Ciftci Ban

[Guest]

A two game ban, one of them suspended, for 'placing' his hand on an official's throat!!!

 

Imagine if that had been one of our players - they'd have thrown the book at him.

 

Find this utterly amazing, particularly when he had his original red card rescinded.

 

SFA = clowns.

[a don in oz]

Stunning

[Redstar]

A two game ban, one of them suspended, for 'placing' his hand on an official's throat!!!

 

Imagine if that had been one of our players - they'd have thrown the book at him.

 

Find this utterly amazing, particularly when he had his original red card rescinded.

 

SFA = clowns.

Stop acting like a Tim..."Imagine if that had been one of our players " ...kind of ironic asking a tiny wee lad to grow up...but hey ho...grow up

[Huntlysheep]

A very lucky man. Could hae been a very lengthy ban for him.

[Byrne Baby Byrne]

Very tim sounding post

[Guest]

Stop acting like a Tim..."Imagine if that had been one of our players " ...kind of ironic asking a tiny wee lad to grow up...but hey ho...grow up

 

 

Very tim sounding post

 

WTF has this got to do with Celtic? Unless of course you have a hidden love affair for Sevco (which we all know Redhun does).

 

Not entirely sure what a 'tim sounding post' would consist of, apart from something like Hail Hail or something similar.

[Guest]

A very lucky man. Could hae been a very lengthy ban for him.

 

Agreed. Windass got something like 5 reds for kicking a fuckin corner flag or whatever it was!

[Foster14]

There was no video evidence of it, and an iffy picture which you couldn't tell anything about what happened (i.e. was his hand raised and linesman walk in to it).

 

He didn't get a second red card. If he had done anything of any real impact, it would have merited it and received it (sure the linesman would have informed the referee of the event).

 

Bigger query would have to be in regard to the communication of the original charge and how they didn't have the evidence to uphold it fully. To me it would suggest there wasn't any evidence to support the claims, and what does that actually mean?

[Guest]

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/25213318

 

Refs up in anger. I can't blame them.

[minijc]

An iffy picture? Sorry but this shows it up for what it was, he took him by the throat. https://twitter.com/stjohnstone1884/status/407958364312711168/photo/1

[K-9]

If had done this to an opposing player he would have got 3 match ban!!

[Foster14]

The incident wasn't picked up by BBC cameras, but were picked up by Dundee United's own cameras. Moving pictures which showed the whole fracas. This was the main basis of their appeal, and talk of a 12 game ban or whatever it was has become 1 and a suspended 1 on top.

 

Look at the picture and the linesman has his hand up at Ciftci's neck as well, or thereabouts. Were they having a strangling match? Nah, it is a picture, that shows a linesman running in to an area to break up ICT and DU players, a still picture can reflect the actual situation completely differently.

 

The charge also got changed after the original one from:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25213318

 

"Ciftci was initially cited for "seizing hold" of official Gavin Harris "by the throat" but that was later amended to "placing an open hand into the lower area of the assistant referee's throat"."

 

Surely this would have been mentioned in the referee's report, having had time to reflect on the events and having discussed with other officials. How did the original charge not reflect the final charge on this basis? Was it embellished by the linesman?

 

There is history of this of course, I just don't believe that the SFA would have not thrown the book at him if there was a case to answer, and the fact it is a 1 match ban (doesn't make any sense in any context, would surely have to be 0 or 3), surely has you questioning how this decision was come to? I'd be thinking more SFA/referee incompetency being covered up (Ciftci is conveniently injured for the next game anyway), rather than him being let off.

[John_B81]

Very lucky to escape with a two game ban.

[Foster14]

I'd be intrigued to see where the Union goes on this one. Separate to the case in hand with Ciftci "grabbing the linesman by the throat", he had already been sent off, which was over-turned, and effectively cost a coasting Dundee United a place in the semi-final. If anyone saw the melee, I don't think you could come up with any situation where Ciftci gets sent off over any other players, including a couple of ICT players.

 

I don't think you'll be seeing any apologies or suchlike coming from the referees on that (similar situations we've been on the end of). Hopefully they go on strike the week of the next big SFA list of fixtures, might get a decent referee at Celtic Park then.

[davieb]

The twitter picture doesn't show that he had assistant by the throat, it looks like the ref ran into the guy's hand as he was pointing at him

[Foster14]

The twitter picture doesn't show that he had assistant by the throat, it looks like the ref ran into the guy's hand as he was pointing at him

 

Exactly. Which was the defence, and why it seems to have been a much reduced ban. It's probably not even worth a ban, but if they hadn't done some kind of punishment, you'd be calling in to question the integrity of the officials...

[Clydeside_Sheep]

I saw TV pictures last night - it didnt look "that bad" in my view.

 

However, for the SFA to charge the guy with "seizing an official by the throat" and then change the charge to "placing his hand next to the throat of an official" just makes the authorities look like a bunch of weak, bumbling idiots.

[Jings Crivvens]

I see Jackie has said he thinks refs should be able to explain themselves. I agree, it would clear up a lot of things

[Foster14]

I saw TV pictures last night - it didnt look "that bad" in my view.

 

However, for the SFA to charge the guy with "seizing an official by the throat" and then change the charge to "placing his hand next to the throat of an official" just makes the authorities look like a bunch of weak, bumbling idiots.

 

Exactly. I think the bigger issue would be that the charge of seizing/grabbing surely came from the linesman. Why, when it is clear from TV pictures it wasn't, did he say that?

[baconman]

This just highlights the inconsistencies surrounding yet another aspect of our game. Its time refs also had dialogue after games to explain their actions and if they got it wrong admit they got it wrong. Find this particular decision very odd. Should have been at least a 3 - 6 game ban.........you cannot raise your hands.