Thursday, 11 February 2016

When is a red card not a red card?


A number of months ago there was an outcry within Scottish football circles circulating around a rather bizarre story whereby Alloa’s Colin Hamilton took to the papers to complain about then-Rangers’ winger Nathan Oduwa’s conduct on the pitch.

While the headline used the word ‘disrespect’, Hamilton did not, but he did strongly imply it and equally strongly suggested that Oduwa’s infamous rainbow flick had professionally belittled him on the pitch.

Today we have had a similar story breaking from Kilmarnock’s Kallum Higginbotham which somehow manages to beat its predecessor for incredulity. In it, the Killie winger has taken to a national publication in order to decry James Tavernier’s use of a photo on his social media account which proves without a shadow of a doubt the impact Higginbotham’s studs had on his leg.

Botham’s (let us shorten his name eh?) complaint is this hard evidence would alter the ‘perception’ of those who he was hoping would overturn the red card he received for administering the ‘tackle’ which caused Tavernier’s leg to become a human join-the-dots board.

Are we reading this right? The player is whining that actual hard evidence has been delivered proving the red card was completely justified? Here is Botham’s declaration in full:


“I don’t have Twitter myself but a few of the lads showed me that when I came in on Monday. It’s disappointing because in my eyes it’s attention-seeking and he’s trying to prove that I’ve touched him. Maybe if he hadn’t posted that picture we could have tried to have appealed it, but the picture shows that there was contact so it would affect the perception of the challenge. I never tried to hurt the guy, I wouldn’t do that, it’s just the way I play the game. I want to win every ball that I go for, and if you can’t go in with a little bit of force then it’s not football anymore. It seems to always be stop-start in games now for the littlest thing, I think referees need to understand that it’s men playing football, and there’s obviously going to be contact. I think it was a harsh sending off, it split views right through Scotland with some people saying it was a straight red and others saying there’s no way it was red. I’m obviously going to say that it’s not a red, but I know that I didn’t have any intent to hurt him. The ball was there to be won and I’ve won the ball, but the referee has obviously factored in the speed of the challenge and the fact my studs were showing, so he’s just doing his job, but I’m just disappointed he’s come to that decision. Maybe if it was away from Ibrox it might have been different or if it was early on in the game. But it’s happened now and I can’t let it get me down, I just need to move on.”

The lunacy of Scottish football these days screams through this quote. This is the same as a QC telling the jury to ignore incriminating evidence as it may change their opinions. Or, even worse, telling the judge it should not be admissible in the first place for risk of the same thing.

Is this what this country has come to? Damn the truth and the facts?

16 comments:

  1. The guy is a complete halfwit he did the crime he has to take the punishment. End of story you can't just think you can go about kicking lumps out of people and complain when you get pulled up for it. Like I said a complete halfwit

    ReplyDelete
  2. Totally agree the guys a halfwit!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. He says there was no intent.........Kallum clearly tries to whack James straight in the knee. The guy should be ashamed as he came on as a sub , let Lee McCulloch down, his team and fans at a point in the game when it was always going to finish 0-0. To then have this drivel plastered all over the press just shows how guilty he really was.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not convinced he let Lee McCulloch down'

      Delete
  4. I actually would tend to agree with Botham on this one. Are we going down the trial by witter road now? Besides it looks more of a scratch - much better that than a gash, a twist or a break. I do despair though at modern day footballers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you are missing the point. Higginbotham tried to say Tavernier took a dive and wasn't touched, No matter how good/bad the picture shows there was contact. A full contact and the player finds himself out for the season or worse. These guys are just trying to do a job and Higginbotham tried to hurt Tavernier but didnt quite manage it. Still a red card

      Delete
    2. Yeah red card and it was administered and was never going to be overturned - players really need to keep the head down instead of racing to twitter every time they fart.

      Delete
  5. When the victim of the tackle plays for the panto villains Rangers

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tav responded to comments on BBC Sportscene by Terry Butcher. Butcher said he thought it was soft. All Tav has done is defend himself against alegations it was soft. Well done for standing up for yourself.

    Higginbotham said he went in stud showing. You cant do that. Stud showing and foot up is a straight red. Add speed and it looks reckless.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Having slo-mo`d the assault on Tav., but for his body turning he`d have lost his Balls too as the upturned boot just missed them.H`bottom is a lucky man Intentional or not , he could have ruined both their careers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. My view is it was intentional and meant to cause Tav an injury which might take him out of a few games and miss the replay. Knees being a very complex joint which are prone to injury and can take an athlete a long time to recover from. Tav was right to post a photo clearly showing heavy contact was made. Studs only make those cuts/scratches when there is a raking motion. I also thought Tav saw it coming and pulled out a bit. If he hadnt done so the injury may well have been worse.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This clown makes the point it was at Ibrox so that's why the card was shown. Also how he despairs at modern players making it a non contact sport.Well here's a question for higgy,why wait until it's a Rangers player to vent your frustration? I'm sure it's happened plenty times before so why now. Then the obvious whining when caught bang to rites. Don't make rash challenges if you can't accept the punishment.
    We also had that other idiot burchill moaning his player at Livingston was singled out for a leg breaker after 12 seconds. That he was not shown any special exemption from criticism on the grounds he was Scottish and Oduwwa was English.This type of shite in the media is detracting from the leg breakers and career ending tackles, but who cares it's only Rangers players,ffs!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. He doesn't sound like the brightest light in the street. In fact, he comes across as a complete fuckwit.

    ReplyDelete
  11. could anyone enlighten me if celtic beat us in Scottish cup final and win spl then choose to enter champions league would we be admitted to Europa league as Scottish cup runners up.
    Just to settle an argument THANKS

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think if this was the case then, We would not be allowed to enter the Europa league as Ra Cellick & everyone associated with them would say it was a conspiracy & we should not be allowed to ply our trade anywhere, As they have a god given right to say whatever they want, Didnt you know this already? Surely you have heard Mr Lawells dictats??

      Delete
  12. As far as I'm aware yes we would unless there is some sort of injunction on us I don't know about

    ReplyDelete

By commenting on this article on Ibroxnoise.co.uk, you confirm you have read and understood the site terms, conditions, and moderation parameters (provided on the home page) of doing so.