Lets face it and admit it - Tansey's challenge was reckless and needless - he deserved a yellow card. O'Reilly clearly had a view from an angle where the challenge was made ten times worse by the pathetic acting of Mr Samaras. O'Reilly made a spot decision on what he saw at the time. The "linesman" never intervened and O'Reilly doesnt have the real say in going to the fourth official to check what had happened on ESPN. My first reaction when I was watching the telly was that Tansey had clatterd the geek and my other immediate reaction was that he was going to be red carded.

That evidently, in the retrospect and on studiously viewing replay, was not afforded to Mr O'Reilly at the time and made it clear that the red card was clearly not indicated and an injustice had been committed.

But I will doff ma cap to Mr O'Reilly who could have hidden behind secrecy and given any form of lame excuse but he put his feckin hands up and good on him. What did the ref ever say when he watched the TV replays of Rosscoe's sending off. In my opinion that wasnt even a feckin yellow - Hoggs on the other hand was a deffo red card.

Respect to Mr O'Reilly fer being so feckin honest and fair

Lets face it and admit it - Tansey's challenge was reckless and needless - he deserved a yellow card. O'Reilly clearly had a view from an angle where the challenge was made ten times worse by the pathetic acting of Mr Samaras. O'Reilly made a spot decision on what he saw at the time. The "linesman" never intervened and O'Reilly doesnt have the real say in going to the fourth official to check what had happened on ESPN. My first reaction when I was watching the telly was that Tansey had clatterd the geek and my other immediate reaction was that he was going to be red carded.

That evidently, in the retrospect and on studiously viewing replay, was not afforded to Mr O'Reilly at the time and made it clear that the red card was clearly not indicated and an injustice had been committed.

But I will doff ma cap to Mr O'Reilly who could have hidden behind secrecy and given any form of lame excuse but he put his feckin hands up and good on him. What did the ref ever say when he watched the TV replays of Rosscoe's sending off. In my opinion that wasnt even a feckin yellow - Hoggs on the other hand was a deffo red card.

Respect to Mr O'Reilly fer being so feckin honest and fair

Billocks. He cost us 3 points. You're getting soft in your old age!

The whole systems a farce we dropped points on Saturday, some people want tv replays, Dont know if this is true or not but I heard that Mr Doncaster wants to have a phone in where the tv viewers have a choice of who get a red card that day.Apparently he thinks it will bring in more tv revenue instead of the ref just randomly selecting a player to be sent off.

The whole systems a farce we dropped points on Saturday, some people want tv replays, Dont know if this is true or not but I heard that Mr Doncaster wants to have a phone in where the tv viewers have a choice of who get a red card that day.Apparently he thinks it will bring in more tv revenue instead of the ref just randomly selecting a player to be sent off.

Or alternatively you can just watch Strictly Come Dancing instead

You mean the"Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy" ? :biggrin:

I will say well done to Mr O'Reilly for changing his view once he seen the evidence. But until he pushes for the game to be replayed, I cannot forgive him for ruining our chances of earning some desperately needed points. Its rediculous that as far as the record books go, we lost that game 2-0 and no one was sent off. Its only fair that the game is replayed to get an honest result! Even if we get beaten 4-0, and have a player ligitimately sent off, but it will be an honest result!

Yes I agree that the main travesty is that we lost the opportunity to win some much needed points - and yes in the ideal world a replay would be the ideal decision / outcome.

But Mr O'Reilly cannot change the rule books. All I am saying is that this incident highlights the dilemnas of the modern day referees. And errors will continue until some form of technology is used. As a regular attender at rugby League games I think that the introduction of the video ref and the large viwing screen is brilliant and it certainly doesnt overstretch or interfere with the game - in fact the presentation of the technology actually adds to the entertainment and ensures that fair play is observed. I think that Mr O'Reilly would have called for the video ref if Tansey had been playing for St Helens or he would have put him on report. After the video evidence was viewed and Samaras had been playing for Wigan he too would have faced a fine or a suspension for putting the game in to disrepute.

What I am trying to herald is that Mr O'Reilly is merely a human being who takes the flak for the authorities - afine example of the term "scapegoat". I feel that he made a genuine mistake but I also feel that he called it as he had seen it. BUT he then had the bollicks to admit that he had got it wrong.

Fully agree with IHE here.

Some people find it very hard to admit to making a mistake, and I applaud Mr O'Reilly for coming clean.

Pity about the lost points though.

Agree with many of Johndo's points and I believe technology will come in for some things. However, and in the mean time, games are officiated by a team of four referee's. One of the problems is that they dont always work as a team. I believe that, if the referee in the middle of the park was to take a little time to get the views of the rest of his team, and if the rest of the team had the courage to point out mistakes, many of the mistakes would be avoided.

Human beings will always be fallible. Did any of the other three officials actually have any clearer a view of the incident thna Mr O'Reilly - I doubt if the stand side official or the fourth official did - and the fourth one doesnt have open access to TV replays. The only person who could have seen it was the road side official. That is where Mr O'Reilly should have looked at him for a "second opinion" and again judging by the TV replay he was so convinced about what he had witnessed that he didnt. And then if the linesman did have a clear view and felt that it was the wrong decision he should have stuck his flag in the air and alerted Mr O'Reilly.

And look at the feckin Europa League and the carboard cut outs who stand behind both goal lines !!

The card was out before Samaras had even hit the deck, so no thought whatsoever was given to consulting with his assistants.

People harp on about "The need for a split second decision". Why does it need to be split second? Why can't the referee take a moment to process what he just saw? Why not make it compulsory to consult assistants when considering a red card? Refs are all mic'd up these days, so it's not going to slow the game down any. By the time the ref calls the player to have a word then he could have had his feedback and he can then decide if he's just going to have a word or issue a red/yellow card.

Tansey NOT GUILTY

We lose points, Samaras gets off Scot Free, Celtic progress with the points....Something wrong there, surely there should be some recompense.

Only half the job has been done

Despite the Ref's confession it's still a win for Glasgow.............unfair play.

The card was out before Samaras had even hit the deck, so no thought whatsoever was given to consulting with his assistants.

People harp on about "The need for a split second decision". Why does it need to be split second? Why can't the referee take a moment to process what he just saw? Why not make it compulsory to consult assistants when considering a red card? Refs are all mic'd up these days, so it's not going to slow the game down any. By the time the ref calls the player to have a word then he could have had his feedback and he can then decide if he's just going to have a word or issue a red/yellow card.

Agree with you CaleyD and not with IHE (that must be a 1st for me, not to agree with IHE - sorry Johndo) but, - after all CaleyD and I were at the game and IHE was only watching courtesy of tv! We were right!!! No red, no yellow. But still no points. The OF win again. When will it ever end. This must be the 1st time I have ever wished that our "dear" neighbours get promoted and be in the same league as us and make the sad central belters travel north twice as many times. See how Kris Commons likes that!? What a wxxxxer.

Edited November 25, 201113 yr by lizi

I think that there may be more to this than meets the eye.

I think thnat the SFA are a bit ashamed at the crap decisions that ICT have had thrown against them in the recent past and I think that ...maybe.. a wee word in Mr Reilly's ear was made too.I also think that the papers weighing in on the controversy has affected their judgement of this issue.

The two crap decisions --the Tokely incident versus Rangers and this one versus Celtic have affected the whole season for our club.

From all accounts ICtT were playing so well before the debacles occurred that they conceivably could have won both games. And the effect of that could easily have been that they could have gained such a lift in spirit from the two wins that they might have won all subsequent games too.

So,frankly, I have little sympathy for the Beaks OR Mr Reilly. The system is weighted against teams like ICT and the more we shout this from the rooftops the better it will be for all smaller teams us against the big mis-managed money baged teams and you know to whom I am mreferrfing.

Finally, thank you IHE for supporting my is done, and the Scottish Football Association finally steps into the modern era, a lot of this crap will solve itself. The sooner the better as far as I am concerned.

Why are these chiefs dragging their feet on this issue? Well,it is not hard to suggest that the probable disadvantages to the big money clubs, if this neutral technology is introduced, is obvious. The reduction and or actual elimination of cheating coukld reduce their superiority on the park which must be a daunting prospect for them!

Any comments or rebuttals? :annoyed:

The card was out before Samaras had even hit the deck, so no thought whatsoever was given to consulting with his assistants.

People harp on about "The need for a split second decision". Why does it need to be split second? Why can't the referee take a moment to process what he just saw? Why not make it compulsory to consult assistants when considering a red card? Refs are all mic'd up these days, so it's not going to slow the game down any. By the time the ref calls the player to have a word then he could have had his feedback and he can then decide if he's just going to have a word or issue a red/yellow card.

Agree with you CaleyD and not with IHE (that must be a 1st for me, not to agree with IHE - sorry Johndo) but, - after all CaleyD and I were at the game and IHE was only watching courtesy of tv! We were right!!! No red, no yellow. But still no points. The OF win again. When will it ever end. This must be the 1st time I have ever wished that our "dear" neighbours get promoted and be in the same league as us and make the sad central belters travel north twice as many times. See how Kris Commons likes that!? What a wxxxxer.

It was a yellow - it was a needless challenge. You, Caley D and the others at the game were evidently affected emotionally and rightly so - but you have to watch the replays and be more balanced.

As fer the split second decision I said "That is where Mr O'Reilly should have looked at him for a "second opinion" and again judging by the TV replay he was so convinced about what he had witnessed that he didnt. And then if the linesman did have a clear view and felt that it was the wrong decision he should have stuck his flag in the air and alerted Mr O'Reilly."