errr” threshold. All goals are automatically checked by VAR for offsides and foul in the build up. Most of these are so quick/obvious that fans don’t notice. But every oral gets a silent check.

    3. Don Robertson doesn’t initially give te goal as we would expect (pointing to centre, heading back to halfway line) so either he thinks something has happened and is waiting for VAR clarification, or VAR has got in very quickly.

    4. No pundit on the telly is worth listening to when it comes to the laws of the game. THey haven’t read them, they’ve had no training in interpreting them and they are idiots. All of them.

    5. It is interesting the views of McCann especially are outcome driven. Had the whistle blown immediately we wouldn’t have heard a peep out of anyone and it would’ve been forgotten. But because the ball ends up in the net that should somehow change how we interpret the laws? Utterly bizarre stuff from someone who has even failed to live up to my incredibly low opinion of him.

    6. There was a clear and deliberate push on Kyoto after his shot cleared off the line. You’re allowed your space on the pitch, Butland had no business pushing him. Not a challenge for the ball or anything…should be yellow and penalty. Not so convinced Goldson gets his hands on Kyoto (though he tries) so I’d have let him off with a quiet word- the penalty is being given anyway. But that being missed b VAR is far far more of an error han the foul being spotted on lagerbielke is being made out to be. Unsurprisingly not a word.

    I don’t think the ref team were particularly biased either way on Sunday and overall were only minimally intimidated by the home crowd setup. The media narrative though, is as biased as can come.

  • Gordon Raeburn says:

    I take it that when Brother Crawford Allan comes out to say they were robbed he’ll also add that we should have been given the penalty for Butland’s push on Kyogo. No chance.

  • Jim says:

    This was a case of 2 incidents in one. The first was a clear foul for a push in the back. The second was clearly obstruction. The Rangers player placed his foot in front of the Celtic player to impede his progress.

  • John Copeland says:

    I now get the distinct feeling that the authorities will be rather keen to make amends for the correct decision to disallow the Roofe goal on Sunday ! I have a hunch that they will not want plenty of bears with sore heads much complaining over any length of time more than necessary . It’s quite pathetic really , if that is to be the case …but this is Scawlin !

  • Bob (original) says:

    Whilst far off our best, currently,

    BR managed the team selection, and the game, extremely well,

    as you would expect from a highly experienced, successful manager.

    That hard fought win shows that the squad has maybe rediscovered its spirit?

    The players must be buzzing too.

  • Tony B says:

    Fair play to Brendan. The balls on this guy!

    Compare and contrast with Ian Beale, the Cockney Capon.

  • Jimmy R says:

    Sorry James. I have to disagree. The upper body contact is negligible. Big Gus goes down when he trips over the planted foot of Dessers. Had Dessers made contact with the ball at that stage, it would not have been deemed a foul to Celtic but a foul to sevco (giving the ref the choice to play advantage.)
    When VAR was introduced we were told that they would analyse the entire phase of play leading to a goal being scored. This makes it completely logical to check the challenge where sevco won possession of the ball. It is also completely logical to draw the ref’s attention to an act of foul play at that stage.
    Meanwhile let’s all enjoy the bears bubbling like weans.

  • king murdy says:

    watching it live james, i was one of those fans giving pelters to lagerbielke..i thought, in his panic to kick the ball, he had kicked the ground, which explained the way his body “jerked” and fell to the ground…dessers impeded his left foot making contact with the ball – a clear foul….
    i STILL have not read anywhere in the press about butland’s clear push into kyogo’s back following goldson’s goal line clearance…these people’s selective memory is astounding…
    it is just DELICIOUS reading the hun sites and the press in general whinging about the total injustice of it….LOVE IT !!

  • Mr magoo says:

    Sevco Scotland , always cheated never defeated.
    When they go bust again, let’s hope hope all clubs in the SPFL vote unanimously to reject any notion of allowing them to rejoin at any level.
    Double jelly n ice cream all around

  • Ian O'Donnell says:

    I don’t think the foul was given for the push. The Celtic player was shielding the ball and brought his foot back intending to pass it to Joe Hart. But as he swung his foot forward, the Rangers player stuck his leg in to prevent him from doing so, causing the defender to catch his opponent’s ankle and fall over.
    It was only then that the Rangers player got possession of the ball. It was a clear foul, maybe not obvious in real time, but is that not what VAR’s for?

  • Johnno says:

    Such decisions are determined by the interpretation of the rules.
    What the scum are looking for is a change of the rules to suit themselves, yet fail to see that is already in play within Scottish football.
    VAR was introduced to help clear up controversy within the game, yet it’s still used as a weapon within the game, moreso in Scotland than anywhere else currently.
    Without VAR the goal would have stood and couldn’t really complain about it either.
    With VAR the fouls committed were able to be highlighted, so what’s the issue?
    Never noticed the kyogo one either in real time, yet after the game when it’s highlighted, the question remains as to why it was never even looked at whatsoever as far as I know?
    VAR was never going to be perfect and still remains so, with interpretation always going to remain an issue.
    Still remains a shock that 1 decision can be given correctly, yet 1 couldn’t.
    Suppose ourselves getting 1 right is a huge improvement upon what we are use to at that kip, but yet not perfect either with the easier of the 2 to decide upon, is not even looked at?
    Overall the officials within the derby has been of a far higher standard than usual with so many eyes upon them, yet the question still remains as to why it’s not being done properly on a regular basis?
    No need for answers, when already well known

  • Clachnacuddin and the Hoops says:

    Ah good old Andy Walker crawls out of his rats lair once again then…

    This guy that used to be one of ma heroes of the centenary team, well if he was lying there gasping for his very last breath and begged me to dial 999, I’d deliberately lie and say my mobi had just ran out of power !

    He is an absolute rat – Jeez that I’d rather take McCann’s insight into football over Walker any day of the year says it all really…

    Just what is it about players that have donned The Hoops that sell their souls like Walker have done to ‘side with Sevco’ – There again this is a guy that when he presented Scotsport (and bloody hell he was dire at that) admitted proudly time after time that he was a cheat, so I suppose that’s his connection to his new found love of Sevco…

    If I ever meet this form ‘hero’ in a pub there’s a chance that I’d be barred outta a pub for the first time in ma 53 years –

    D’ya know what though – In the case of Walker, it’d a price worth paying !

  • Roonsa says:

    I think the rules need to be explained to me as I don’t understand why it’s not a foul with the feet. Dessers was not in control of the ball, Lagerbielke is. Dessers tries to win the ball from behind but he fails. As a result of where Dessers’ foot landed, Lagerbielke kicks his leg and trips over. Ergo, that is a foul. For me it’s no different to stopping someone at full tilt by putting a leg in their path. I am not a footballer so I get it should be down to people who have played the game to make these calls (it should be but most of the ex players I see as pundits of the Scottish game are cretins). But I haven’t heard anyone explain that away yet. All I heard is Lagerbielke hesitates. It’s not against the rules of the game to hesitate and still be in possession of the ball. Anyone?

  • John S says:

    It’s rather ironic that when the officials actually played fair, a genuine surprise but a welcome one, howls of discontent emanate from Ibrox.

    • Clachnacuddin and the Hoops says:

      Almost fair John – They missed one if not two stonewall penalties for big shoves in The Sevco Penalty Box on Kyogo when the ball was in play !

  • Johnny Green says:

    It was a stonewall foul, end of.

    4 points in front now, heading for 3 in a row and another possible Invicibles run until the end of the season.


  • Joe black says:

    Well said couldn’t have put it better??

Comments are closed.