Honest Mistakes - Week 23
Another week, another terabyte of digital space used debating VAR.
This week, Celtic travelled to Tangerine Tannadice whilst Micky Beale’s plucky challengers hosted the Saints of Perth.
The impact of a call being incorrect can be evaluated using the framework outlined here -> Honest Mistakes in the SPFL.
28/01/23 The Rangers vs St Johnstone
Incident 1
Referee Willie Collum Game Minute 15th Score At Time 0-0
Incident Ball hits Brown in the Saints box Outcome Penalty to TRFC Evidence (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 1:00
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Ball hits Brown inside the penalty area.
Initial on field decision: Penalty awarded to Rangers for a handball offence
Rangers swing a cross into the box and Brown, along with two other players all jump together and compete for the ball. At initial, full speed, the St Johnstone’s player’s right arm does seem to be extended out wide and there seems to be little defensive protest when the penalty is awarded.
Upon watching the slow-motion replay, it appears the ball ricochets off the Rangers player first before striking the out stretched arm of the St Johnstone player. On reflection, I can see why this penalty was awarded. Even though Brown is competing for the ball and can’t react to the first contact, his arm is outstretched when it doesn’t need to be. He is making his body shape unnaturally bigger which I don’t feel is justifiable relating to his specific movement here – so will agree with the on-field decision.
Verdict: Correct decision to award the penalty for hand ball.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 2
Referee Willie Collum Game Minute 36th Score At Time 1-0
Incident Clark challenges Jack Outcome Foul to TRFC; Red Card to Clark on VAR review Evidence (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 2:00
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Clark clashes with Jack
Initial on field decision: Foul awarded to Rangers. Clark is sent off after VAR review (initially no foul awarded).
Clark loses a first contest and then is off balance as he stretches for a 2nd tackle with Jack. Initially I thought the tackle was high and the replay doesn’t make it any better viewing. He is slightly off balance and leaning back as he stretches in. In doing so, his studs are high and appear to catch Jack around the shin area. Although I do not feel there is much intent here, I would have to say the height of the studs showing here does merit the sending off – for a tackle that is excessive/endangers a player’s safety
Verdict: Correct decision to award the red card for an excessive force/endangering player safety tackle
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 3
Referee Willie Collum Game Minute 37th Score At Time 1-0
Incident Jack challenges Montgomery Outcome Foul to St Johnstone; YC to Jack; VAR review requested but on field decision stood Evidence (9) Rangers 2-0 St. Johnstone | Tavernier and Kamara Seal Win for The Gers | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 2:34
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Jack fouls Montgomery
Initial on field decision: Foul to St Johnstone. Yellow card shown to Jack (VAR ask referee to review for a possible red card offence – referee declines to change his initial decision)
Interesting decision to review here, as we see a referee here, stick to his guns about what he felt/saw on the field of play at the time.
When I watched the challenge in real time I wasn’t sure if Jack gets the ball cleanly or catches the player so knew it wasn’t a clear cut decision. From the referee’s viewpoint he sees Jack slide in low to attempt to win the ball, but he cannot clearly what contact is actually made, in my opinion. Certainly, the players reaction makes everyone think something serious could have happened here.
Slow motion does make this challenge appear worse than I initially suspected. Even though Jack is sliding in low, he does fully extend his challenging leg which cause his studs to be showing in a level/exposed motion.
I can see why the referee only gave a yellow card initially, but feel VAR was right to ask him to review this decision and on the basis of the slow motion showing the studs catch Montgomery on the inside ankle, the referee should have produced a red card for a tackle with excessive force/endangering player safety.
Not a terrible initial decision, but should have taken the safe option here after reviewing, rather than stick with his gut decision.
Verdict: Incorrect decision. Red card expected outcome, after review.
Expected Points
Outcome
+0.86 xPts TRFC
29/01/23 Dundee United vs Celtic
Incident 1
Referee Don Robertson Game Minute 44th Score At Time 0-0
Incident Furuhashi goes down in the box Outcome No decision Evidence https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHVqKbpT_k8&list=PLAmNSUlUap5sY5W8Szk8h5tDCBYlrB2tW&index=118
At 2:11
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Furuhashi goes over in the box
Initial on field decision: No foul committed
Balls break loose in box and Furuhashi feels contact and drops to ground. On review, there is a very slight tug on the front of his shirt, but nowhere near enough contact to merit the way the player then falls to the ground. I don’t feel his movement is being impeded by the momentary contact and am satisfied that no foul was awarded here.
Verdict: Correct decision to not award a penalty kick.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 2
Referee Don Robertson Game Minute 45th Score At Time 0-0
Incident Furuhashi, McMann and Birighitti challenge for the ball in the box Outcome Penalty to Celtic rescinded on VAR review Evidence (9) Dundee United 0-2 Celtic | Jota and Mooy Keep Celtic 9 points clear | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 2:34
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Furuhashi goes down in the box under a challenge from Brighitti
Initial on field decision: Penalty that was first awarded to Celtic, is over turned after VAR review
Ball goes into the air and the Dundee Utd keeper & Celtic forward both attempt to win the ball first. As expected, the keeper comes for the ball with his fist to punch the ball away. Strikers must expect to get clattered every now and again in this kind of situation and Furuhashi shows his bravery in challenging with the keeper.
After review I will side with the keeper as his eyes are only on the ball and he does clearly contact and deflect the ball first and then it his downward momentum that collides with Furuhashi afterwards. A sore one for the Celtic player to take, but the correct decision arrived at.
Verdict: Correct decision to overturn the initial penalty award. No foul committed.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 3
Referee Don Robertson Game Minute 51st Score At Time 0-0
Incident Ball hits Freeman in the box Outcome Penalty to Celtic upon VAR review Evidence (9) Dundee United 0-2 Celtic | Jota and Mooy Keep Celtic 9 points clear | cinch Premiership - YouTube
At 4:23
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Ball hits Freeman in the box
Initial on field decision: Penalty awarded to Celtic after VAR review. Freeman was already on a yellow card.
Jota flicks the ball over Freeman who at the last second raises his arm slightly and this blocks the ball. Correct decision to award the hand ball offence as the arm movement is totally unexpected or needed based on his body shape/position at this time. I am also comfortable that a 2nd yellow card is not awarded here, on the basis that he has not denied what I would consider a ‘promising attack’. For me, the Celtic player who might have received the ball was running away from goal and was closely marked. The penalty decision was sanction enough.
Verdict: Correct decision to award the penalty kick for hand ball.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 4
Referee Don Robertson Game Minute 69th Score At Time 0-2
Incident McMann challenges Abada Outcome No decision upon VAR review Evidence https://twitter.com/Zeshankenzo/status/1620030930961453056?s=20&t=_7_VS3m46HCZq2PRiIcBfg
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict With only one slowed down clip it’s difficult to be certain with this one. I suspect at full speed this looked fairly innocuous as the defender comes away with the ball.
However, when slowed down it looks like the Dundee Utd defender misjudges the speed of the ball and then over commits to the recovery tackle. In doing so he makes contact with the ball with his outstretched foot and then his foot goes over the ball and looks to catch the Celtic player.
Doesn’t look great, but I suspect the reason this wasn’t picked up as a potential red card clear & obvious incident to review, is based on the defender looking the favourite to win the ball and the force/momentum of the challenge being relatively minor/ not excessive. He comes away with the ball but his studs do glance off the Celtic player.
Overall, I’m satisfied this was not a red card offence, but would have been interesting if referee had been asked to review this incident.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.
Remember, he is reviewing each and every incident on its own merits, independently. He is not concerned with what happened in any other game or how such and such was treated last week.
In terms of impact on the expected points picture, another “helpful” week for The Rangers.
Based on the in-match game state when the decisions were made (or not made), The Rangers have 2.41 MORE expected points due to the cumulative impact of Honest Mistakes and Celtic 4.12 LESS.
A swing of 6.53 xPts.
Celtic lead by nine points after 23 matches.