PDA

View Full Version : Unusual Red Card... (merged)



Hibs90
08-03-2011, 12:06 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUtiCXQNJks&feature=player_embedded#at=61

Pretty Boy
08-03-2011, 12:15 PM
:faf:

Unbelievable refereeing. No common sense whatsoever.

Great tackle though (no pun intended:wink:)

Groathillgrump
08-03-2011, 12:20 PM
Difficult to decide who's the biggest idiot - the streaker or the ref!

supershotmo
08-03-2011, 12:25 PM
Ancelotti will not be too chuffed.

Last week Ashley Cole was shooting a trainee with an air rifle. Now he has to deal with David Luiz streaking.

IWasThere2016
08-03-2011, 12:27 PM
Ancelotti will not be too chuffed.

Last week Ashley Cole was shooting a trainee with an air rifle. Now he has to deal with David Luiz streaking.

:faf:

The ref needs shooting!

Peevemor
08-03-2011, 12:30 PM
Technically the ref's correct - but what a choooob!

Was there not a similar thing a few years back when a player was sent off for tripping a pitch invader?

Bohemian_Hibee
08-03-2011, 12:30 PM
Saw this elsewhere and have been reliably informed that, under the law of the game, the referee has no alternative but to send off the player. Ridiculous, but there you go.....

(((Fergus)))
08-03-2011, 12:33 PM
Ref unfortunately reminded of his small pee-pee syndrome!

hibeeleicester
08-03-2011, 12:52 PM
he will get praise for that in the referee's headquaters :agree:

100% to the rules.

Hibs Class
08-03-2011, 01:01 PM
he will get praise for that in the referee's headquaters :agree:

100% to the rules.


Violent conduct presumably? I cannot see any other red card offences that would be applicable here.

H18sry
08-03-2011, 04:18 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qzQ3qjzomo :wtf: never a red card :confused:

Ritchie
08-03-2011, 04:22 PM
http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?205944-Unusual-Red-Card...

:whistle:

blackpoolhibs
08-03-2011, 04:35 PM
In the 60s and 70s some of the ref's we had would have done it themselves. Now the games just gone mad.

H18sry
08-03-2011, 05:26 PM
http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?205944-Unusual-Red-Card...

:whistle:

had a quick look earlier for (NHC) but never noticed it :wink:

Dinkydoo
08-03-2011, 06:16 PM
Don't see why this is unusual.

Player assaults a streaker and although it's not violent conduct towards an opposition player or the ref, it is still violent conduct on the pitch; if he'd walked over and punched a fan in the crowd I doubt he'd play any further part in the game either.

Hibs Class
08-03-2011, 06:26 PM
Don't see why this is unusual.

Player assaults a streaker and although it's not violent conduct towards an opposition player or the ref, it is still violent conduct on the pitch; if he'd walked over and punched a fan in the crowd I doubt he'd play any further part in the game either.

I'm not sure he assaulted him - he caught him but didn't hit him, and had he not done so the guy would probably still be running around the pitch whilst the stewards ambled slowly in circles.

Arch Stanton
08-03-2011, 06:47 PM
Totally ridiculous - would it have been too difficult for the ref to gather the players together and tell them not to intervene?

sleeping giant
08-03-2011, 07:03 PM
All the players , refs and stewards should have just sat down and watched him running about . He would soon feel rather silly.

I am of the opinion that these streakers need a boot in the heehaws though !

lucky
08-03-2011, 07:19 PM
Shocking from the ref. Imagine the reaction at an old firm game if that happened. The ref is a tool

snooky
08-03-2011, 07:32 PM
All the players , refs and stewards should have just sat down and watched him running about . He would soon feel rather silly.

I am of the opinion that these streakers need a boot in the heehaws though !

I maybe wrong here but, I thought that written into "the rules" are clauses that allow the referee to use common sense where and when applicable.
Common sense tells me that the player was assisting the police/security guards in apprehending a person who was breaking the law.
Kinda like pulling over a Fire Engine for running a red light. Muppet!

itchy07
08-03-2011, 07:37 PM
I take it the player is appealing this red card? The streaker was commiting a criminal offence and the player was only helping the police detain him. Think maybe the ref(:asshole:) had it in for him.:rules:

BTW, did it effect the outcome of the match?

heretoday
08-03-2011, 08:08 PM
I can't remember a streaker at ER.

There were plenty of stray animals used to wander in and afford us all brief respite from the fare on the park.

Removed
08-03-2011, 08:12 PM
I can't remember a streaker at ER.

There were plenty of stray animals used to wander in and afford us all brief respite from the fare on the park.

Neither can I. But I remember the one at the PBS in our CIS semi.

Ouch :faf:

Dinkydoo
08-03-2011, 08:23 PM
I'm not sure he assaulted him - he caught him but didn't hit him, and had he not done so the guy would probably still be running around the pitch whilst the stewards ambled slowly in circles.

He didn't punch him but I think he went a bit OTT, probably closer to violent conduct than a trip - more of a flying close-line headlock :greengrin

I agree that the player was only trying to put a stop to it but he could have held onto him rather than slam him into the ground.


Totally ridiculous - would it have been too difficult for the ref to gather the players together and tell them not to intervene?

Would have thought that the players would have had the common sense not to deck the guy tbh; but that might just be my opinion.

soupy
08-03-2011, 08:33 PM
At no time should a fan get onto the pitch, so imo the player done nout wrong. Jobsworth!

Hibercelona
08-03-2011, 08:50 PM
All the players , refs and stewards should have just sat down and watched him running about . He would soon feel rather silly.

I am of the opinion that these streakers need a boot in the heehaws though !

With a hee haw like that he should have been far to embarassed to do it to begin with. :devil:

Alfred E Newman
08-03-2011, 09:04 PM
Don't see why this is unusual.

Player assaults a streaker and although it's not violent conduct towards an oppsition player or the ref, it is still violent conduct on the pitch; if he'd walked over and punched a fan in the crowd I doubt he'd play any further part in the game either.

In the same vane, if the guy on the pitch had been carrying a gun threatening to shoot the ref and the player had wrestled him to the ground the ref would have no option but to send him off? Surely not.

Dinkydoo
08-03-2011, 09:19 PM
In the same vane, if the guy on the pitch had been carrying a gun threatening to shoot the ref and the player had wrestled him to the ground the ref would have no option but to send him off? Surely not.

Think there is a bit of a difference between a guy wearing a mankini and holding a gun :confused:

blackpoolhibs
08-03-2011, 11:32 PM
I have seen players grab animals by the neck before, when they have found themselves on the pitch. And nobody has been sent off?

Removed
08-03-2011, 11:48 PM
I have seen players grab animals by the neck before, when they have found themselves on the pitch. And nobody has been sent off?

Davie Weir grabs opposition players by the neck most weeks and doesn't get sent off.

http://i34.tinypic.com/qpgpjm.jpg


http://i36.tinypic.com/15xx2kn.jpg

HibbiesandtheBaddies
08-03-2011, 11:58 PM
I have seen players grab animals by the neck before, when they have found themselves on the pitch. And nobody has been sent off?

David Weir regularly grabs Hibs players by the neck with no intervention from the officials :whistle:

matty_f
09-03-2011, 08:15 AM
Technically the ref's correct - but what a choooob!

Was there not a similar thing a few years back when a player was sent off for tripping a pitch invader?


Saw this elsewhere and have been reliably informed that, under the law of the game, the referee has no alternative but to send off the player. Ridiculous, but there you go.....


Violent conduct presumably? I cannot see any other red card offences that would be applicable here.

:agree: Ref was (unbelievably) right to send the player off under the rules of the game.

poolman
09-03-2011, 08:28 AM
:agree: Ref was (unbelievably) right to send the player off under the rules of the game.


What are the rules exactly when it comes to a situation like this :rules:

Twa Cairpets
09-03-2011, 09:03 AM
As a ref, these are the kind of decisions you absolutely hate having to make, I promise you.

Violent conduct is violent conduct regardless of whether or not it is against a opponent or anyone else. I've sent off two brothers on the same team for fighting amongst themselves in the past, and a guy who took a fly-kick at a spectator. This season in the top division in the 21s in Edinburgh a keeper and defender were sent off for having a rammy (not my game I hasten to add).

I would put a pound to a penny that when the boy did his headlock tackle, the ref went "aw naw Im going to look like a fanny" and in fairness he did, but it wasnt his fault.

If he'd left the player on, and, say, he'd scored the winner and injured an opponent, would that have been fair? Damned if you do....

StevieC
09-03-2011, 10:10 AM
Violent conduct is violent conduct regardless of whether or not it is against a opponent or anyone else.

:agree:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFLeTm46CqQ

blackpoolhibs
09-03-2011, 10:14 AM
As a ref, these are the kind of decisions you absolutely hate having to make, I promise you.

Violent conduct is violent conduct regardless of whether or not it is against a opponent or anyone else. I've sent off two brothers on the same team for fighting amongst themselves in the past, and a guy who took a fly-kick at a spectator. This season in the top division in the 21s in Edinburgh a keeper and defender were sent off for having a rammy (not my game I hasten to add).

I would put a pound to a penny that when the boy did his headlock tackle, the ref went "aw naw Im going to look like a fanny" and in fairness he did, but it wasnt his fault.

If he'd left the player on, and, say, he'd scored the winner and injured an opponent, would that have been fair? Damned if you do....

I understand the rules are the rules and all that. Where do the rules stand on catching animals like dogs, is this violent conduct?

J-C
09-03-2011, 10:22 AM
Basically he had to send him off for violent conduct as players are not allowed to touch fans in any violent way, this should be left to the police and stewards who's job it is to tackle these guys and eject them from the ground.

StevieC
09-03-2011, 10:37 AM
Can a ref send himself off for violent conduct??


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQWql5iHgVY

StevieC
09-03-2011, 10:39 AM
I understand the rules are the rules and all that. Where do the rules stand on catching animals like dogs, is this violent conduct?

That would be classed as "obstruction" and would result in a booking and an indirect free kick for the dog.

:greengrin

Unless the dog had a clear goal scoring opportunity?

:hmmm:

delbert
09-03-2011, 10:53 AM
The referee was 100% correct, and I am afraid that the idiot here was the player. What if a player did that to a clothed guy running about the pitch who then pulls out a knife as they go to ground and the player is stabbed, I take it everyone would then blame the ref for not disarming the guy. It's up to the stewards and police to get the guy, it's their job, not the players, and if they chose to leave it a few minutes before getting to the guy then so be it. What happened there was plain and simple, it was violent conduct by a player on a spectator, who just happened at the time to be a naked twat running on the park, the referee had absolutely no option but to red card him, just another example of brainless players who know nothing about the rules.

delbert
09-03-2011, 10:56 AM
Incidentally, as to the question just posed about animals on the park, a few years ago at a Junior game in West Lothian, a dog ran onto the park and was proving really difficult to catch. As it went past one of the players he booted its arse pretty hard - result, red card correctly administered to the player for violent conduct, I love this game, mainly because players make it so funny on a regular basis !

(((Fergus)))
09-03-2011, 11:07 AM
People seem to be saying he was sent off for violent conduct, is that right?

If so, isn't the definition of "violent" open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis or are there specific actions that are viewed as "violent" in all cases, e.g, wrestling to the ground.

If the latter, does this mean that - as Macolm Bogie asked - that had a player violently disarmed a spectator who was intent on shooting the ref, would the ref be required to send the player off?

(((Fergus)))
09-03-2011, 11:08 AM
Incidentally, as to the question just posed about animals on the park, a few years ago at a Junior game in West Lothian, a dog ran onto the park and was proving really difficult to catch. As it went past one of the players he booted its arse pretty hard - result, red card correctly administered to the player for violent conduct, I love this game, mainly because players make it so funny on a regular basis !

To be honest it seems that it's the law that is an ass

Wilson
09-03-2011, 11:10 AM
If the latter, does this mean that - as Macolm Bogie asked - that had a player violently disarmed a spectator who was intent on shooting the ref, would the ref be required to send the player off?

I don't know but the fans would be entitled to boo the player off!!

Wakeyhibee
09-03-2011, 11:31 AM
What has our game come to???? So a fan runs on the pitch punches a player and the player punches back ala Stack and gets sent off if the letter of the law is carried out. the world's gone nuts.

Speedy
09-03-2011, 12:12 PM
People seem to be saying he was sent off for violent conduct, is that right?

If so, isn't the definition of "violent" open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis or are there specific actions that are viewed as "violent" in all cases, e.g, wrestling to the ground.

If the latter, does this mean that - as Macolm Bogie asked - that had a player violently disarmed a spectator who was intent on shooting the ref, would the ref be required to send the player off?

I was about to say something similar. I don't think it was a violent action. He was apprehending the guy. The intent was to stop the guy, he didn't look like he was trying to cause any harm to him.

I suppose it depends on your definition of violent.

Ritchie
09-03-2011, 04:49 PM
Neither can I. But I remember the one at the PBS in our CIS semi.

Ouch :faf:

:faf:

that was a cracker!!!

Twa Cairpets
09-03-2011, 05:15 PM
I was about to say something similar. I don't think it was a violent action. He was apprehending the guy. The intent was to stop the guy, he didn't look like he was trying to cause any harm to him.

I suppose it depends on your definition of violent.

If the boy who was sent off did the same to a player, would you think it worthy of a red card? Clearly, yes.


In the same vane, if the guy on the pitch had been carrying a gun threatening to shoot the ref and the player had wrestled him to the ground the ref would have no option but to send him off? Surely not.

If a guy comes on with a gun threatening to shoot the ref I suspect that regardless of what happened the game would be abandoned...


If so, isn't the definition of "violent" open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis or are there specific actions that are viewed as "violent" in all cases, e.g, wrestling to the ground.

Yep, case by case.


What has our game come to???? So a fan runs on the pitch punches a player and the player punches back ala Stack and gets sent off if the letter of the law is carried out. the world's gone nuts.

Might seem that way on the face of it, but heres what has to be considered:

A referee makes judgement calls on offences - did the player trip his opponent?, was he active during an offside incident?, was a foul in the penalty are or outside it? Once an offence has been committed, he cannot exercise discretion on the consequences of the offence. In this case, it was quite clearly violent conduct, no matter how understandable it was. If he decked him and broke his jaw would that have been ok? Clearly not.

If you start asking referees to make moral judgements, then we're on a very slippery slope. The sanctions against an offence are what they are, even though it might seem on the face of it unfair.

matty_f
09-03-2011, 07:37 PM
People seem to be saying he was sent off for violent conduct, is that right?

If so, isn't the definition of "violent" open to interpretation on a case-by-case basis or are there specific actions that are viewed as "violent" in all cases, e.g, wrestling to the ground.

If the latter, does this mean that - as Macolm Bogie asked - that had a player violently disarmed a spectator who was intent on shooting the ref, would the ref be required to send the player off?

A similar question was raised in a "You are the Ref" desktop calendar I had last year, where the player hit and stopped a spectator who was intent on attacking the referee. The answer to "what would you (the ref) do?" was to send the player off.

snooky
09-03-2011, 08:04 PM
A similar question was raised in a "You are the Ref" desktop calendar I had last year, where the player hit and stopped a spectator who was intent on attacking the referee. The answer to "what would you (the ref) do?" was to send the player off.

Well then, all you young 'uns who play the game now know what to do if the ref gets attacked.

Is the law really an ass? No, it isn't - it's the numpties who apply it to the letter that are the bahookies.

I vote that a "Common Sense Law" be passed in Parliament. This Law would override all stupid interpretations of Laws that can be used in cases like this thread's subject.