SFA controversy as Rangers wait on verdict

1
GLASGOW, SCOTLAND - NOVEMBER 26: Kemar Roofe of Rangers celebrates after he scores his team's second goal during the UEFA Europa League Group D stage match between Rangers and SL Benfica at Ibrox Stadium on November 26, 2020 in Glasgow, Scotland. Sporting stadiums around the UK remain under strict restrictions due to the Coronavirus Pandemic as Government social distancing laws prohibit fans inside venues resulting in games being played behind closed doors. (Photo by Ian MacNicol/Getty Images)

We must admit, we’ll be very interested to see what the outcome of Kemar Roofe’s retrospective hearing is.

We have zero defence of the tackle – he lost control and was reckless, and it could have been red. Roofe is in no way malicious and it certainly wasn’t deliberate, but it was poor and careless and an early bath would have been justified.

However, after Scott Brown got off Scott-Brown-Free with his own citation, we’ll be fascinated to see if the pressure Steven Gerrard has put on the disciplinary system to be ‘consistent’ has told and Roofe gets away with this.

It doesn’t matter if either of them ‘should’ have been sent off, or should get a two match ban or whatever, what matters is even-handed treatment among clubs in this situation.

Alfredo Morelos, of course, got a three-match ban, and if Roofe gets the same punishment despite Brown getting away with his, the agenda against Rangers will be patently apparent.

We’ll get on with the ‘trial by TV’ angle in another entry, albeit we’ve covered it before, but while Roofe could have no complaints with a ban or a red card, because ‘Broony’ got away with it clean for his own misdemeanour, the consistency has to be there and Roofe must be exonerated.

If not, if Roofe gets a ban on top of Morelos, and Brown got away for free, it’ll be the 6th time this has happened with Stevie as manager, and still Celtic have had none.

And that will be telling…

1 COMMENT

  1. It appears to be the view of many that Roofe’s actions were reckless and deserved a red card. However, I wonder if they would have the same view had Murray Davidson not been injured and have to leave the field. I say this because I’ve seen footage that shows Roofe connecting with Davidsons left ankle followed by the player getting treatment to his right leg. He was then able to continue playing. Shortly after Davidson clearly hurts his ankle trying to stop a Ryan Kent attack and hobbles away in pain before being replaced. My point is that if Roofe didn’t hurt Davidson then a yellow card was more than sufficient for a movement (it wasn’t even a tackle) designed to protect the ball without malice.

Comments are closed.