We see what we want to see. I see McGinn clearly getting his boot on the ball and sending it in completely the opposite direction from where it was heading. No foul.
Printable View
Whether he got a touch or not , it happened quickly and as he was stretching in to get the ball it’s quite easy to see how the ref would have seen a foul, like many did in first viewing ..always a risky tackle stretching a leg in like that
Having looked at the replay now I think it was a foul. It's Turnbull that flicks the ball away.
Yes Duffy steps forward but is in the wall well before the ball is struck. Games are won or lost on very fine margins, especially with the old firm. Where do you draw the line with these rules? Goalie steps of his line at a penalty, player steps in as a penalty is taken, ball bouncing unkindly up onto an arm, off side by an elbow or big toe? No disputing it was a cracking free kick but for me we either leave rules alone & simplify so players & officials are in full understanding or implement the laws as they are now.
Too much messing about with things that don’t improve the game or lead to grey areas.
Just watched it again in very slow motion. You're wrong. Turnbull has pretty much lost control of the ball, he touches it wide, McGinn puts a much firmer touch on it a nanosecond after that. It wasn't a foul, end of. There is no debate, most people who have commented agree it wasn't a foul. That's because it wasn't.
A picture paints 1000 words.
Attachment 24235
I rest my case, m'Lud.
Attachment 24236
To be fair, in real-time, the incident is all over in a matter of seconds. Both players are moving at pace. What the stop-frame analysis does is it allows us to unpick the sequence of what actually physically happened. For me, both players are entitled to go for the ball and neither is in full control of it. What this picture shows absolutely clearly and without any shadow of doubt is that McGinn plays the ball at a point in time when Turnbull's momentum is both behind the ball and behind McGinn's leg. Although contact, at that point, is inevitable it's within the rules of the game. That's the nature of a tackle. It's a difficult call for the referee but there's no question that the actual physical sequence of events shouldn't have led to a foul.
Yep, that’s McGinn knocking the ball away from Turnbull with a touch immediately after Turnbull tries to flick the ball wide of him.
Tbf it’s tight as and it’s given, so it just shows how marginal some key decisions can be.
Shall we debate the Porteous penalty incident now:wink:?
As far as I can see the officials down south constantly get it wrong, even after Consulting VAR. it stems from not drawing the lessons from other sports who have used it for years and and also an undocumented change in intention from dealing with obvious errors to drawing lines to see if someone’s left nipple is in an offside position. IMO if you have to draw a line to tell it’s onside.
You’re 100% right our officials would make a complete James Hunt of VAR if they were let loose with it and it would little to address bias IMO. VAR is an abomination and should have no place in football. I’d rather put up with the odd bad decision and preserve the continuous and free flowing nature of the game and have no interest in waiting five minutes to see whether it’s worth cheering for a goal,
I didn’t think it was a foul at the time but when Tam McManus and his co commentator both said it was clearly a foul. I just put my initial thought ,down to my Hibs tinted vision.
But when slowed down, I was bloody spot on 🤨
But I’d still never vote for VAR, which is killing the game imo .
I’ve seen the stills where you can see his foot near the ball. But when I watch the video I don’t see the touch from McGinn to divert it that people are on about. The ball obviously changes direction but so does Turnbull, he was going away from goal by the time the challenge comes in and I still think it’s him that toes it away. As I said, could go round in circles with it!
In real time it looks like a foul, so that really was your Hibs tinted vision. It’s only the close up and very slowed down view that shows McGinn took the ball after Turnbull’s very slight sideways touch.
Agree in some respects about Var. the McGinn free kick wouldn’t be given, but on the other hand Porteous does make contact with the Celtic players foot in the debated penalty incident. The wee prick then took a dive, but fact is that Porteous stands on the guy’s foot. That could easily have been given.
I can’t believe there is so much debate about if McGinn touched the ball, its a clear free kick
Never a free kick and shocking refereeing not noticing that Duffy was in the wall. He is looking right at it so the assumption has to be he doesn't know the rules. Referees should be dropped down a league for mistakes like not noticing the position of Duffy. Apart from that that he seemed to have two separate free kick rules for either team and the free kick that led to the foul was never a free kick with the direction the ball took a big clue