Tokely Appeal

[ICT_Away]

Yup potter got off tokley didn't, total joke

[Libero]

LINKY

Ross Tokely (Inverness CT FC)

Inverness CT v Rangers - August 13, 2011

Claim of Wrongful Dismissal for (A4); Denying the opposing team or an opponent a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity as defined by Law 12

Outcome: Claim dismissed. One SPL match suspension, effective immediately.

[Tichy_Blacks_Back]

Have to say it sums up scottish football - disappointing reflection of those in charge and the current system....

I think the club should voice their opinion on this one as something doesn't seem quite right....

[AJS]

Have to say it sums up scottish football - disappointing reflection of those in charge and the current system....

I think the club should voice their opinion on this one as something doesn't seem quite right....

We can stomp and scream all we want - the muppets down at the SFA have made their decision, it makes no difference now. Shows why we are deemed such a dire footballing nation. With the use of extensive replays and video technology the right decision still isnt capable of being made - sarcastic applaud for the SFA.

Edited August 18, 2011 by ajsict92

[MissICT]

Not Happy

[CaleyD]

Have to say it sums up scottish football - disappointing reflection of those in charge and the current system....

I think the club should voice their opinion on this one as something doesn't seem quite right....

We can stomp and scream all we want - the muppets down at the SFA have made their decision, it makes no difference now. Shows why we are deemed such a dire footballing nation. With the use of extensive replays and video technology the right decision still isnt capable of being made - sarcastic applaud for the SFA.

I dunno, stomping and screaming seemed to serve Celtic pretty well last season. Whilst I appreciate we are nowhere near the size of Celtic or carry the same clout, I think we'd garner a fair bit of support from fans of other teams.

[Scotty]

its bullshit, plain and simple, and i resisted the temptation to go further in the article we now added to the main site

[Jaggie994]

Disgusted. Shows the Old firm can get away with pretty much anything. I'm confused as to why this appeal has been rejected! even if the appeal reduced his punishment to a yellow i would still be angry as he clearly won the ball with a magnificent challenge. Its an absolute disgrace to the Scottish game. Same old story with them scum i suppose maybe one day we might see an S.P.L that is not run by the Old firm on and off the pitch. personally i think Tokely should have been dropped for the rangers game after his performance in Dunfermline and that would have avoided the whole situation. FTOF

[KingBeastie]

F**king shocking decision. Disgraceful.

[Renegade]

Sadly, the two headed monster runs the show in this country and the cowardice that permeates the SFA and the referees when dealing with them proves this. It's actually a worse decision than the one Norris made. While he and his linesman made the wrong decision, the had to do so in essentially two seconds - this lot have had nearly a week to watch it over and over again, from a number of different angles and they still can't get it right! The game's run by idiots and cowards here, and decisions like this should come as no surprise.

[Scotty]

Sadly, the two headed monster runs the show in this country and the cowardice that permeates the SFA and the referees when dealing with them proves this. It's actually a worse decision than the one Norris made. While he and his linesman made the wrong decision, the had to do so in essentially two seconds - this lot have had nearly a week to watch it over and over again, from a number of different angles and they still can't get it right! The game's run by idiots and cowards here, and decisions like this should come as no surprise.

Actually dont think the OF have any starring role in this decision other than one of them being the team we were playing. The buck for this has to stop with the referee and then this so-called independent review panel. If either are in awe or fear of these dark forces then that is their problem not the problem of the OF. They might have created the problem/scenario, but the ref and the panel are the ones helping to perpetuate it. Grow a spine and a set of balls FFS !

1. the referee made a decision and I accept that its done in a fraction of a second and based on what he saw he can make an error. I have no problem with that if he has the balls to admit his mistake at the end of the game when he can actually change his decision in his report or make mention of it. It is apparent that he did not do either of those things so he gets the "Walloper of the Weekend" prize for that display of arrogance and ineptitude..... a bit of poetic license but an anagram of his name is "OUR INSANE R."

2. The appeals panel have the advantage of being able to view the tackle frame-by-frame and from a variety of different angles given that it was live on TV. but true to (past) form and regardless of the evidence in front of their eyes they seem to want to give benefit of the doubt to the referee report. F****** Spineless.

Back in the day when I was involved in the local amateur scene and was a committee member of the IDAFA (and by extension, the disciplinary committee) I always remember George Davidson saying that no matter what we were told by players or witnesses or anyone else brought to plead a case, and no matter what we believed based on that story, if we made a decision that went against the referees report we would have it thrown back to us from the SAFA or SFA because the 'punishment' did not fit the 'crime'. Hell, we even caught a referee out in a lie based on a review of a specific incident and independent witness comments, removed the punishment from the player entirely, and got our arses handed to us on a plate from down south.

It would seem that as much as things change - with the introduction of a streamlined system - certain elements of it stay exactly the same. absolute bollocks !

[mikeyrob73]

Disgusting decision, bad enough that the decision was SO wrong in the first place. These things even themself out over the season is normally whats said, lets just see come the end of the season if it evens itself out. my bets are it doesnt.

[PaderbornCaley]

A few secret hand shakes going on in that panel i'd imagine.

[MissICT]

I really do feel its a fecking conspiracy!

[RiG]

What a laughable decision.

Nothing else to add really.

[12th Man]

We had better put barrier tape around our box and give the players H vis shirts.

I'm actually embarrassed for the officials who up held the red card, if you want to cover up for the mistakes of a ref who wouldnt have even had a clear sight of the foul, then for your own credibility dont do it for a match shown on international tv.

[Jeepsaw]

What a f-ing joke!

If the roles were reversed i doubt it would have been a red.

If the roles were reversed and in some freak display of madness they did send off the rangers defender, it would have been overturned.

If the roles were reversed and an appeal wasn't successful then the referee would be harassed, his family would be harassed, he would be forced to quit, and then they would turn on the linesman. Same goes for the other ugly sister.

What a f-ing joke!

[lizi]

What a f-ing joke!

If the roles were reversed i doubt it would have been a red.

If the roles were reversed and in some freak display of madness they did send off the rangers defender, it would have been overturned.

If the roles were reversed and an appeal wasn't successful then the referee would be harassed, his family would be harassed, he would be forced to quit, and then they would turn on the linesman. Same goes for the other ugly sister.

What a f-ing joke!

I agree!

[tm4tj]

I had a feeling this was going to be the outcome unfortunately.

Not that I believe he fouled the diver, but more to do with solidarity in the secret society. Tokely does come across the attacker, and there is contact, the possibility of the legs entangling like a scissor movement made it look like a foul from the refs perspective, but surely there is no logical reason for a panel to back the referee other than look after our own. I had hoped for it to be reduced to a yellow as there was nothing cynical or intended in the tackle, and that would save face all round, but there you go.

for Cowboy Norris, back to Coronation Street for him

[Murchison]

Unfortunately this was the expected and all too predictable result. Personally i'm along with 99% of people I have spoken to who didn't think it was a penalty, although wouldn't say Naismith dived. Even McCoist said after the game he thought they were lucky to get it. Ref made a decision which he wasn't man enough to say he got wrong, would have understood and had more respect for him if he did. Everyone makes mistakes.

After that, no way they would overturn the red, as that would be admitting Rangers shouldn't have had a pen, which would start all the Old Firm conspiracies. They would be too scared of this season going like last season. Better to annoy the wee diddy team from the Highlands than anger the old firm.

[Libero]

While this has been a hugely frustrating decision in the short term it will come back to haunt us as well later in the season i fear. A sending off so early in the season will boost Tokely's disciplinary points total and will leave him and us vulnerable to further suspensions as the season goes on.

The SFA panel has really shafted us here and IMO it stems from their unfathomable backing of the decision that tackling in the box is no longer allowed

:irritated:

[starchief]

I am hoping that the decision is changed and the red card is resinded however I am not so sure, my brother is in the process of doing his referees course and he said that this decision came up in the course this week as a point for debate. All were in general concensus that Tokely made a scissor like motion with his legs from behind regardless if he got the ball or not, this was the thoughts of all on the course and also those teaching at the course. For these reasons I don't see it being changed as I have a feeling this will be how it has been seen from the ref's view/angle at the time.

I am not saying it is correct nor that I agree with it just how it may be perceived unfortunately. For what it's worth I do think it was a great tackle to get the ball first I just don't think the ref seen that touch and the linesman never helped either.

This is the real problem. A great tackle is as impressive as a great save and a great goal. It seems to be a rule change for fairweather football fans that can't appreciate anything other than goals.

[Council Juice]

Cant say Im overly surprised.

I still stick by the notion that even if it was a fault (which it was NOT) it wasn't a clear goalscoring opportunity or a professional foul so should not have been a red. End of. Typical SPL, typical SFA. typical JOKE!

[HumbersideDude]

So, the ref who gives a penalty, who sends off Rossco for a great tackle, misses 2 potential handballs(amongst other terrible decisions on the day), who then finds that he has been totally blanked at all levels of football for a game this weekend by the SFA. Has been found by this "independant panel" to have made a correct call. All makes sense to me

Edited August 19, 2011 by Dewsburydude

[PullMyFinger]

Top picture contact has been made, ball still untouched.

Bottom picture ball still hasn't been touched.

I posted these in the aftermath of the game but removed them when I heard there would be an appeal.

As I see it, the ref and the panel called it okay. On the balance of the game we were lucky not to concede a penalty earlier and we never looked like winning the game. We'll get decisions against other teams who will feel like most of the posters in this thread do.