Whilst the league was on hold as the League Cup Semi- Finals played out at sodden Hampden, the Yorkshire Whistler thought he had a week off.
“But they keep pulling me back in!“
Such is the refreshing and novel approach the SFA take to implementing VAR in Scotland, there is the need for a League Cup special edition.
Overtime cyber pints necessary for the intrepid Yorkshire Whistler.
The impact of a call being incorrect can be evaluated using the framework outlined here -> Honest Mistakes in the SPFL.
14/01/23 Celtic vs Kilmarnock
Incident 1
Referee | Willie Collum |
Game Minute | 48th |
Score At Time | 1-0 |
Incident | Juranovic shot hits Taylor and rebounds to Hatate who scores |
Outcome | Offside against Hatate. Free kick to Kilmarnock |
Evidence | (1) Celtic 2-0 Kilmarnock | Maeda & Giakoumakis Send Celts into Final! | Viaplay Cup Semi-Final – YouTube
At 2:14 |
Incident 2
Referee | Willie Collum |
Game Minute | 93rd |
Score At Time | 1-0 |
Incident | Giakoumakis and Wright tangle in the box |
Outcome | No decision |
Evidence | https://twitter.com/graeme818/status/1614351466474479616?s=20&t=EvexvQxC3l0Me3s_l42cOQ |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Wright goes down in the box under a challenge from Giakoumakis
Initial on field decision: No foul committed
As Wright waits to receive the ball, he is closely marked by the Celtic man and they end up on the floor together. I would have liked a different angle of this contact as you can make an argument either way here. Giakoumakis makes some upper body contact as he is getting ‘touch tight’. This contact, in isolation, I don’t believe merits a foul and is relatively minor. However, Giakoumakis immediately after this then loses his balance and stumbles forward into Wright, whilst also wrapping his arms around the Kilmarnock player.
It is this secondary contact and appearance of ‘dragging’ his opponent down that looks like it should have been penalised by a foul. Certainly, at full speed, it would have been difficult for the referee to be clear, but I suspect if VAR had deemed this a clear & obvious error and recommended an on-field review, then a penalty kick would have been awarded.
Verdict: Incorrect decision. Foul committed and penalty kick expected outcome |
Expected Points
Outcome |
Celtic +0.9 xPts |
15/01/23 Aberdeen vs The Rangers
Incident 1
Referee | Nick Walsh |
Game Minute | 87th |
Score At Time | 1-1 |
Incident | Barisic fouls Kennedy |
Outcome | Foul to Aberdeen; YC to Barisic |
Evidence | https://twitter.com/markmassie4372/status/1614931212526669824?s=20&t=EvexvQxC3l0Me3s_l42cOQ |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Barisic fouls Kennedy
Initial on field decision: Foul and yellow card shown to Barisic.
Another type of challenge that I imagine has split opinion. Barisic, in an attempt to win the ball stretches his leg through the air and catches the Aberdeen player first. This is clearly a reckless challenge and meets yellow card criteria. But should it have been upgraded to a red card for a challenge with excessive force/endangering players safety?
I suspect the reason the referee does not give a red card is that he sees Barisic pull his leg back before going to extend it and hook the ball away. Barisic is not planting his studs in the leg of Kennedy, but it is rather the extension motion that grazes/clips Kennedy right knee. This makes him lose his balance.
However, you cannot escape the fact that Barisic is coming in from behind and makes contact with Kennedy at knee high level, irrespective of level of actual contact made. For this reason, I believe Barisic has been slightly fortunate here. I suspect if VAR recommended an on-field review, the caution would have been upgraded to a sending off decision.
Verdict: Incorrect decision (after some deliberation). Sending off the expected outcome |
Expected Points
Outcome |
TRFC +0.7 |
Incident 2
Referee | Nick Walsh |
Game Minute | 93rd |
Score At Time | 1-1 |
Incident | Stewart fouls Sakala |
Outcome | Foul to TRFC; RC to Stewart |
Evidence | (1) Rangers 2-1 Aberdeen | Rangers Through To Final with Extra-Time Goal! | Viaplay Cup Semi-Final – YouTube
At 5:20 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Stewart fouls Sakala
Initial on field decision: Foul committed, and red card shown to Stewart. Stewart lunges into make a challenge and clearly catches Sakala, rather than the ball. 100% a reckless challenge but does this type of tackle also trigger the red card criteria of a tackle with excessive force/or endangering a player’s safety? In real time, I felt Stewart was slightly unlucky to be shown the red card. Yes, the challenge is late, but it is relatively low and he has eyes on the ball. It is not a two footed challenge. However, the slow-motion review does make it look slightly worse, mainly as Stewart’s extended leg catches Sakala knee high. Although the referee I believe could have ‘sold’ a yellow card decision, on review I do not feel the red card was wrong either. The type of tackle, that we sometimes refer to as an ‘orange card’ kind of challenge. More than a yellow, but not quite a red (if this only existed!)
Verdict: Correct decision (just) |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 3
Referee | Nick Walsh |
Game Minute | 96th |
Score At Time | 1-1 |
Incident | Kent and Scales have an altercation off the ball |
Outcome | No decision |
Evidence | https://twitter.com/WalterNewtoo/status/1614744507001495554?s=20&t=EvexvQxC3l0Me3s_l42cOQ https://twitter.com/doc42/status/1614721598031798272?s=20&t=EvexvQxC3l0Me3s_l42cOQ |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Kent clashes with Scales off the ball
Initial on field decision: No foul committed
Kent & Scales are running towards the ball together and Kent inexplicably raises a hand in an open-handed punching/slapping motion. This is a clear act of violent conduct, regardless of the level of actual contact made. The referee is clearly looking at ball and does not see this action. But how VAR has not intervened is quite astonishing. This is the exactly the type of incident VAR was originally brought in for.
Verdict: Incorrect decision. Red card to Kent for violent conduct the expected outcome. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
TRFC +0.7 |
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler in this League Cup special.
No impact on league points today, obviously.
Once again, I would highlight the respective media treatments of the incidents in these matches.
Many, supposedly responsible, commentators could not wait to lash Celtic supporters with the “paranoia” prop. This is the standard response to Celtic getting a rough deal on decisions.
Some consider it clever to play the same card two different ways. Celtic fans are “paranoid” (i.e. suffer from some mental illness) if they dare query a dubious call. Simultaneously, when Celtic appear to have benefited from a dubious call, this must surely put a stop to the paranoia evident on all the calls that go against the club. World class pin dancing, Timmy.
In the last 18 months, Celtic have had perhaps two calls that have benefitted them materially. Kyogo Furuhashi’s winning goal against Heart of Midlothian (YW ruled a goal on benefit of the doubt given there is no conclusive evidence of offside) and Giorgos Giakoumakis’s foul on Wright in the League Cup semi-final (YW ruled a penalty – just). And my goodness don’t we get to know about it! Crawford Allan mobilised, screams of where we can stuff our “paranoia” and Derek McInnes moaning for days on end. To be fair it is remarkable that Greg Aitken (VAR) from Kilmarnock did not give, errr, Kilmarnock a penalty.
Some doth protest too much.
Meanwhile, back to the absence of things.
Aberdeen should have been playing nine players from The Rangers in extra time in the other semi-final. That is a big story, no?
The BBC completely ignored both red card incidents in their web match report.
The Daily Record tried to play down Kent’s assault on Scales thus:
“Replays showed that out-of-contract star (Kent) did raise his hands towards Scales, seemingly in frustration at being impeded.”
Poor lamb, I mean, who doesn’t hate being impeded?
The highlight reels available from official channels also omitted both red card incidents against The Rangers players.
Most telling is the YW’s reaction.
“But how VAR has not intervened is quite astonishing. This is the exactly the type of incident VAR was originally brought in for.”
“Quite astonishing” is as harsh an assessment as it gets from our mild mannered, patient and thorough professional expert.
As far as we can tell, there was NO VAR scrutiny of the Kent assault, nor any request to review the Barisic tackle from behind on Kennedy. In fact, we were told on the day that VAR technology stopped working some time early in extra time. What impact, if any, did it have on these incidents late in normal time?
Three days later and no indication the Compliance Officer is scrutinising Kent’s assault despite both referee Walsh and VAR “missing” the incident.
Now there’s a story worth pursuing.
John Dempsey says
We know that Rangers get all benefits of decisions,to allow them to get at least 2nd place in the SPL.Uefa should be monitoring this,and should be given dossier with video evidence of the”so called inefficient referees”They need to take charge of the corrupt SFA,and demand neutral officials as all Scottish fans want is fair decisions across the board for every club.Uefa also need to know why Rangers have went on two seasons long runs without a penalty being given against them, their defenders aren,t that good.All we want is fair governance.Celtic or Liam Scales should charge Ryan Kent with assault.
Tam says
Does Scottish football still have a compliance officer If so who is It.
Justshatered says
Did The Whistler not review the Aberdeen penalty claim ?
I haven’t seen it but was that not a controversial decision.
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
No knowledge of that. Video?
Justshatered says
I haven’t seen it either but there was a lot of chat about it on various websites on Sunday
Andy says
Scales was brought down in the box in the exact same way as happened in the GG incident?
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
No idea not on highlights. Got video?
John Dodsworth says
100% agree Alan. A well written and balanced article as always. Frankly it never ceases to amaze me that the mainstream media dismiss Celtic’s grievances as paranoia. Surely anyone with an objective mind with no agenda only has to look at the distribution of penalties awarded and conceded (or not in some cases!) with Celtic and Rangers this season and last for that matter, to think hang on wait a minute that’s a bit strange! But no we’re all paranoid. Yeah right! Keep up the fight and the huddle breakdown!
Thomas Burke says
Just wait and see the final it will be the same nothing will change if Celtic score there will be something wrong with it and the other half will get away wi murder mark my words Celtic will need to shoot outside the box because they aren’t going to get a penalty.
The Cha says
When watching the match in the pub with my Celtic Codgers Club (and what more fair and balanced environment can you get? 🙂 ) I was adamant that Hatate’s goal should have stood.
I reasoned this, as Taylor had made a deliberate movement ie to block the ball, which I thought constituted playing the ‘offside’ player onside.
Not for the 1st time YW has schooled me (and I suspect others) with regard to the proper application and interpretation of the law (gawd darn him), notwithstanding your intervention.
I can’t remember this incident myself but its claimed there was a potential penalty for Celtic missed:
https://videocelts.com/2023/01/blogs/latest-news/watch-the-cameron-carter-vickers-hampden-penalty-claim-that-has-largely-ignored/
I might be in a small minority but these discussions fascinate me (cf Rashford goal against City), especially the ex-ref expert (Peter Walton) who simply and effectively explains decisions but not lazy ex-players, who offer nothing but ignorance and arrogance.
Of course, in SPhell, Celteris Paribus doesn’t exist, so such discussions aren’t simply a matter of law and different levels of bias appear to be involved and there’s no acknowledgement of mistakes, hence there can be no commitment to improvement to reach the much-fabled level playing field.
With regard to VAR in the EPL and commitment to improvement they set up an independent review panel at the start of the season and they made their first report on 21st December, so when only 14 or 15 games had been played.
“Premier League: VAR has made six incorrect interventions this season”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63531141
Surprisingly (to me) they identified quite a high error rate:
“BBC Sport understands the panel has gone through hundreds of incidents and identified 48 situations when VAR needed to get involved, with 42 correct decisions made.
However, it found six incidents were missed completely and on another six occasions, VAR overturned on-field decisions that had initially been right.”
They don’t go into details but there seems to be a firm commitment to improve things, with introduction of experienced VAR coach etc.
Compare and contrast with Scotland where there has been no errors hence no need for independent reviews nor improvements. 😉
Willie mcg says
Davis bear hugged scales in the box & brought him down, no one commented or looked at it absolute stonewall penalty!
John says
The conclusion I draw from this weeks contribution from the YW is that VAR is failing.
Instead of assisting officials in accurately assessing incidents and demonstrating to punters the transparency of the process it has mangled everything & made things worse.
I submit that no one knows why or how incidents are referred to the referee, nor do we know the outcome – unless its a goal/penalty and is flashed up on the big screen.
As the YW has stated, how some incidents are missed altogether is astonishing, while the recommendations from scrutinized incidents are bafflingly inconsistent.
Officials in Scotland are not trained adequately.
I have no idea how much or little training they get, but if the result is the chaos we now have, it cannot possibly be sufficient.
Disputing a call from an official is normal but for officials, aided by VAR technology, to still manage games in the same confusing manner is a testament to old attitudes, poor training & inadequate supervision.
Damian says
I think the SFA has to make a commitment towards full time referees in the top flight within a realistic timeframe (five years seems about right to me). Hard to hold non-professionals to professional standards. I think that the voice of non-Celtic (or Rangers) fans needs to be louder on this.