PDA

View Full Version : Why was their keeper not sent off?



Hibbyradge
27-02-2010, 10:13 PM
From my viewpoint it looked like Nish went round him and had an open goal.

Why only a yellow card?

I usually defend referees, but I thought the boy today was terrible.

Hibbie_Cameron
27-02-2010, 10:20 PM
Your spot on. I thought he should have walked too

PaulSmith
27-02-2010, 10:21 PM
Honestly no idea and IMO indefensible, it's actually a text book case of denying goal scoring opportunity.
Maybe ref had too much sun last week?

matty_f
27-02-2010, 10:22 PM
From my viewpoint it looked like Nish went round him and had an open goal.

Why only a yellow card?

I usually defend referees, but I thought the boy today was terrible.

He wasn't sent off because the ref bottled it, IMHO. Definite red card, and if it'd happened after 70 mins rather than 2, he'd have been sent off.

Miller gets sent off for a bookable offence last week, their keeper gets booked for a red card offence this week. Refs are beyond poor this season.

Dirkster23
27-02-2010, 10:23 PM
The only thing i can imagine is the Ref thought one of the defenders got back beyond the keeper and may have been in a position to block a shot.

Looked like a definite red to me. Think the Ref bottled it with it being in the first minute.

JimBHibees
27-02-2010, 10:23 PM
Appalling decision as clear a red card as you could see. Was in line with his general performance though he was making it up as he went along.

madabouthibs
27-02-2010, 10:23 PM
I couldn't understand it either, but I reckon it was simply a case of, 2 minutes into the game, the ref's stinker begun. He bottled it basically.

Booked4Being-Ugly
27-02-2010, 10:28 PM
From my view in the wrong end in the East it looked like Nish touched the ball slightly away from goal to get round their keeper.

It's the only (*****) excuse i can think of that the ref used to try and justify a yellow somehow.

Put simply - it should have been a red and the ref bottled it.

PC Stamp
27-02-2010, 10:30 PM
The only thing i can imagine is the Ref thought one of the defenders got back beyond the keeper and may have been in a position to block a shot.

Looked like a definite red to me. Think the Ref bottled it with it being in the first minute.

Irrelevant. It stopped a clear goal scoring opportunity and tghe laws of the game state that in such a case the player should be dismissed from the field of play. Whether or not a defender could have blocked it would be down to the quality or otherwise of Nish's attempted finish which we didn't see as he was flattened!

woody47
27-02-2010, 10:31 PM
Cos the ref was an a$$ and bottled it. (but then again the whole friggin lot of them are on par with each other)
Where TF do they find these excuses for refs? Do they walk along the west end of the weege and pick up some tramp, give him a whistle and a nice new red strip and tell him to make himself look a clown?
It really is about time that the suits sit up and get their heads out of their own a$$es and actually realise that these idiots in the middle are actually ruining the game.
Fans pay their hard earned money to watch their team play - not some jumped up [email protected] who could never get a game when he was a kid and is now acting like some hitlerite wanting to be the centre of attraction. :grr::grr:

Part/Time Supporter
27-02-2010, 10:49 PM
I would have thought that he will be pulled up for that, as it was a clear matter of fact decision. Balogh and Bamba were sent off for "denying goalscoring opportunity" in a derby last season when both the forwards fouled (Fletcher and Nade) were 30+ yards from goal. There wasn't a Saints defender within five yards and the ball was well within Nish's reach if he hadn't been pulled down. Most other decisions you could debate until the cows come home (eg what is "deliberate" handball?) but that was clear cut.

Cool_Hand_Luke
27-02-2010, 11:38 PM
I dont particularly agree with this rule when a penalty is given, but i thought that if a player is denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, then it was an automatic red card for the offending player :confused:
Why was Smith only given a yellow card?

Hibercelona
27-02-2010, 11:40 PM
Because the ref was an @rsehole?

maturehibby
27-02-2010, 11:42 PM
Cause teh idiot ref bottled it -it was adouble ordering off one for being the last man and the second for denying the Hibs palyer a goal scoring opportunity

Blurry Face
27-02-2010, 11:43 PM
I dont particularly agree with this rule when a penalty is given, but i thought that if a player is denied a clear goal scoring opportunity, then it was an automatic red card for the offending player :confused:
Why was Smith only given a yellow card?

Been on a few threads already with some pretty definitive answers which suggest the rule book has been disected and digested.
The best answer I have seen was "the ref saw it was Nish therefore deemed it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity"

Probably misquoted but you get the picture

bernz
28-02-2010, 01:06 AM
Cause teh idiot ref bottled it -it was adouble ordering off one for being the last man and the second for denying the Hibs palyer a goal scoring opportunity

I dont think that being last man is actually the offence. Its irrelevant. Its just the most common occurrence for a goalscoring opportunity being denied.

The Harp Awakes
28-02-2010, 01:22 AM
Like last week, a crazy decision by the ref has probably cost us the 3 points. As clear a red card as ever you will see in football. Refs in Scotland are a total joke.

Saorsa
28-02-2010, 01:24 AM
From my viewpoint it looked like Nish went round him and had an open goal.

Why only a yellow card?

I usually defend referees, but I thought the boy today was terrible.because the ref wash pish the and he was little better for the rest of the game, pretty much the norm these days though so I cannae say it surprises me :bitchy: None of that though changes how bad we were.

PaulSmith
28-02-2010, 09:03 AM
Just watched the reply on Hibs TV, there is no doubt that Colin Nish is the player getting to the ball after touching the ball around the keeper.

So 15 yards out, keeper on his erse, 2 yards of the middle of the goal with two defenders running back towards the line isn't a clear opportunity to score.

Thought it was a terrible decision at the time and this backs it up.

KWJ
28-02-2010, 09:10 AM
The only thing i can imagine is the Ref thought one of the defenders got back beyond the keeper and may have been in a position to block a shot.

Looked like a definite red to me. Think the Ref bottled it with it being in the first minute.

Exactly what that man said.

skipster7
28-02-2010, 09:15 AM
i read earlier this week they were talking about changing the rules so it's not a red when a pen is awarded as teams were being punished twice? din't think they would be able to implement it until the WC at the earliest though.
thats the only thing IMO that was going to stop a red.

H18sry
28-02-2010, 09:25 AM
I think it is Yogi's fault that he had the cheek to appeal Millers red card last week and win, so the referee's union got together during the week and decided that any little decision in our game yesterday was going to go against us. Therefor no sending off as he could not deny us the penalty even if he wanted too, and he got round lasts week appeal by booking as many Hibs players as he could because we all know bookings cannot be appealed, and awarding them a soft penalty in the last minute to even things out. IMO :wink:

malcolm
28-02-2010, 09:49 AM
if they are to change the rules it should be to award a goal where the crime occurs in the penalty box with a yellow card for the player. There is no guarantee rhat a penalty is scored so bringing down the player is always an attractive gamble since

The penalty may be missed/saved.
If it is against hibs you may only get a yellow, and
Maybe if you are playing for the OF, the hibs player may be booked for forcing you endure the indignity of having to resort a foul :wink:


These guys recently threatened to strike for more money. I'd be happy for them to be paid more but only if we saw consistent good performances and they did not operate as a secret society. The poor wee souls can't take any criticism, only comment on decisions when it suits them and against all good practice act as judge and jury on their own crimes!

And while I am on a whinge can we have the refs just in charge of the on field activities. The 4th official calling over the ref to say "that big boy shouted at me" and holding up the game is a farce - why can't the 4th official (a qualified ref) not have to power to at least sin bin the offender to the stand for 10 minutes. It takes the steam of of the issue and only if sent back again in the game would it be for the whole match. Could have a totting up system during the season (like yellow cards) for repeat offenders.

All players cards and managers 'sin bins' should be wiped out at the start of a season with only unless there is an unserved suspensions carryingforward.

Cropley10
28-02-2010, 09:52 AM
The only thing i can imagine is the Ref thought one of the defenders got back beyond the keeper and may have been in a position to block a shot.

Looked like a definite red to me. Think the Ref bottled it with it being in the first minute.

It's not about a defender being on the line, it's about denying a clear goal scoring opportunity which that was.

basehibby
28-02-2010, 09:53 AM
The referee disgracefully bottled it with that decision and in doing so DIRECTLY affected the outcome of the game.

He should definately be taken to task about this - players and managers get banned and fined for showing contempt for the rules - what about REFS :grr::grr::grr:

matty_f
28-02-2010, 09:56 AM
i read earlier this week they were talking about changing the rules so it's not a red when a pen is awarded as teams were being punished twice? din't think they would be able to implement it until the WC at the earliest though.
thats the only thing IMO that was going to stop a red.

I don't see how they're getting punished twice any more than a team getting a man sent off is punished twice - i.e. they'll concede a free kick for the foul and go down to ten men.

If it's a sending off offence in the box, the fact that a penalty is awarded shouldn't come into it, the player should be off, IMHO.

If that keeper had saved the penalty yesterday we would have been 'punished' twice - first for Nish being fouled with an open goal, and then for not having the same goalscoring opportunity as we had initially. St Johnstone, on the other hand would have benefited from the foul.

Craig_in_Prague
28-02-2010, 10:00 AM
Fans pay a lot of money, players and managers jobs are on the line, and the standard of Refs is just appauling.

James Connolly
28-02-2010, 10:22 AM
I'm not usually one to moan about officials; but the ref's performance yesterday is one of the worst I've seen in a long time!:grr:

Yes he bottled it because it was very early in the game; no ******ing excuse...stonewall sending off.

Not only that, he constantly slowed play down by being over officious where free kicks were taken; these imbiciles think the game's all about them, it's a disgrace.

To top it all, he dished out 7 yellow cards, 4 to Hibs players; there was only one team being physical yesterday, and it certainly wasn't Hibs.

These imposters should be held to task; players and managers are hammered by the SFA; it's about time they got there own house in order as well!!:grr:

Alfred E Newman
28-02-2010, 10:39 AM
Yesterdays appauling referee has probably been saved by Stokes scoring the penalty. If he had missed and only a yellow given to the keeper ,all hell would have broken out. I don`t always agree with the rule especially when its the keeper making a genuine attempt to get to the ball but it is there and has to be applied.

berwickhibee
28-02-2010, 12:10 PM
Like last week, a crazy decision by the ref has probably cost us the 3 points. As clear a red card as ever you will see in football. Refs in Scotland are a total joke.

just about sums it up for me,100% a red card. Yet the people who make the rules cant even get a simple stonewall decision right,these clowns this season are getting away with unbelievable decisions.:grr:

would love the highly paid referee to explain why it wasnt a red???

he couldnt give a legitimate reason,just yet another shocking performance from a group of referees who have taken the level to yet another level of incompetence this season.

still he will have another big game next week and be given a pat on the back by his bosses. accountability???? freekin joke.:grr:

TornadoHibby
28-02-2010, 12:16 PM
just about sums it up for me,100% a red card. Yet the people who make the rules cant even get a simple stonewall decision right,these clowns this season are getting away with unbelievable decisions.:grr:

would love the highly paid referee to explain why it wasnt a red???
he couldnt give a legitimate reason,just yet another shocking performance from a group of referees who have taken the level to yet another level of incompetence this season.

still he will have another big game next week and be given a pat on the back by his bosses. accountability???? freekin joke.:grr:

That would be the sensible thing to do to clarify the position precisely but whenever did common sense EVER have anything to do with SFA decisions of which this was yet another one which was horribly wrong and significantly affected the game to the detriment of the team who DID NOT COMMIT THE OFFENCE! :grr:

clerriehibs
28-02-2010, 01:34 PM
i read earlier this week they were talking about changing the rules so it's not a red when a pen is awarded as teams were being punished twice? din't think they would be able to implement it until the WC at the earliest though.
thats the only thing IMO that was going to stop a red.

how's that any fairer? say a player is just about to roll a ball into an empty net, then gets halved from behind? well worth it for the defender, because he's not going to get sent off, and has stopped a definite goal, only giving the attacking team a chance from a penalty.

Keep the rule! But make sure refs ****in implement it consistently!

clerriehibs
28-02-2010, 01:38 PM
And it was NEVER a yellow card offence yesterday! It was either a red card (which it was), OR just a penalty (it defo wasnt just a penalty). Giving a yellow card for the soft foul clearly showed the ref bottled it.

EasterRoad4Ever
28-02-2010, 01:46 PM
It was simply a disgraceful decision by an awful referee.

The fact is that Nish had gone past the keeper and, had he not been brought down - would have simply slotted it into the net. Instead, the ref gives a penalty kick and puts the keeper back in goal 12 yards away with another chance of saving the goal.... what logic or justice is there in that :bitchy: The boy should have got a straight RED - no ifs or buts.

Part/Time Supporter
28-02-2010, 02:36 PM
Same thing happened at Hamilton, an outfield player handled the ball on the line preventing a goal. The referee (eventually) gave a penalty but didn't send the player off. That situation was made even worse by the fact that Cerny saved the penalty.

blackpoolhibs
28-02-2010, 02:41 PM
It was a certain sending off, although why the ref did not do so is a mystery? But surely if he had sent him off, it would have ruined the game, i keep reading it spoils it, when players are sent off, and teams are reduced to 10. :devil:

Speedy
28-02-2010, 03:07 PM
Didn't see the incident but the same thing just happened in the Carling cup final

blackpoolhibs
28-02-2010, 03:11 PM
Didn't see the incident but the same thing just happened in the Carling cup final

That was nothing compared to our penalty.

Hibernian Verse
28-02-2010, 03:20 PM
That was nothing compared to our penalty.

I would've booked Vidic, but sent off the annoying prick of a keeper yesterday.

Speedy
28-02-2010, 03:20 PM
That was nothing compared to our penalty.

Fair enough, I haven't seen the Hibs game but I meant the ref bottled giving a red card.

StevieC
28-02-2010, 06:24 PM
Quite a few Saints fans up here are saying they expected a red, and were both surprised and relieved at the yellow.

:rolleyes:

Cropley10
28-02-2010, 06:42 PM
Why was Craig not booked for leaving the field of play after he'd scored...?

Donaldson got sent off (2nd yellow) IIRC when he did it at Falkirk.

Danderhall Hibs
28-02-2010, 07:02 PM
Why was Craig not booked for leaving the field of play after he'd scored...?

Donaldson got sent off (2nd yellow) IIRC when he did it at Falkirk.

You don't get booked for that - I think you only get booked if you leave the field and run into the crowd.

You only get one booking if you take your shirt off and run into the crowd - I can't really work that one out though.

PaulSmith
28-02-2010, 07:15 PM
Shouldve Bren booked for the ' get it up ye' archie gemmill style sign to the west stand, obviously still a bitter wee man after being sent off as a sub whilst at Falkirk

SidBurns
28-02-2010, 08:04 PM
The only thing i can imagine is the Ref thought one of the defenders got back beyond the keeper and may have been in a position to block a shot.

Looked like a definite red to me. Think the Ref bottled it with it being in the first minute.

This doesn't matter, the GK stopped a goalscoring opportunity therefore it's a red card.

Part/Time Supporter
28-02-2010, 09:53 PM
This doesn't matter, the GK stopped a goalscoring opportunity therefore it's a red card.

:agree:

If it had been the other way round, ie if the last defender tripped Nish, with only the goalie to beat, it would be a red card. The way it happened is actually worse because it would be harder for the outfield player on the line to save a shot than the goalkeeper.

Jonnyboy
28-02-2010, 10:27 PM
This doesn't matter, the GK stopped a goalscoring opportunity therefore it's a red card.

Is the wording not "a clear goalscoring opportunity"

If so and if you watch the highlights Nish was moving diagonally away from goal and a defender had gotten between him and the goal which presumably according to Alan Muir that it was not a clear goalscoring opportunity. Of course that assumes the defender could have blocked a shot or that Nish would hit the ball wide of the target but I can't believe all of that goes through a referee's mind in such circumstances.

For my money it was, based on what we've seen numerous times before, that was a red card offence :agree:

Hibs On Tour
01-03-2010, 01:03 AM
From my viewpoint it looked like Nish went round him and had an open goal.

Why only a yellow card?

I usually defend referees, but I thought the boy today was terrible.

From the telly highlights I think the ref called it right unfortunately. There was cover there and you can't say that if Nish hadn't have went over him that it would def have been a goal [as for me it was 50-50 as to whether he brought down CN or whether big Nishy deliberately ran through him for the pen]

On another day we'd have won that by 2 or 3. Some good chances that were missed or cleared off the line.

wee 162
01-03-2010, 01:28 AM
Is the wording not "a clear goalscoring opportunity"

If so and if you watch the highlights Nish was moving diagonally away from goal and a defender had gotten between him and the goal which presumably according to Alan Muir that it was not a clear goalscoring opportunity. Of course that assumes the defender could have blocked a shot or that Nish would hit the ball wide of the target but I can't believe all of that goes through a referee's mind in such circumstances.

For my money it was, based on what we've seen numerous times before, that was a red card offence :agree:
If it isn't a clear goalscoring opportunity with the keeper on his backside and with you 12 yards out in front of the goals I don't know what is tbh.

It wasn't like Nish was running the ball out of play it was still in front of the goal. Put it this way if a defender brings someone down when he'd be one on one with the keeper then he gets sent off, so I fail to see how being one on one with a defender would make it less of a goalscoring opportunity than that!

hibee_girl
01-03-2010, 07:51 AM
Stack expected a red to be shown - http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20100301/ive-have-expected-a-red_2262950_1980299

PaulSmith
01-03-2010, 07:55 AM
From the telly highlights I think the ref called it right unfortunately. There was cover there and you can't say that if Nish hadn't have went over him that it would def have been a goal [as for me it was 50-50 as to whether he brought down CN or whether big Nishy deliberately ran through him for the pen]

On another day we'd have won that by 2 or 3. Some good chances that were missed or cleared off the line.

Disagree, Nish is clearly getting to the ball after touching it past the keeper and therefore there is no doubt that it was a clear goal scoring opportunity (middle of the goal 15 yards out and in a yard of space!)

matty_f
01-03-2010, 08:10 AM
Disagree, Nish is clearly getting to the ball after touching it past the keeper and therefore there is no doubt that it was a clear goal scoring opportunity (middle of the goal 15 yards out and in a yard of space!)

:agree:

Even I would have been confident of tucking that one away, and I've not kicked a ball in anger for about five years.

ahibby
01-03-2010, 09:00 AM
I'm probably in the minority of one but at the time I didn't think it was a red and now having watched it again on the highlights, I still don't think it was a red. There were plenty of their players back in time to stop Nishy IMO.

Danderhall Hibs
01-03-2010, 09:01 AM
I'm probably in the minority of one but at the time I didn't think it was a red and now having watched it again on the highlights, I still don't think it was a red. There were plenty of their players back in time to stop Nishy IMO.

You don't think it was a clear goalscoring opportunity?

Sudds_1
01-03-2010, 09:15 AM
Is the wording not "a clear goalscoring opportunity"

If so and if you watch the highlights Nish was moving diagonally away from goal and a defender had gotten between him and the goal which presumably according to Alan Muir that it was not a clear goalscoring opportunity. Of course that assumes the defender could have blocked a shot or that Nish would hit the ball wide of the target but I can't believe all of that goes through a referee's mind in such circumstances.

For my money it was, based on what we've seen numerous times before, that was a red card offence :agree:

Good job he gave the penalty then John! Would you put your mortgage on Nishy hitting a coos erkie wi a banko on his current form? :devil:

mim
01-03-2010, 09:51 AM
Is the wording not "a clear goalscoring opportunity"

If so and if you watch the highlights Nish was moving diagonally away from goal and a defender had gotten between him and the goal which presumably according to Alan Muir that it was not a clear goalscoring opportunity. Of course that assumes the defender could have blocked a shot or that Nish would hit the ball wide of the target but I can't believe all of that goes through a referee's mind in such circumstances.

For my money it was, based on what we've seen numerous times before, that was a red card offence :agree:

From what I see on the highlights, when the keeper brings Nish down there is no other defender between Nish and the goal. The only reason that defenders get back is because Nish is falling to the ground, rather than slipping the ball into the empty net.

A clear red card.

--------
01-03-2010, 09:53 AM
I think it is Yogi's fault that he had the cheek to appeal Millers red card last week and win, so the referee's union got together during the week and decided that any little decision in our game yesterday was going to go against us. Therefor no sending off as he could not deny us the penalty even if he wanted too, and he got round lasts week appeal by booking as many Hibs players as he could because we all know bookings cannot be appealed, and awarding them a soft penalty in the last minute to even things out. IMO :wink:


You may well be right.

The last few weeks we've had virtually nothing from the referees at all.

blackpoolhibs
01-03-2010, 09:56 AM
From what I see on the highlights, when the keeper brings Nish down there is no other defender between Nish and the goal. The only reason that defenders get back is because Nish is falling to the ground, rather than slipping the ball into the empty net.

A clear red card.

100% Spot on. If thats not a clear goal scoring opportunity, we will struggle to see one ever again.

davemcbain
01-03-2010, 11:26 AM
Graham Poll the ex English ref was on radio 5 this morning talking about the Man U v Villa game, but I think his comments would be valid here also.

His view was that the last player (as others have mentioned) is irrelevant and not mentioned in the rules. It is a red card if the foul prevented what "would" have been a clear goal scoring opportunity.

Poll went to great lengths to discuss the difference between "could" and "would" and summarised it with "If the player was facing the goal when he went down it's a would and if not it's a could and therefore not a red card".

In the case of the Villa penalty Agbonlahor - it was never going to be an easy to spell player was it - was facing away from goal, so penalty but no red card.

Maybe in Nish's case that last second swerve to the right saved the keeper? Or maybe the ref was rubbish. I suspect the latter.

ahibby
01-03-2010, 11:32 AM
You don't think it was a clear goalscoring opportunity?

I'm not 100% certain that Nish would have got to the ball having to go around the goalie before a defender got a tackle in. Maybe's aye maybe's naw. If Nish was on the ball then yes definitely but he put it a yard or two past the goalie and still had to get to it. I'm not sure so would probably have given a yellow.

I've watched it again and I think Nish would have got to it and got a shot in on target. There was a defender who might have blocked it and he might not have. So as everyone seems to be saying he was a denied a goal scoring opportunity but is that term open to interpretation I wonder. Is it a clear goal scoring opportunity or just goal scoring opportunity? I don't know.

lapsedhibee
01-03-2010, 11:51 AM
I've watched it again and I think Nish would have got to it and got a shot in on target. There was a defender who might have blocked it and he might not have. So as everyone seems to be saying he was a denied a goal scoring opportunity but is that term open to interpretation I wonder. Is it a clear goal scoring opportunity or just goal scoring opportunity? I don't know.

Wouldn't surprise if the ref on the day decided to interpret the phrase to mean that the goalmouth had to be clear. As it wasn't, no red. :dizzy:

ahibby
01-03-2010, 11:57 AM
Wouldn't surprise if the ref on the day decided to interpret the phrase to mean that the goalmouth had to be clear. As it wasn't, no red. :dizzy:

I'm thinking along those lines. We were poor but also unfortunate. A good team makes it's own luck and we did that earlier in the season.

SidBurns
01-03-2010, 12:36 PM
The wording from the 'official' FIFA Laws of the Game book is:-

There are two sending-off offences that deal with denying an opponent an
obvious opportunity to score a goal. It is not necessary for the offence to occur inside the penalty area.

If the referee applies advantage during an obvious goal-scoring opportunity
and a goal is scored directly, despite the opponent’s handling the ball or fouling an opponent, the player cannot be sent off but he may still be cautioned.

Referees should consider the following circumstances when deciding whether
to send off a player for denying a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity:-


• the distance between the offence and the goal
• the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
• the direction of the play
• the location and number of defenders
• the offence which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity may be an offence that incurs a direct free kick or an indirect free kick

In my opinion Nish was close enough and going in the general direction of the goal. There was also only the one defender from memory and was an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. The only thing that might get the ref off is number 2, the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball, as if he has seen Nish this season the chances are he wouldn't have! :wink: Seriously though, going by the book, he should've went. :agree:

Dinkydoo
01-03-2010, 12:44 PM
We didn't play brilliantly at the weekend but the penalty in the 2nd minute should have been followed up with a red card for thier keeper.

Clear goal scoring opportunity - imagine what would have happend if it had been either of the OF that were playing in our place. :grr:

Part/Time Supporter
01-03-2010, 12:45 PM
I think the ref would argue that Nish was going away from the goal, because the ball was still under Nish's control. I don't think that argument stands up though because Nish was heading slightly away from the goal in order to go around the goalkeeper. The only way that Nish could have kept going in the direction of the goal itself was if he had ran right over the top of the goalkeeper. Using that logic, Balogh shouldn't have been sent off in the derby last season that I mentioned above, as Fletcher was heading towards a right wing area.

If the goalkeeper hadn't tripped Nish he would have had a shot on the goal from about 15 yards, middle of the goal, with only one outfield player back in the general goalmouth area. If that doesn't meet the criteria of clear goalscoring opportunity...

proud_and_green
01-03-2010, 12:53 PM
I don't see how they're getting punished twice any more than a team getting a man sent off is punished twice - i.e. they'll concede a free kick for the foul and go down to ten men.

If it's a sending off offence in the box, the fact that a penalty is awarded shouldn't come into it, the player should be off, IMHO.

If that keeper had saved the penalty yesterday we would have been 'punished' twice - first for Nish being fouled with an open goal, and then for not having the same goalscoring opportunity as we had initially. St Johnstone, on the other hand would have benefited from the foul.

Absolutely agree. Similar incident in the Carling Final pen but no sending off. Discussion about whether it should be a pen and a sending off, Andy Gray thinks it should be changed to no automatic red, (clearly the law has been changed) the fact that he (Gray) thinks its not confirms to me that the law is right!!! The penalty is not given simply for the foul, it is given because the foul was committed in the box, therefore if a foul which merits a sending off was committed in the box it would result in a pen and a sending off.

Jonnyboy
01-03-2010, 12:59 PM
If it isn't a clear goalscoring opportunity with the keeper on his backside and with you 12 yards out in front of the goals I don't know what is tbh.

It wasn't like Nish was running the ball out of play it was still in front of the goal. Put it this way if a defender brings someone down when he'd be one on one with the keeper then he gets sent off, so I fail to see how being one on one with a defender would make it less of a goalscoring opportunity than that!

As I said, I thought it was a red card but I think the ref saw a player getting back to cover the goals so maybe he thought Nish getting a shot in was not a clear goalscoring opportunity?

Either way the ref was an erse :greengrin

allmodcons
01-03-2010, 01:46 PM
As I said, I thought it was a red card but I think the ref saw a player getting back to cover the goals so maybe he thought Nish getting a shot in was not a clear goalscoring opportunity?

Either way the ref was an erse :greengrin

You're correct ref is an erse.

If he thought a defender was in a position to cover the goals then surely it follows that no outfield player would ever get sent off for being 'last man' because he still has a goalkeeper behind him ?

My undertstanding is that if you're the last defender and take someone out from going in on the keeper it's a straight red (i.e. - preventing a goal scoring opportunity).

When it's the keeper taking someone out and there's a defender on the line it's even more of a goalscoring opportunity!

Have to agreed with most of the comments on here. Ref defo bottled it, presumably because it was so early on in the match.

clerriehibs
01-03-2010, 01:47 PM
I'm probably in the minority of one but at the time I didn't think it was a red and now having watched it again on the highlights, I still don't think it was a red. There were plenty of their players back in time to stop Nishy IMO.


ok ... explain the yellow card, then; it was a foul, but not a bad one. Why yellow?