Alfredo Morelos’ reputation preceeded him on the pitch on Tuesday – and the SFA Appeal Panel’s has done so off the pitch today.
The Colombian has had an appeal for the wrongful yellow card handed to him for diving against Aberdeen thrown out by the panel. It is clear as day the Colombian was fouled in the box at Ibrox.
The fact they haven’t repealed the booking shows a serious lack of responsibility by the SFA. And there’s one damaging myth overturning the incredibly poor decision could’ve helped dispel.
The notion that Alfredo Morelos’ reputation is a justifiable reason for refereeing decisions going against him is a farcical one. It truly is.
More than just appeal any suspension, Rangers wanted to prove Clancy got it wrong. Morelos didn’t dive, it was a penalty and it was potentially a red card for Aberdeen’s Andrew Considine.
Alfredo Morelos’ reputation does not precede him
If someone throws enough mud at a wall, at least some of it tends to stick. Clancy hasn’t given this blatant penalty to Alfredo Morelos because it involves Alfredo Morelos. And some people are actually ok with that.
As quoted on BBC Scotland, Kilmarnock and Scotland defender Stephen O’Donnell said: “I’ve got sympathy for the referee because I’ve played against Morelos.
“He’s always at the heart of things and maybe his reputation hasn’t helped him, but the referee gets one look and has to make a quick decision.”
Rangers have appealed this yellow card handed out to Alfredo Morelos.
— BBC Sport Scotland (@BBCSportScot) March 14, 2019
The above quote is precisely what is wrong with the entire debate. Morelos’ manufactured “reputation” is not a good enough reason to justify big decisions going against him.
Referees are supposed to be immune from this kind of thing, they’re supposed to call every decision as they see it. Not as they’re told to.
It’s a nonsense myth and merely justifies refereeing one player differently from everyone else.