mikey devlin

[Lencarl]

The club has this morning received confirmation it has been unsuccessful with the appeal for the red card shown to Michael Devlin last weekend.

We are extremely disappointed with this outcome, which will now mean Michael misses our important league match against St Johnstone after the international break.

The club will be making no further comment.

 

Not unexpected, but fans across the country are saying it is unacceptable that the club will be making no further comment. Dignified silence no longer works in Scottish football.

[Jute]

With Devlin suspended and Reynolds and Hoban out with long term injuries it will mean we will be down to Ball and Considine as centre halfs against St if McKenna is not ready to return.

[ayrshire_don74]

maybe need a lunatic club group like club 1872 to threaten and intimidate officials and the like

[RicoS321]

Not unexpected, but fans across the country are saying it is unacceptable that the club will be making no further comment. Dignified silence no longer works in Scottish football.

 

Is there any evidence that the opposite works?

 

Will be interesting to see what the club put forward as reasoning (link below to SFA page where it'll appear in the next week). The visible tug from Brophy surely undermines the decision? There can be no argument that it affected Devlin and thus he brought down Brophy. The only argument could be that the player still knowingly brought down the player who was through on goal (he wasn't) and so regardless of previous contact he still made a red card challenge. However, there is precedent in the Morelos case that would confirm that previous incident can be used in defence of the accused:

 

That  was  given  credence  by  the  video  footage  which  clearly  shows  both incidents before the particular action of the Player and the outcome of it. The video footage shows an earlier barge on the Player that the Tribunal believe, had it been noted it would have been acted upon

 

I don't see any circumstance in which Devlin's red should not have been rescinded if we put forward the argument that Brophy pulled him back first (accepting that the ref didn't/couldn't have seen this).

 

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/football-governance/disciplinary/disciplinary-updates/

[Lencarl]

Is there any evidence that the opposite works?

 

 

The Rangers and their playing staff give their opinions at every available opportunity on every decision that goes against them.

 

This seems to work as most are overturned and it also keeps their fans onside.

 

There is no football club in the World that would get off with the statements that they make on a regular basis.

 

Response from the SFA/SPFL...…..silence.

 

All what Scottish fans want  is a level playing field.

 

 

 

 

[RicoS321]

 

The Rangers and their playing staff give their opinions at every available opportunity on every decision that goes against them.

 

This seems to work as most are overturned and it also keeps their fans onside.

 

There is no football club in the World that would get off with the statements that they make on a regular basis.

 

Response from the SFA/SPFL...…..silence.

 

All what Scottish fans want  is a level playing field.

 

I don't think that's evidence.

[Lencarl]

I don't think that's evidence.

 

In your honest opinion do you believe that certain clubs in the SPFL are treaded more fairly than others by the SFA/SPFL.

[RicoS321]

In your honest opinion do you believe that certain clubs in the SPFL are treaded more fairly than others by the SFA/SPFL.

 

In terms of decisions by refs and the overturning of those decisions? No, I think it's fairly balanced.

 

I think the entire setup of Scottish fitba is designed to the betterment of two teams, but I don't think that the refs/panels are against us. Nor do I think they are pro anyone shouting loudest.

[Lencarl]

In terms of decisions by refs and the overturning of those decisions? No, I think it's fairly balanced.

 

I think the entire setup of Scottish fitba is designed to the betterment of two teams, but I don't think that the refs/panels are against us. Nor do I think they are pro anyone shouting loudest.

 

All about opinions.

 

There is now way to prove that the SFA/SPFL and Ref Panels are biased towards the Glasgow Two but most Scottisn football fans believe ( like myself ) that important decisions always seem to go their way. Is it coincidence?..... I think not.

 

 

 

[Ten Caat]

With Devlin suspended and Reynolds and Hoban out with long term injuries it will mean we will be down to Ball and Considine as centre halfs against St if McKenna is not ready to return.

 

Or we could sign a free agent.......Steven Caulker is available.......and we instantly are covered for when McKenna leaves in January

[Orion]

 

The Rangers and their playing staff give their opinions at every available opportunity on every decision that goes against them.

 

This seems to work as most are overturned and it also keeps their fans onside.

 

There is no football club in the World that would get off with the statements that they make on a regular basis.

 

Response from the SFA/SPFL...…..silence.

 

All what Scottish fans want  is a level playing field.

 

This 100%.

[A llad insane]

Been going to Pittodrie for 50 years now, but really now starting to think 'what's the point', the game is full of corruption.  Was always obvious the beaks favoured 2 teams, but this has moved onto another level.

[Elgindon]

 

Theres always the option of resigning from the league and starting a new league,like we should have done at the time of Doncaster-gate IMO. If we can get 20'000 at Easter road for an also ran battle last saturday,what would we get if it was a league title challenge....(Aye ok,20'000 because it only holds 20'000  )

   

  Scottish fitba was dying a death pre 2012,and will do again,assuming the scum continue to progress.

[RicoS321]

Theres always the option of resigning from the league and starting a new league,like we should have done at the time of Doncaster-gate IMO. If we can get 20'000 at Easter road for an also ran battle last saturday,what would we get if it was a league title challenge....(Aye ok,20'000 because it only holds 20'000  )

   

  Scottish fitba was dying a death pre 2012,and will do again,assuming the scum continue to progress.

 

Exactly this. We had ample opportunity to change that. That voting decision by Milne will go down as the worst in the history of the club and possibly Scottish fitba. Lickspittlery at its finest.

[Barcosente]

I think too much focus on this incident has been placed on the tug on Devlin's shirt before Devlin tugged Brophie's.

 

As I see it, the red was given because the ref deemed Devlin to be the last man.

The concern that the decision was upheld by the comittee, based on this part of the incident alone rather than the "was Shay Logan actually the last man" part is worrying.

The fact that we can see Logan in the picture and as a result could actually be deemed to be the last man, casts the decision of the ever incompetent egotistical Thomson into a grey area and would then put doubt on the decision to award a red card to Devlin.

 

The committee in my opinion failed to agree on the main issue, and given that a "3 for 3" agreement is required to overturn the referees verdict, it may be that we are in for a long hard season, because there will be plenty more to come.

 

For what it's worth, I do think that match officials have a hard job these days and at times are not all singing off the same hymn sheet due to all not being fully conversant with the letter of the law...........which is a sad indictment of the Scottish game and our lawyers and bankers officials.

 

Every club asks for a fair crack of the whip, but inconsistent decision making makes that unlikely.

 

As for the setup favouring the 2 favourite Glasgow clubs, it has always been thus.

No one can tell me that a referee or linesman ( I'm old school), isn't going to be influenced by 40 or 50 thousand Weegies ( or Irish if you prefer) calling for a penalty.

 

in my opinion, the beeks at the SFA are similarly influenced by the way too powerful voices at those two clubs, running scared of making decisions against them.

The rest of the other clubs are easy targets therefore.

 

We were warned by one of the esteemed members of the buyable SFA board that "football armageddon is coming".

This is just the start folks and the two colours that will be left standing are green and blue unless we do something now.

 

 

[RicoS321]

I think too much focus on this incident has been placed on the tug on Devlin's shirt before Devlin tugged Brophie's.

 

As I see it, the red was given because the ref deemed Devlin to be the last man.

The concern that the decision was upheld by the comittee, based on this part of the incident alone rather than the "was Shay Logan actually the last man" part is worrying.

The fact that we can see Logan in the picture and as a result could actually be deemed to be the last man, casts the decision of the ever incompetent egotistical Thomson into a grey area and would then put doubt on the decision to award a red card to Devlin.

 

I'm 100% certain that the club would have put forward both reasons in their argument. For me, the Brophy tug is more pertinent because in order for Devlin to be the last man Brophy required to foul him first. As per the quote above from the Morelos case: "The video footage shows an earlier barge on the Player that the Tribunal believe, had it been noted it would have been acted upon" it suggests that had McKenna been pulled up for the barge then the kick wouldn't even have happened. That, for me, sets the precedent here and we can simply take the panel's exact phrase and substitute Devlin: "The video footage shows an earlier tug on the Player that the Tribunal believe, had it been noted it would have been acted upon". That's how the club should have appealed the decision - using the panel's own wording to present Devlin's case, thus giving them little room for argument. 

 

I do think that match officials have a hard job these days and at times are not all singing off the same hymn sheet due to all not being fully conversant with the letter of the law...........which is a sad indictment of the Scottish game and our lawyers and bankers officials.

 

I don't think that's entirely true (or at least I haven't seen evidence of it). I'm pretty certain the refs know the rules, they're just not interpreting them consistently, which isn't unusual. The punditry, media and ex-refs have not helped by not knowing the rules and I think is exacerbated by not allowing refs to explain decisions.

 

As for the setup favouring the 2 favourite Glasgow clubs, it has always been thus.

No one can tell me that a referee or linesman ( I'm old school), isn't going to be influenced by 40 or 50 thousand Weegies ( or Irish if you prefer) calling for a penalty.

 

in my opinion, the beeks at the SFA are similarly influenced by the way too powerful voices at those two clubs, running scared of making decisions against them.

The rest of the other clubs are easy targets therefore.

 

We were warned by one of the esteemed members of the buyable SFA board that "football armageddon is coming".

This is just the start folks and the two colours that will be left standing are green and blue unless we do something now.

 

Agree about refs and crowd influence but do you think that folks on panels give a shite about the powerful voices? A bit like civil servants giving a shite about what politicians think I'd have thought? Totally agree with your conclusion though. I think we've locked ourselves in though.

[Barcosente]

I'm also sure that the club would have put forward the double argument of Brophie tugging back Devlin before the latter incident.

The argument as being the same as the Morellos case is the same, but I don't think that the 2 panels would even have thought of the relevance, or even have coralted the two, such is the inconsistency alive and well within the decision makers of Scottish football.

I believe that they will have looked at this incident in isolation, rather than have looked at precedents such is the shortsightedness of this particular panel.

This is not a legal decision, but one of a panel who are anonymous and beyond reproach, unlike a jury.

 

As I see it, the match officials do not......using a well versed song from the stands "know what they are doing", which would be entirely down to there being a massive grey area of interpretation of the always changing rules of the game. In short they do not all know the laws of the game and therefore the ongoing repercussions that befall clubs during that match of thereafter.

 

While clubs might see themselves as " locked in" I don't think that supporters of "Provincial" clubs such as ours can afford this view. The clubs might be owned by money men but unless they operate in the English Premiership or the top 2 in Spain or Germany in fact could not function without the supporters paying at the turnstiles.how

If we want change, then the screws must be turned on the boards of our respective clubs to achieve this.

 

The boards of Aberdeen Football Club over the years have been complicit in allowing the status quo of the Glasgow clubs to have such a big day in how the game is run and by whom.

The other so called big clubs out with those 2 are just as complicit as ours.

What you sow, you shall reap.

[RicoS321]

Not unexpected, but fans across the country are saying it is unacceptable that the club will be making no further comment. Dignified silence no longer works in Scottish football.

 

You have your wish:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45491684

 

Interestingly, it looks like the club have gone with the Logan covering appeal rather than the video evidence of the tug on the jersey. Frustratingly, the SFA have not updated their website with the actual panel's decision which is as much of a disgrace as the decision itself. We can't see what AFC have argued or the panel's thoughts on making the decision. To me, Logan covering is debatable and not indicative of a definite error by the ref (in my opinion it is, but it's not unarguable). The tug on Devlin is a foul that directly resulted in Devlin having to foul the player in return - it's completely unarguable given the video footage. Again, be interesting to read the text whenever the fuck it arrives (which should be on day one of the decision, at the press of a button).

[Barcosente]

If the club have indeed gone with the Logan as last man defence I'd say there is a debate to be had among the guys/girls of the panel who viewed the evidence provided.

 

The brief they'd have been given would have been " was a clear goal scoring opportunity denied? "

Obviously, this was not a clear goalscoring opportunity, and no matter how many times I watch this back, Logan's presence in the build up and aftermath is debatable as to the outcome thereafter, so the panel either misunderstood what they were asked to look at, or do not understand the physics or laws of the game.

 

Of course the SFA are being as obtuse as ever and showing a lack of transparency that Maxwell promised he'd bring the game in Scotland.

That no explanation of the decision has been posted by now is a disgrace. Had it been one of the 2 Glasgow clubs, this would have been posted the minute any decision had been made.

 

There have been several of these decisions made by so called "expert" panels which have now seen the opposite outcome to what the majority of fans, experienced journals and ex players have expected to see.

 

We, the paying supporters deserve better from the powers that be, and until some sense and clarity about how these whacky decisions are arrived at, then each match increasingly becomes a lottery with no winner.

[KennyFuckinPowers]

Kilmarnock and manager Steve Clarke have been charged by the Scottish FA regarding comments made criticising the governing body's disciplinary process after Gary Dicker lost his red-card appeal.

 

More to follow.

 

Wow. This is what happens when you speak the truth. Can we expect McInnes to now face the same process? Perplexing.

 

[Barcosente]

Kilmarnock and manager Steve Clarke have been charged by the Scottish FA regarding comments made criticising the governing body's disciplinary process after Gary Dicker lost his red-card appeal.

 

More to follow.

 

That's what you get when you have corrupt power crazy autocrats in charge of the game. No sense at all, yet we have gobshites like Gerrard and Rodgers saying what they want with not a card in the world.

 

Wow. This is what happens when you speak the truth. Can we expect McInnes to now face the same process? Perplexing.

[Barcosente]

And also this kind of confirming that match officials don't know the rules and therefore justifying the chants from the stands of "you don't know what your doing"

 

"Scotland's referees are seeking urgent clarification from football's international law makers over what constitutes a straight red card ahead of the return of the top-flight this weekend, with a video package believed to include incidents involving Rangers pair Alfredo Morelos and Allan McGregor as well as Hearts striker Steven Naismith being sent"

 

Nuff said

[Lencarl]

The Tribunal viewed the video footage of the incident, supplied by the Claimant, at different angles and in real time and in slow motion, and carefully considered the Claimant’s written submission. Having done so, the Tribunal found that the Kilmarnock No 25 was getting ahead of the Player, and was in control of the ball and heading towards the Claimant’s penalty area and goal when he was challenged by the Player. There were no other players on the field of play between the Kilmarnock FC No 25 and the Claimant’s goalkeeper. The Tribunal found that the Player’s contact with the Kilmarnock FC No 25 caused the latter to fall to the ground and prevented his progress with the ball towards the Claimant’s goal and therefore denied him an obvious goal scoring opportunity.  The Tribunal further found that the Referee was well positioned to see the challenge and make his decision. 

 

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/4270/reasons-fast-track-tribunal-devlin-aberdeen-fc.pdf

 

What a pile of garbage. How can a player 40 yards from goal and Logan racing back to cover and Lewis to beat in goal be an obvious goal scoring opportunity No mention of any shirt pulling.

 

 

 

[RicoS321]

The Tribunal viewed the video footage of the incident, supplied by the Claimant, at different angles and in real time and in slow motion, and carefully considered the Claimant’s written submission. Having done so, the Tribunal found that the Kilmarnock No 25 was getting ahead of the Player, and was in control of the ball and heading towards the Claimant’s penalty area and goal when he was challenged by the Player. There were no other players on the field of play between the Kilmarnock FC No 25 and the Claimant’s goalkeeper. The Tribunal found that the Player’s contact with the Kilmarnock FC No 25 caused the latter to fall to the ground and prevented his progress with the ball towards the Claimant’s goal and therefore denied him an obvious goal scoring opportunity.  The Tribunal further found that the Referee was well positioned to see the challenge and make his decision. 

 

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/4270/reasons-fast-track-tribunal-devlin-aberdeen-fc.pdf

 

What a pile of garbage. How can a player 40 yards from goal and Logan racing back to cover and Lewis to beat in goal be an obvious goal scoring opportunity No mention of any shirt pulling.

 

Bit in bold is the key here. Why did the club not go with this? It was incontrovertible. Obviously the fact that Logan was covering was clear and the distance to goal was a definite plus on our side, but just go with the easy undeniable facts - Liam McLeod even mentioned it in the BBC highlights to give us a hint. Be interesting to read our submission, but it seems that we've completely - and unforgiveably - overlooked a key part in the incident. I'm assuming the panel are only obliged to look at the case put forward by the club?

[Lencarl]

Bit in bold is the key here. Why did the club not go with this? It was incontrovertible. Obviously the fact that Logan was covering was clear and the distance to goal was a definite plus on our side, but just go with the easy undeniable facts - Liam McLeod even mentioned it in the BBC highlights to give us a hint. Be interesting to read our submission, but it seems that we've completely - and unforgiveably - overlooked a key part in the incident. I'm assuming the panel are only obliged to look at the case put forward by the club?

 

May be wrong, but I am sure Aberdeen sent them video evidence with Devlin's shirt pull to try and get the red overturned but was totally ignored by them.