Mark Warburton and Rangers bench played part in Scott McDonald's red card

[ian1964 10,761]

Utter p!sh from McFadden.

 

McDonald's tackle could easily have broken Miller's ankle or leg and was arguably worse than MOH's.

 

Of course we must not forget the whole Motherwell team ran at the ref and surrounded him to make sure MOH was getting sent off!, it was a red card for me, as was theirs.

[craig 5,199]

says James McFadden.

 

The Australian striker, who is now free to line up against Ross County tonight, was shown a red card for a tackle on Kenny Miller in the 2-0 defeat.

 

Firstly, sorry Ian for making these look like quotes from you

 

James McFadden last night accused Mark Warburton and his staff of getting Scott McDonald sent off as Motherwell launched an appeal against his dismissal.

 

You mean the same way that more than half your team crowded the ref in 4 minutes to ensure that O Halloran was sent off.... McFadden ya diddy, you are a hypocrite. Or the way half your team then also crowded the ref to try and get Kiernan sent off too...

 

The Australian striker, who is now free to line up against Ross County tonight, was shown a red card for a tackle on Kenny Miller in Rangers’ 2-0 weekend win.

 

And sent off he should be.

 

Rangers’ Michael O’Halloran had been sent off for a studs-up challenge on Carl McHugh four minutes in before team-mate Rob Kiernan escaped with a yellow for a dangerous lunge on Motherwell’s Steven Hammell.

 

However, it was 10 v 10 in 27 minutes as whistler Willie Collum flashed a straight red to McDonald for a foul in front of the Fir Park technical area with the game still goalless.

 

Lies from the Record. It wasn't studs up at all and, if you look at it closely, he tries to withdraw when he realizes he is very high. Was still a red card but to label it "studs up" is more than just a little disingenuous - it is a blatant lie. Do the Record even know what "studs up" actually means ?

 

And Well assistant manager McFadden believes the reaction of Rangers boss Warburton and his staff influenced the official. McDonald could still face a two-game ban if the SFA upholds Collum’s call and McFadden said: “It costs £1000 for an unsuccessful appeal so we’re not doing this lightly.

 

So McFadden thinks that refs, rather than follow the rules, will be swayed by the benches of a team.... I guess after years of following Celtic you would expect that - your only surprise McFadden is that it went against your team and for Rangers.... That in itself is grounds for a disrepute charge, suggesting that the referee was influenced. Wont wait my breath on the Compliance Officer citing you.

 

As for the cost of the appeal.... if McDonald is so certain that he didn't deserve to be sent off then he should be confident in winning the appeal - so have him pay it personally - I am sure he has the funds to do so - so if he is so confident that he didn't deserve a red let him put his money where his foot was.....

 

“We believe Scott was hard done to and there were worse tackles in the game which went unpunished. “We need him and we want him to play but we’re not doing this just so he’s available for the Ross County game.

 

Tackles often go unpunished in the game. Without debating ad nauseum about my belief that this tackle and Kiernan's were very similar and my agreeing that Kiernan COULD have seen red - that doesn't mean that this tackle should have went unpunished. In football they really ARE mutually exclusive. McDonald's tackle needs to be looked at on its own merits - and did it deserve a red card ? Absolutely, it was studs up - no debate. As for Kiernan's - and I suspect, McFadden, that you are attempting to have the Compliance Officer look at Kiernan's tackle - you should be onto plums there as the ref saw it and booked him, no further action can be taken.

 

“The appeal can’t be heard until Thursday but this isn’t gamesmanship on our part – we believe he’s innocent.“People say the referee might have been evening things up because he’d already sent one of their players off but the reaction from their dugout and the way it looked probably didn’t help Scott. It’s hard to say but I don’t want to get into a battle with referees.

 

Innocent... innocent of what ? Innocent of a lunge which could have ended a player's career - yes, I am sure that if you had been the recipient you would be saying "hey ref, Scott's a nice guy, he didn't just lunge at me, studs up and he doesn't deserve a red". Funny how you were a pro and had you received such a tackle you would have been howling for a red - yet as it is your player you defend the indefensible. HYPOCRITE

 

I felt at the time the decision was harsh.“Scott has taken a bad touch and then he has tried to clear the ball rather than go through it and take the man.

 

O' Halloran tried to clear the ball too. Doesn't mean he shouldn't have seen red. "Tried to clear the ball" is absolutely no defense whatsoever when the studs are up. If this is your defense then I suggest you save your 1,000 GBP for a rainy day. Have you even read the rulebook ??? It doesn't matter these days if you try to clear the ball - if you tackle someone studs up, even if you win the ball but clear out the man, you run the risk of a red (whether I agree with that or not is for a different debate.... I was brought up when if you won the ball it made little difference if you also hit the player - my playing days it was ball first = clean challenge".

 

“He’s not that sort of player but that’s not what I’m saying – he was just unfortunate the contact was so close.“He hasn’t lunged from a distance because the ball was right in front of him and so we have grounds for an appeal.”

 

He's not that sort of player ? As Ian has posted only a couple of videos which dispel your myth - particularly the one in the Dundee Utd game where he slides in, legitimately, and then raises his leg, deliberately, to the player's knee. Yes, he isn't that type of player - you do realize we live in the technological age right McFadden - an age when your lies can easily be disproved.

 

"He was unfortunate the contact was so close" - again, if this is your defense then save your money, would be a complete waste. You are right though, he didn't lunge from a distance - he lunged from close, which is still a red card you fool. Lunge, Check. Studs up, Check. Contact with player, Check (even though not actually needed these days). Red Card, Check. Yes, I think you have grounds for appeal too. Grounds to appeal to the NHS to have your sanity checked.

[der Berliner 3,815]

At the end of the day, I would still not be surprised if McDonald gets away with this, thus proving McFadden had - despite his and the DR's obvious lies - a point and "was right". And if someone asks about O'Halloran, the snide remark would be: "we, you could have appealed that card too, you know?".

 

As for McDonald, thanks for Helicopter Sunday. The sooner you head home to Down Under, the better.

[compo 7,229]

Get real it was an ankle breaker

[MacK1950 2,399]

More than that it was a career ender even for someone as fit as Miller.

[scotjo 19]

Some of the Pish that has been directed at us since we came back is amazing, the ref didn't need to be influenced, we could all see he went for the card right away. More that wee runt's tactics on the bench, not ours.

[Bearman 9]

As 26th of Foot pointed out...it's a shocking decision for BBC Scotland to invite McDonald on to their programmes and give him a platform after what he did.

 

BBC Scotland are a disgrace!

[craig 5,199]

As 26th of Foot pointed out...it's a shocking decision for BBC Scotland to invite McDonald on to their programmes and give him a platform after what he did.

 

BBC Scotland are a disgrace!

 

Was he not already booked for the program pre-game ?

 

Either way, I don't think current pro's in the game in Scotland should be in a show about Scottish football - it is a clear conflict of interest

[Tannochsidebear 2,429]

He was pre-booked. Should be an easy disrepute charge for the compliance officer, who we know is one of the few to watch this amateur production.

 

Of course that is assuming he wasn't nodding in agreement as he usually does with the opinions of whatever tims are on the show.

[Bearman 9]

Was he not already booked for the program pre-game ?

 

Either way, I don't think current pro's in the game in Scotland should be in a show about Scottish football - it is a clear conflict of interest

 

Ah right. I didn't consider he may have been pre-booked?

 

Bit of a disappointment for the BBC then...were looking forward obviously to McDonald coming on after scoring the winner against Rangers but instead got the guy who got red carded up against 10 man Rangers!

 

They should have pre-booked Miller...haha - because of their stance against Rangers they can't do that!

 

No way should Rangers ever allow McLaughlin back into Ibrox Stadium as a 'reporter', the guy is a bitter hater of all things Rangers, meanwhile the broadcasting station gets McDonald instead of Miller. Cool.