Honest Mistakes - The Festive Catch Up

All the reviews from all the games from the 26th December to the 9th January

Due to seasonal but significant illness, the poor Yorkshire Whistler has been on the injury list for most of the festive period.

So, we have a bumper catch-up covering the matches from 26^th December 2024 to 9^th January 2025. About 64 matches. Or it feels like it.

The impact of incorrect big calls can be evaluated using the framework outlined here -> Honest Mistakes in the SPFL.

26/12/24 Celtic vs Motherwell

Incident 1

Referee: Ross Hardie

Game Minute: 11th

Score At Time: 0-0

Incident: Maswanhise goes down in the box under a challenge from Yang

Outcome: No decision.

Evidence: Provided

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Free kick to Celtic and YC to Maswanhise for diving

The Motherwell forward attempts to break into the box and appears to manufacture foot-on-foot contact with the Celtic player before throwing himself to the ground quite theatrically. Fully support the referee's call to judge this as a simulation.

Verdict: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 2

Referee: Ross Hardie

Game Minute: 28th

Score At Time: 0-0

Incident: Maeda tries to head in a loose ball near the goal

Outcome: No decision.

Evidence: Celtic 4-0 Motherwell | Maeda & Hatate Score As Celtic Extend League Lead | William Hill Premiership

At 0:54

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: No decision

Motherwell keeper makes a good reaction save but in the aftermath, the ball spins up in the air and as it drops in the 6-yard box, a Motherwell defender goes to play the ball at the same time that Maeda lunges down to make a diving header. The defender has his back to Maeda and given how low the attempted header, I don’t feel the clearance is careless as his foot is at an acceptable height for this particular passage of play. Having reviewed the footage back several times, I also can’t be certain a foul is committed here. On balance happy to support refs on field call of no foul.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 3

Referee: Ross Hardie

Game Minute: 44th

Score At Time: 0-0

Incident: Yang intercepts a cross into the box under pressure from Oxborough

Outcome: Foul by Oxborough and penalty to Celtic.

Evidence: Celtic 4-0 Motherwell | Maeda & Hatate Score As Celtic Extend League Lead | William Hill Premiership

At 2:00

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Foul and penalty to Celtic

As a cross is swung into the box, it takes a looping deflection changing the trajectory of the ball mid-flight. Yang gets to the ball just before the Motherwell keeper. The stopper only succeeds in clipping the Celtic man. Enough to knock him off balance and with no contact at all on the ball, I believe the referee is correct to award the penalty kick.

Verdict: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 4

Referee: Ross Hardie

Game Minute: 52nd

Score At Time: 1-0

Incident: Casey challenges Maeda in the box

Outcome: No decision

Evidence: Provided

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: No foul committed

As the two players sprint to get to the ball first, it appears Maeda has just won the foot race, although in the sprint off, it appears he is already slightly off balance before he feels some contact from behind and momentarily slips to the floor.

In my opinion, Casey is entitled to maintain his running trajectory and he makes to obvious attempt to challenge or tackle Maeda. The minimal contact seen here I feel is acceptable for this passage and I don’t feel a foul has been committed. Not all contact is a foul and I back the referees on field call.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

26/12/24 St Mirren vs The Rangers

Incident 1

Referee: David Dickinson

Game Minute: 29th

Score At Time: 0-0

Incident: Kiltie goes down in the area under challenge from Butland

Outcome: No decision.

Evidence: St Mirren 2-1 Rangers | Stoppage-Time Stunner Sinks Rangers | William Hill Premiership

At 0:00

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Penalty awarded to St Mirren and caution shown to Butland

As Killie chases down a long ball over the top, Butland momentarily hesitates before deciding to commit and try and punch the ball away from danger. Unfortunately, this hesitation sees Killie just make contact with the ball first, before Butland collies with the St Mirrens player's head.

For me, this is a clear foul/penalty kick decision. Given that Butland only has eyes on the ball and is expected to punch the ball away, I don’t feel this is worthy of a sending-off for challenging excessive force and the ref correctly deems this a challenge reckless in nature.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

29/12/24 Celtic vs St Johnstone

Incident 1

Referee: Matthew McDermid

Game Minute: 77th

Score At Time: 4-0

Incident: Yang goes down in the box under challenge from Raymond

Outcome: No decision.

Evidence: Provided

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: No decision

As Yang breaks into a box he goes down under the challenge of Raymond. Having watched the clip back several times it is very difficult to spot what contact is actually made by the defender. I can’t say with confidence that a foul is committed so will stick with the referee's call of no foul.

Verdict: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

29/12/24 Motherwell vs The Rangers

Incident 1

Referee: Kevin Clancy

Game Minute: 16th

Score At Time: 0-0

Incident: Stamatopoulos scores for Motherwell

Outcome: Goal to Motherwell.

Evidence: Motherwell 2-2 Rangers | Igamane Double Rescues Point For Rangers | William Hill Premiership

At 0:27

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision - goal awarded after VAR review

The Motherwell forward charges down a defensive clearance before getting through and scoring a one on one. There is a strong shout for a handball in the initial attempt to charge the clearance down.

However, upon watching the replay the goal is correct to stand in law. It does hit his right arm but his arms are not extended unnaturally and as the ball then ricochets to a teammate before then going back to Stamatopoulos. If he had directly scored following the ball on hand contact, then we would have seen the goal chalked off. But in this scenario the goal was within the laws of the game.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 2

Referee: Kevin Clancy

Game Minute: 53rd

Score At Time: 2-1

Incident: Miller fouls Cortes

Outcome: Foul to TRFC, YC to Miller

Evidence: https://x.com/ScotlandSky/status/1873423601359093823

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: foul to Rangers and Miller cautioned after VAR review

Miller appears to go over the football at full stretch trying to make a challenge.

However, he only succeeds in planting his left studs at full stretch into the inside right ankle of the Rangers. A difficult call for the referee in real time but I was surprised VAR didn’t recommend an on-field review. I suspect if the review is recommended then in most probability, the caution would have been upgraded a sending off for a tackle with excessive force.

VERDICT: INCORRECT decision. Red card expected outcome.

Expected Points Outcome: TRFC -0.51 xPts

Incident 3

Referee: Kevin Clancy

Game Minute: 56th

Score At Time: 2-1

Incident: Butland palms a corner into the net under pressure from Watt

Outcome: Foul to TRFC

Evidence: Motherwell vs Rangers: Were Rangers when Motherwell's goal disallowed when a foul was given against Jack Butland? | Football News | Sky Sports

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Foul to Rangers following VAR review.

I feel Butland is quite lucky here as the referee feels there sufficient unfair contact which he feels impedes the keeper's ability to play the ball.

I’m not convinced Watt actually does anything wrong and can’t see a foul committed. I feel the wrong call is here.

VERDICT: INCORRECT decision. The goal should have stood.

Expected Points Outcome: TRFC 0.4 xPts

02/01/25 The Rangers vs Celtic

Incident 1

Referee: Don Robertson

Game Minute: 31st

Score At Time: 1-0

Incident: Johnston challenges Hagi

Outcome: Foul to TRFC

Evidence: Provided

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Foul awarded to Rangers

Both players jump to head the ball and Johnston does appear to lead with his forearm slightly. In agree this is a foul but nothing more than that. There is no intent or excessive force on show as Johnston perhaps puts his arm forward in a slightly defensive gesture.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 2

Referee: Don Robertson

Game Minute: 45th

Score At Time: 1-0

Incident: Jefte blocks Johnston

Outcome: Foul to Celtic; YC to Jefte

Evidence: Provided

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: foul to Celtic, caution to Jefte

Both players chase the ball down near the corner flag. In the challenge, Jefte swings his body around to make a clearance and in doing so, sees his left arm swing around and unknowingly catch Johnston in the face.

For me, there is no intent or any real element of excessive force so I don’t see a red card offence here. Reckless in nature and correctly punishable with a caution.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

05/01/25 Hibernian vs The Rangers

Incident 1

Referee: John Beaton

Game Minute: 31st

Score At Time: 0-2

Incident: Diomande challenges Boyle

Outcome: Foul to Hibs; YC to Diomande

Evidence: https://x.com/ScotlandSky/status/1875884548589855010

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: foul to Hibs and caution to Diomande

Diomande tries to get a block on the ball after a heavy previous touch. Unfortunately he only manages to see his left foot studs catch Boyle.

For me, the reason this doesn’t quite hit excessive force/ sending off criteria is the lack of force in the challenge. Yes studs do catch Boyle's ankle, but the Rangers is not at full stretch and I feel he’s pulling back slightly as the contact is made.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 2

Referee: John Beaton

Game Minute: 60th

Score At Time: 1-2

Incident: Hagi challenges Campbell in the box

Outcome: Penalty to Hibs

Evidence: Hibernian 3-3 Rangers | Hibs Comeback Despite Igamane Hat-Trick | William Hill Premiership

At 2:27

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: Penalty to Hibs

As Campbell and Hagi race into the box, the Hibs man looks to favourite to get to the ball and possibly a shot off. Hagi does make a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball but appears to make contact on Campbell's leg and no contact with the ball.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Incident 3

Referee: John Beaton

Game Minute: 83rd

Score At Time: 2-3

Incident: Bushiri scores from a corner

Outcome: Goal to Hibs

Evidence: Hibernian 3-3 Rangers | Hibs Comeback Despite Igamane Hat-Trick | William Hill Premiership

At 4:22

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: goal warded

Despite a congested box as a corner is swung, I see no fouls committed in this passage and am satisfied with the decision to award the goal.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

09/01/25 Dundee vs The Rangers

Incident 1

Referee: Callum Scott

Game Minute: 33rd

Score At Time: 1-0

Incident: Nsiala challenges Murray in the box

Outcome: No decision

Evidence: Dundee 1-1 Rangers | Rangers Held At Dundee To Fall Further Adrift Of Top | William Hill Premiership

At 1:17

Yorkshire Whistler Verdict:

Initial on-field decision: No decision

After a ball spins up in the air, Murray looks to anticipate contact from Nsiala. I suspect he is trying to buy a cheap penalty decision and doesn’t appear to make any attempt to play the ball on. He instead puts the brakes and although there is minimal contact from Nsiala who is trying more proactively to clear the ball.

What I feel is acceptable contact in this particular situation and so I’m comfortable with the referees on field call.

VERDICT: CORRECT decision not to ward a foul or penalty kick

Expected Points Outcome: No impact

Summary

My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.

Another mainly stellar set of performances from the referees apart from Kevin Clancy and team at Fir Park for the Motherwell versus The Rangers match.

It is almost as if giving people what they want in terms of transparency and accountability results in better outcomes for all.

And it almost seems as if holding referees publicly accountable for bad calls is influencing behaviour and generating better outcomes for all.

Well, nearly all.

This leaves the overall position thus:

Celtic have 0.46 MORE expected points, and The Rangers have 0.35 MORE due to the impact of Honest Mistakes. The Rangers have 0.11 less xPts than the runaway leaders.

Celtic led by 15 points after 21 matches.