Another week, another terabyte of digital space used debating VAR.
This week, Celtic travelled to Tangerine Tannadice whilst Micky Beale’s plucky challengers hosted the Saints of Perth.
The impact of a call being incorrect can be evaluated using the framework outlined here -> Honest Mistakes in the SPFL.
28/01/23 The Rangers vs St Johnstone
Incident 1
Referee | Willie Collum |
Game Minute | 15th |
Score At Time | 0-0 |
Incident | Ball hits Brown in the Saints box |
Outcome | Penalty to TRFC |
Evidence | (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership – YouTube
At 1:00 |
Incident 2
Referee | Willie Collum |
Game Minute | 36th |
Score At Time | 1-0 |
Incident | Clark challenges Jack |
Outcome | Foul to TRFC; Red Card to Clark on VAR review |
Evidence | (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership – YouTube
At 2:00 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Clark clashes with Jack
Initial on field decision: Foul awarded to Rangers. Clark is sent off after VAR review (initially no foul awarded).
Clark loses a first contest and then is off balance as he stretches for a 2nd tackle with Jack. Initially I thought the tackle was high and the replay doesn’t make it any better viewing. He is slightly off balance and leaning back as he stretches in. In doing so, his studs are high and appear to catch Jack around the shin area. Although I do not feel there is much intent here, I would have to say the height of the studs showing here does merit the sending off – for a tackle that is excessive/endangers a player’s safety
Verdict: Correct decision to award the red card for an excessive force/endangering player safety tackle |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 3
Referee | Willie Collum |
Game Minute | 37th |
Score At Time | 1-0 |
Incident | Jack challenges Montgomery |
Outcome | Foul to St Johnstone; YC to Jack; VAR review requested but on field decision stood |
Evidence | (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership – YouTube
At 2:34 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Jack fouls Montgomery
Initial on field decision: Foul to St Johnstone. Yellow card shown to Jack (VAR ask referee to review for a possible red card offence – referee declines to change his initial decision)
Interesting decision to review here, as we see a referee here, stick to his guns about what he felt/saw on the field of play at the time.
When I watched the challenge in real time I wasn’t sure if Jack gets the ball cleanly or catches the player so knew it wasn’t a clear cut decision. From the referee’s viewpoint he sees Jack slide in low to attempt to win the ball, but he cannot clearly what contact is actually made, in my opinion. Certainly, the players reaction makes everyone think something serious could have happened here.
Slow motion does make this challenge appear worse than I initially suspected. Even though Jack is sliding in low, he does fully extend his challenging leg which cause his studs to be showing in a level/exposed motion.
I can see why the referee only gave a yellow card initially, but feel VAR was right to ask him to review this decision and on the basis of the slow motion showing the studs catch Montgomery on the inside ankle, the referee should have produced a red card for a tackle with excessive force/endangering player safety.
Not a terrible initial decision, but should have taken the safe option here after reviewing, rather than stick with his gut decision.
Verdict: Incorrect decision. Red card expected outcome, after review. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
+0.86 xPts TRFC |
29/01/23 Dundee United vs Celtic
Incident 1
Referee | Don Robertson |
Game Minute | 44th |
Score At Time | 0-0 |
Incident | Furuhashi goes down in the box |
Outcome | No decision |
Evidence | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHVqKbpT_k8&list=PLAmNSUlUap5sY5W8Szk8h5tDCBYlrB2tW&index=118
At 2:11 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Furuhashi goes over in the box
Initial on field decision: No foul committed
Balls break loose in box and Furuhashi feels contact and drops to ground. On review, there is a very slight tug on the front of his shirt, but nowhere near enough contact to merit the way the player then falls to the ground. I don’t feel his movement is being impeded by the momentary contact and am satisfied that no foul was awarded here.
Verdict: Correct decision to not award a penalty kick. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 2
Referee | Don Robertson |
Game Minute | 45th |
Score At Time | 0-0 |
Incident | Furuhashi, McMann and Birighitti challenge for the ball in the box |
Outcome | Penalty to Celtic rescinded on VAR review |
Evidence | (9) Dundee United 0-2 Celtic | Jota and Mooy Keep Celtic 9 points clear | cinch Premiership – YouTube
At 2:34 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Furuhashi goes down in the box under a challenge from Brighitti
Initial on field decision: Penalty that was first awarded to Celtic, is over turned after VAR review
Ball goes into the air and the Dundee Utd keeper & Celtic forward both attempt to win the ball first. As expected, the keeper comes for the ball with his fist to punch the ball away. Strikers must expect to get clattered every now and again in this kind of situation and Furuhashi shows his bravery in challenging with the keeper.
After review I will side with the keeper as his eyes are only on the ball and he does clearly contact and deflect the ball first and then it his downward momentum that collides with Furuhashi afterwards. A sore one for the Celtic player to take, but the correct decision arrived at.
Verdict: Correct decision to overturn the initial penalty award. No foul committed. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 3
Referee | Don Robertson |
Game Minute | 51st |
Score At Time | 0-0 |
Incident | Ball hits Freeman in the box |
Outcome | Penalty to Celtic upon VAR review |
Evidence | (9) Dundee United 0-2 Celtic | Jota and Mooy Keep Celtic 9 points clear | cinch Premiership – YouTube
At 4:23 |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | Ball hits Freeman in the box
Initial on field decision: Penalty awarded to Celtic after VAR review. Freeman was already on a yellow card.
Jota flicks the ball over Freeman who at the last second raises his arm slightly and this blocks the ball. Correct decision to award the hand ball offence as the arm movement is totally unexpected or needed based on his body shape/position at this time. I am also comfortable that a 2nd yellow card is not awarded here, on the basis that he has not denied what I would consider a ‘promising attack’. For me, the Celtic player who might have received the ball was running away from goal and was closely marked. The penalty decision was sanction enough.
Verdict: Correct decision to award the penalty kick for hand ball. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Incident 4
Referee | Don Robertson |
Game Minute | 69th |
Score At Time | 0-2 |
Incident | McMann challenges Abada |
Outcome | No decision upon VAR review |
Evidence | https://twitter.com/Zeshankenzo/status/1620030930961453056?s=20&t=_7_VS3m46HCZq2PRiIcBfg |
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict | With only one slowed down clip it’s difficult to be certain with this one. I suspect at full speed this looked fairly innocuous as the defender comes away with the ball.
However, when slowed down it looks like the Dundee Utd defender misjudges the speed of the ball and then over commits to the recovery tackle. In doing so he makes contact with the ball with his outstretched foot and then his foot goes over the ball and looks to catch the Celtic player. Doesn’t look great, but I suspect the reason this wasn’t picked up as a potential red card clear & obvious incident to review, is based on the defender looking the favourite to win the ball and the force/momentum of the challenge being relatively minor/ not excessive. He comes away with the ball but his studs do glance off the Celtic player. Overall, I’m satisfied this was not a red card offence, but would have been interesting if referee had been asked to review this incident. |
Expected Points
Outcome |
No impact |
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.
Remember, he is reviewing each and every incident on its own merits, independently. He is not concerned with what happened in any other game or how such and such was treated last week.
In terms of impact on the expected points picture, another “helpful” week for The Rangers.
Based on the in-match game state when the decisions were made (or not made), The Rangers have 2.41 MORE expected points due to the cumulative impact of Honest Mistakes and Celtic 4.12 LESS.
A swing of 6.53 xPts.
Celtic lead by nine points after 23 matches.
Dominic Sharkey says
Is your Yorkshire Whistler a grade 1 ref? He seems to very often agree with contentious decisions and, I think, errs on the side of giving the referee the benefit of the doubt.
Nicky Clark’s straight red v Sevco, for example, is a decision your man agrees with and yet has already been downgraded on appeal.
I think you should also track where your YW calls it wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Martin says
In fairness to YW (who I disagree with on this being a red, for me it’s a yellow), the appeals panel isn’t made up of any referees/ex referees or anyone who has even proven they’ve read the laws of the game so we should never put much stock in what they say.
Dominic Sharkey says
I can’t help being cynical. What’s the point of having referees on the appeals panel? It’s referees who are the source of the complaint! More referees are surely likely to just act like herd animals under attack and close the circle to protect each other. In my view, a couple of trained chimps could form a more objective view!
Damian says
That’s not really the point in the exercise. The point is that he’s an experienced referee, who knows the intricacies of the rules a lot better than most football fans, and who has no allegiances for any Scottish football club. That certain decisions are open to interpretation is simply as its going to be.
The instances referred to the YW are not necessarily exhaustive, which is an arguable problem regarding the credibility of the overall xPts impact.
The next question in all of this is why any trends (to whatever extent they can be taken seriously) are as they are.
I know with confidence that the referee of the Rangers v St Johnstone match is absolutely not a Rangers fan, and that the referee of the Dundee United v Celtic match is a Celtic fan.
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
Damian
It is irrelevant whom any referee may or may not support or what religion they are. Folk will generally fall into line and behave according to the mores and norms of the culture of the organisation they work for ie who pays them. If that already aligns to the culture they were brought up in, happy days.
Damian says
Ok. We can’t have that both ways though. That’s always SEEMED to be relevant when discussing the school Nick Walsh is a Depute Head at (even though he has no connection whatsoever with the Rangers academy there). It seems relevant when people distort stories about which pubs John Beaton frequents, or when they make up absolutely bogus nonsense about Bobby Madden coordinating a supporters bus he would never have the chance to set foot on.
The underlying assumption is that the culture of the SFA is inherently pro-Rangers / anti-Celtic. Is analysing refereeing decisions, as curated by a Celtic fan genuinely the best way to go about this? If it’s an analysis of culture, would it not be better trying to get some kind of intelligence from people who work there? I have known two people who have had salaried jobs at the SFA, for what it’s worth, both of them Celtic fans, both of them cultural Catholics with Irish surnames etc. I never thought to ask, but they never gave any impression of their place of work being geared against them.
It also ignores the elephant in the room that Celtic is demonstrably the most powerful institution in Scottish football and has been for two decades. Rangers are and will likely remain a relative irrelevance.
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
Damian – we need to force the SFA to have the minimal expected risk controls in place such as declaring allegiance and declaring conflicts of interest such as Walsh. To me that is minimum standard risk management that is lacking. My point is that to progress as a Scottish referee, to get promoted, to get more money, to get the big games, to get recommended to UEFA and FIFA, you will toe the line as regards organisational culture. This is not ground breaking what i am saying, Anyone who has ever worked for an organisation as an employee will relate to this.
What i am doing here is trying to cut through the media crap which is inherently biased to build up enough data to see what trends there are in refereeing decisions. The hypothesis of bias is not a secret – we all watch the matches. But far better to approach an argument with data and facts, And if, in fact, there are no discernible trends, then that’s ok too as a valid outcome.
Finally, your point about SFA employees is not necessarily relevant. How senior and influential were these people? The evidence of public data is that it is a few very senior SFA officers that have disadvantaged Celtic/all clubs bar one – Farry was Chairman; Ogilvie was Chairman; Dallas as Head of Refereeing;. It only takes one or two senior people to wield influence to make a difference.
Damian says
Sorry for the delay in getting back, Alan.
I have in fact worked as an employee in several organisations, just in case you’re wondering, and I understand that places of work can have prevailing cultures. What I don’t understand is your assumption that the culture of the SFA is necessarily what you very clearly think it is (because you’ve said).
Farry stood down in 1999 and died in 2010. Ogilvie stood down eight years ago. The current chair is Michael Mulraney. Is there anything that would indicate he is anti Celtic (or anything that goes with it by association)? The board he chairs also includes Michael Nicholson. The SFA for many years has had Celtic representatives at the heart of it. This is simply sensible given the overwhelming strength Celtic holds in Scottish football.
So, reasons for thinking that the culture is necessarily as you assume it to be are weak. The premise is really weak and I don’t believe you would accept it in any other context (apologies if that’s an assumption too far).
I’m also an employee with plenty of experience of the culture of the public sector in the west of Scotland, which for the last several decades has been overwhelmingly dominated by cultural Catholics with Irish surnames. From Chief Exec to director positions and all the way down – both direct public sector and quango organisations, like the SFA.
So, the cultural argument, I just don’t buy. It might be that the Scotland you left is not the same as the one that persists and that what you read and hear about it, in this field at least, is written and expressed to you disproportionately by Celtic fans who are wedded to this premise and cannot be unwedded from it. I don’t know (obviously).
So, back to how it plays out with referees: it’s an institution with Michael Mulraney at the top of it, with Nicholson not far off the top (I think Lawwell’s still involved somewhere?).
One referee, Bobby Madden, in the year 2019 can send off seven Rangers players in the seven Rangers games he officiated and suffer no career hit for doing so. He can go on to send off more Rangers players than players of any other club, and yet not face any sanction from his employer.
There are as many generally known Celtic fans as Rangers fans officiating senior matches, and the SFA (with Nicholson at the top table) is perfectly at ease with this.
So, Celtic fans, go in hunt for confirmation bias. They talk about penalty deficits, but ignore extended periods (indeed, overlapping with Farry’s time) where the deficit was in Celtic’s favour. They also ignore the absolutely random breakdown of penalty deficits in leagues the world over, and the fact that there are clubs which get more penalties than Rangers (as if there were literally two teams in the league) etc etc.
They also make up LIES about individual referees. And that’s the bit that genuinely concerns me. Give quasi-academic credence to the agenda of an angry mob and seriously ugly things can happen.
Your first paragraph is not needed in my case, I have said exactly that on your site on multiple occasions. I think allegiances should be declared and favourable decisions for ‘your’ team should result in heavier appraisal points being deducted, as is the case in Holland where many Ajax fans have officiated Ajax matches over the years. I also think that refs should be full time so that the SFA can have more reasonable control over extra-curricular or other professional commitments (but, being a Depute Head at Boclair Academy, for anyone who knows anything actual about such things, would not meet any reasonable bar for a conflict of interests; just as it would not be if Willie Collum moved from his post at Cardinal Newman to a post at St Ninian’s in Kirkintilloch, or indeed to Braidhurst High, which has the SFA academy with close links to Motherwell – the team he supports, I believe).
But we also need to be more open about what we would accept in relation to declarations. It is often put about (usually by Celtic fans) that in England this has to happen. England is the great white hope, even though England is atypical on a European basis and Scotland is far more typical. But this bit of information about England usually comes first with a lie – that referees cannot officiate matches involving their team’s rivals (just not true), and also with an assumption: that these declarations are published. They are not. I know this because I’ve looked and looked and nowhere has the English FA told the public which clubs their refs are declared to support. That might be fair enough. Data protection etc. But you think that will satisfy the many blatant bad faith actors on this issue up here? That refs declare allegiances but, like in England, they don’t get to find out what they are except through online innuendo? Even if they are published, do you think anyone will believe them? Try explaining that Clancy and Robertson are Celtic fans to anyone who’s wedded to this fundamentalist position. Try explaining that Collum isn’t a Rangers fan and that there’s no reason to assume he would be.
Look, you’re not going to convince me, and indeed you have indirectly managed to convince me to change my long held assumption of referee bias. I am not going to convince you. But, I absolutely love your Celtic work in general. And so, thanks for hearing me out.
berniebhoy says
I hope Alan would not put his trust in this guy –
http://www.scotzine.com/2016/09/former-english-referee-jeff-winter-in-sectarian-storm/
or any other wolf in sheep’s clothing.
How many guys like him are out there ? who have the sense not to make their views known !
Steve says
I don’t understand the comment about the handball incident v Celtic.
The player raised his arm intentionally to stop the ball, it really doesn’t matter if the player it was intended for is already marked or we think it’s going out of play.
We can’t foresee these future events, he was already booked therefore the ball was stopped intentionally by the arm of a player in his own box, it’s a yellow card all day long.
I’ve seen players yellow carded for handling a ball before it goes out of play for a throw in.
Martin says
What you’ve seen before isn’t important. Not every handball, even if deliberate, is a yellow card (or even a foul). If this had bee a shot he had blocked with his hand then definite yellow, but crosses/passes would usually be penalty, no card as it is deemed penalty is enough of a punishment. Same as DOGSO from a non serious foul play challenge now only gets a yellow if a penalty is given. I didn’t expect nor want a yellow for that handball, though I must say I expected the penalty to be given in real time.
Pat McAllister says
How can The Whistler have any credibility with some of these assessments. Seems to me he is trying far too hard to be seen to be fair. He says Clark used excessive force without considering the momentum of Jack arriving after Clark clearly plays the ball. Clarks’ red card has already been overturned. Laughable assessments of incidents at times.
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
“trying too hard to be fair”
I’ll let you dwell on that
Unlike me (and you) he is not biased so we have to take the rough with the smooth on that
Are you a qualified referee?
Pat McAllister says
No, I’m just a football fan with an opinion. Does the fact Clark’s red card has been downgraded,
means his assessment of an incident with the benefit of multiple repays was still wrong. My opinion stands.
Martin says
Not really, though as I say I don’t think it was a justified red. As I say above the panel for these things isn’t made up of “experts” as it would be in any other discipline, but of ex players and club officials who are not required to know, or have read, the laws of the game.
And yes Pat, I am a qualified referee. I disagree with YW on this red card, but I bow to his lower bias than mine in providing a neutral assessment.
Damian says
Not quite. You’re very specifically a Celtic fan who is (I presume) not trained as a referee, with an opinion which favours Celtic.
That is almost a perfect definition of not credible.
Damian says
The fact that Clark’s red card has been downgraded does not necessarily negate the YW’s stance in the incident.
Indeed, if you were being completely dispassionate about the matter, you could ask: which is more likely to be accurate, the view of an experienced referee with no interest in Scottish football, or reflective position of the SFA, reacting to noisy pressure from the public, the media and clubs?
celticbynumbers@btinternet.com says
He has to take the rough with the smooth too!
Damian says
His credibility can ultimately only come from the confidence this audience has in him.
You however (like me) have no real credibility at all.
Michael Keenan says
How can the YW say that Clarke is tackling Jack? Clarke has the ball. He’s being fouled and knocks the ball clear before Jack comes in on him. Jack is tackling Clarke. Not the other way around. Clarke is the only player in this scenario who is actually playing the ball.
Deliberate handball is a booking. United player should have gone . I’ve never heard the interpretation the YW puts on this one.
Martin says
Hi Michael,
Your comment that deliberate handball was news to me. But stated with such confidence that I doubted myself for a second and rechecked the laws of the game (https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#disciplinary-action for relevant passage). Alas I cannot find the evidence to back your claim up. I’ll happily accept your word if you can find it where I cannot though, and change my refereeing behaviour accordingly going forward.
Martin says
Hi Michael,
No it isn’t
https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#disciplinary-action
Thanks.
Michael Keenan says
Cheers Martin. I was making an assumption based on playing experience and watching. Deliberate handball and deliberate trips are not attempts to play the ball fairly. Mostly, I’ve seen players booked for them. My assumption was that they were both automatic yellow cards, but you’re right. Deliberate handball isn’t. Sad reflection on the game that these things are not cautionable, but taking your jersey off to celebrate is. Thanks for the info ?
Damian says
If you remove a glove to handle the ball, it’s an automatic three match ban.
Martin says
It’s one of those annoying ones. A few years ago he’d have been booked, but the message changed re penalty incidents and now it’s got to be clear promising attack or a shot at goal or something. Every ref different but I’d probably have gone with the same in this game, penalty no card. Ball was moving wide of goal, receiver for the pass had a couple of guys on him. No card seems fair. Can be frustrating I know, but that’s because we watch football which is commentated on and pundited by people who don’t know what they’re talking about. So myths enter the public psyche, like this or last man.
Sandy says
As a former referee myself I often disagree with the Yorkshire man’s opinion but the game is made up of opinions and the most important thing is in the opinion of the referee is final
Damian says
Indeed. And, in this case, that the referee has no personal Scottish football connections or allegiances whatsoever.