Match Thread [AET] Celtic 3 - 3 Rangers (Bajrami 41'; Diomande 75'; Danilo 89')

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,806]

44 minutes ago, RANGERRAB said:

The referee( Beaton) could have asked for a VAR review of the incident after he’d blown his whistle & awarded a foul. 
Unless we get the audio we will not know what actually happened between the match referee & the var officials 

The referee should not have to ask. VAR are checking everything in the game. It's not like they are sitting in a wee room with their feet up drinking coffee and are waiting on a buzz from the ref. A foul that close to the line should be heavily scrutinised. This bloody stinks.

Edited Monday at 20:13 by BlackSocksRedTops

[RANGERRAB 3,731]

8 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

The referee should not have to ask. VAR are checking everything in the game. It's not like they are sitting in a wee room with their feet up drinking coffee and are waiting on a buzz from the ref. A foul that close to the line should be heavily scrutinised. This bloody stinks.

All I said he was he’s entitled to ask. I’m told  he did ask but that would need to be confirmed

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,806]

34 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

I haven’t seen that in motion but from the still it looks the right thing to do. Cerny has a clear run at goal. The other two attackers are behind. While one of them also has a good run at goal it takes him nearer the defender. The second attacker is to the right and he would still have to get past the defender. 

It was poor but he's a young player with very little experience. Cerny is the better option obviously but I think Igamane is caught in 2 minds. 

[BlackSocksRedTops 3,806]

1 minute ago, RANGERRAB said:

All I said he was he’s entitled to ask. I’m told  he did ask but that would need to be confirmed

Of course he is but he is refereeing a game that is going 100 miles an hour. VAR was created to step and help refs. Like they did last season when the disallowed Dessers goal for the previous foul. The onus is on VAR here.

[Blue Moon 1,344]

26 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

The referee should not have to ask. VAR are checking everything in the game. It's not like they are sitting in a wee room with their feet up drinking coffee and are waiting on a buzz from the ref. A foul that close to the line should be heavily scrutinised. This bloody stinks.

You are absolutely right.  There is a good post from a Rangers FB site detailing the VAR mistakes over the last couple of years.  If they are mistakes why do they never go against them when we are playing them?  Cheating on the park is one thing but cheating with VAR is on a different level entirely because everyone can see it and they've got the system so stitched up they don't give a monkeys.

Edited Monday at 20:39 by Blue Moon

[der Berliner 3,798]

3 hours ago, CammyF said:

If we are reverting to 3 at the back, we need to sign 1, if not 2 centre backs. Balogun is fine but nearing end of his career, Propper has improved over last 2 games but I'm unconvinced and Souttar is fine when fit (we don't know how long he'll be missing).

 

Ridvan shouldn't be anywhere near our starting 11 and Cerny or Matondo aren't "wing-backs".

 

But agree that we should at least attempt to play 2 strikers in some domestic games.

 

 

In games against the sides mentioned, and most others of the low-defence teams too, we play essentially two centre-halfs at the back, two DMs who cover the territory ahead of them or the space vacated by the "wingbacks", and said wingbacks. De facto, we play with 6 defensive-minded players. People may argue that our fullbacks shall act like wingers/wingbacks, and our DMs should venture forward too. These players actually do exactly that, but in essence, in such games, we still have 2 defenders "attacking" on the wings (with a varying degree of success), and two defensive-minded midfielders trying to be positive. Barron and Diomande are more positive than most we had before, but how often do they still pass rather than shoot.

 

Be that as it may, the opposition in such games rarely threatens our backline. So why should  we keep essentially 6 defence-minded players? When we effectively need just 3, maybe 4? Hence, 3-4-3, or 3-5-2. And if I ask a fullback to play wingback (and some can do that better than others), why shouldn't I ask a winger to do some fullback work? Wright did that, McCausland does that, Cerny to a degree ... I wouldn't be so sure with Matondo and Cortes.

Hence, IMHO, against Dundee and Co. play a centre-half through the middle (Souttar), and Sterling (who can play right-back) and Balogun (left- or right-back)  and that's that for defensive work. Put Barron/Raskin in front of them with the task of a cleaner/destroyer, who can cover flanks too. Do we need any more "defenders" in the Premiership?

Ask the two wingers on either side to do a bit of defensive work in case of need (and IMHO Jefte and Ridvan can both play winger instead of fullback too), but let them lose at the opposition in their half. We'd have 6 instead of 3 or 4 really attack-minded players. In this day and age, players are asked to be versatile and most of our chaps can do that. Sterling can play centre-half, right-defender up to right-winger. So he might even decide to go on the attack as well, if space opens up. It's no rocket science, but we try to play this wedge style that simply turns blunt in the Premiership time and again. You see that, I see that. People don't even try to think around/about the system, but rather have a go at players shoehorned into it. 

 

[compo 7,184]

It’s going to be a long season 

[CammyF 8,370]

6 minutes ago, compo said:

It’s going to be a long season 

It sure is, be interesting to see what the attendance is on Saturday. Not the "published" attendance but the actual "bums on seats" attendance. 

 

Think Sunday will have knocked the stuffing out of a lot of fans.

[MacK1950 2,398]

A novelty----Saturday 3.00 kick-off I'll be there.

[RANGERRAB 3,731]

2 hours ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

Of course he is but he is refereeing a game that is going 100 miles an hour. VAR was created to step and help refs. Like they did last season when the disallowed Dessers goal for the previous foul. The onus is on VAR here.

That Dessers goal should have stood. The referee clearly saw the foul( he was just yards away) but didn’t blow his whistle. Isn’t var for incidents missed? This one wasn’t missed.

Play continued and into another phase of play and after 3 Celtic players touching the ball including the goalkeeper, Dessers scored.

By disallowing the goal it was effectively re-refereeing the game.