PDA

View Full Version : Sportscene



Baldy
18-12-2011, 10:20 PM
how bad is Cillian Sheridan as a guest pundit:rolleyes:

but to be fair His jumper is a cracker:rotflmao:

keep the faith
18-12-2011, 10:30 PM
how bad is Cillian Sheridan as a guest pundit:rolleyes:

but to be fair His jumper is a cracker:rotflmao:

How did he get that gig?? It's like pulling teeth!

down the slope
18-12-2011, 10:31 PM
Penalty that never was, Pawlett should be hauled up in front of the beaks for his dive, we were cheated .

David@EasterRoad
18-12-2011, 10:37 PM
How did he get that gig?? It's like pulling teeth!

he's like something out a father ted xmas special

Hibercelona
18-12-2011, 10:38 PM
Penalty that never was, Pawlett should be hauled up in front of the beaks for his dive, we were cheated .

Was a clear dive, but TBF, he wasn't the only player on the pitch who was at it. GOC needs to get his act together.

Spike Mandela
18-12-2011, 10:42 PM
Penalty that never was, Pawlett should be hauled up in front of the beaks for his dive, we were cheated .

What did they say about it on Sportscene?

NYHibby
18-12-2011, 10:50 PM
Why was PF wearing Billy Brown's clothes?

Fantic
18-12-2011, 10:51 PM
Compared it to recent incidents and thought it may end up in a disciplinary.

Northernhibee
18-12-2011, 10:52 PM
Absolute stone-wall dive, also think that there was more in Pawlett's red card - if that had connected with Stevenson, that could be a pretty serious injury.

****ing unforgiveable that Craig Thomson didn't spot that, must have been the only person in the stadium that didn't see it.

Sir David Gray
18-12-2011, 10:59 PM
I can see Pawlett getting off with his red card and then being hit with a ban from the compliance officer for his dive for the penalty.

Holmesdale Hibs
18-12-2011, 11:27 PM
Blatant dive for the penalty. Shocking decision.

The tackle for the red card was dangerous but no contact was made. I guess it was a straight red for dangerous play although its difficult to tell whether he was trying to play Stevenson or block the clearance. Dirty wee sheep doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt as he dived for the penalty.

Sodje's miss was pretty bad but, although he should have scored, the keeper came out quickly and wasn't the shocker I was expecting.

Based on the highlights, it looked like an even game between 2 poor teams and could have gone either way.

NOLA
18-12-2011, 11:32 PM
Why was PF wearing Billy Brown's clothes?
:greengrin

Sylar
18-12-2011, 11:35 PM
Didn't think either decision from Thompson was correct - not a penalty but never a red card either. Even Stevenson said he was shocked that Pawlett was sent off.

Unlike the penalty decision against us though, the red card didn't cost them anything yesterday and even the disciplinary panel handing Pawlett a ban won't undo the damage it will ultimately do to us, which was cost us a point.

Really - how difficult would it have been for the 4th official to have a quick glance at a video replay and say "no - book him for diving".

Watching the NFL again tonight and it's such a quick process which football is prehistoric to keep avoiding.

Eyrie
18-12-2011, 11:44 PM
Watching the NFL again tonight and it's such a quick process which football is prehistoric to keep avoiding.

Still takes a minute or two. Same with the video ref in rugby.

Sir David Gray
18-12-2011, 11:54 PM
Still takes a minute or two. Same with the video ref in rugby.

I would argue that it's a minute or two that would be worth it, if we're going to end up with the correct decisions being made at the time, when it really matters.

I don't want to turn this into a "will we be relegated?" thread as there's already another one on the go but the point we missed out on yesterday, because of that penalty, could be the difference between us staying up and going down at the end of the season.

Eyrie
19-12-2011, 12:04 AM
I'm not averse to the idea, but it's not as quick as people think.

iwasthere1972
19-12-2011, 12:09 AM
how bad is Cillian Sheridan as a guest pundit:rolleyes:

but to be fair His jumper is a cracker:rotflmao:

Thanks for that. I couldn't hear him as we was drowned out by that jumper.

iwasthere1972
19-12-2011, 12:14 AM
Didn't think either decision from Thompson was correct - not a penalty but never a red card either. Even Stevenson said he was shocked that Pawlett was sent off.

Unlike the penalty decision against us though, the red card didn't cost them anything yesterday and even the disciplinary panel handing Pawlett a ban won't undo the damage it will ultimately do to us, which was cost us a point.

Really - how difficult would it have been for the 4th official to have a quick glance at a video replay and say "no - book him for diving".

Watching the NFL again tonight and it's such a quick process which football is prehistoric to keep avoiding.

This has to be the way forward. I would rather the game be delayed for however long it takes so long as the correct decision is made. If "cheats" know that their dive or whatever will be scrutinised via video replay it may make them think twice before going to ground.

SteveHFC
19-12-2011, 12:15 AM
Why was PF wearing Billy Brown's clothes?

Fenlon is a tramp :greengrin

Eyrie
19-12-2011, 12:22 AM
How would a review system work in football?

Would it only apply when a penalty is awarded? Would the award only be cancelled if the replay showed no contact between defender and attacker, or that the ball did not strike the defender's hand? If there is no clear visual evidence, or it is a judgement call, would the original decision to award a penalty still stand?

Would a manager be able to challenge the decision by a referee not to award a penalty? How often could he do this? When would such a review take place? At the next stoppage? Imagine the outcry if the defending team counter attacked and scored, only for their goal to cancelled because the review took priority and a penalty should have been awarded? But how could the game be stopped just because a manager wanted a non-award reviewed?

In rugby it is only used when the ball is over the line and play has stopped. There is an obvious break after every play in the NFL, or afeter a delivery in cricket. I'm not sure that it would be practical in football.

Sylar
19-12-2011, 12:40 AM
How would a review system work in football?

Would it only apply when a penalty is awarded? Would the award only be cancelled if the replay showed no contact between defender and attacker, or that the ball did not strike the defender's hand? If there is no clear visual evidence, or it is a judgement call, would the original decision to award a penalty still stand?

Would a manager be able to challenge the decision by a referee not to award a penalty? How often could he do this? When would such a review take place? At the next stoppage? Imagine the outcry if the defending team counter attacked and scored, only for their goal to cancelled because the review took priority and a penalty should have been awarded? But how could the game be stopped just because a manager wanted a non-award reviewed?

In rugby it is only used when the ball is over the line and play has stopped. There is an obvious break after every play in the NFL, or afeter a delivery in cricket. I'm not sure that it would be practical in football.

So long as Blatter and his cronies remain in the halls of power at FIFA, it's a moot discussion to be honest, as we'll endure the same pish excuses about why technology cannot be incorporated at all levels through the game.

Either a challenge system (similar to tennis or American football), or automatic review whenever the ball is next dead would both be valid options, each undoubtedly with their pros and cons in situation specific instances.

With the amount of money which is riding on games these days, football clubs can literally live or die by some of these poor decisions, which, although are part and parcel of the game (and make for lengthy discussion points throughout the season which all fans can relate to), are detrimental to the business and financial management of these effective companies.

Jack
19-12-2011, 08:40 AM
Still takes a minute or two. Same with the video ref in rugby.

A minute or two to decide something that could turn the match, as we saw on Saturday is still a damn sight quicker than the sheep appealing a red card that should never have been, what about 2 weeks, and then the ‘fast track system’ taking a week to decide it was a dive and suspend him anyway for a penalty that never was.

In one scenario we at least draw and the match is finished after 90 minutes, plus maybe another 4 minutes for review. The match hasn’t really finished yet and the full outcome wont be known for maybe a couple of weeks but we'll have still been cheated out of a point.

Geo_1875
19-12-2011, 08:50 AM
Can't believe they're still whining about Garry O "getting away with it" every time somebody is caught cheating.

Billy Whizz
19-12-2011, 08:55 AM
Can't believe they're still whining about Garry O "getting away with it" every time somebody is caught cheating.

It got us 3 points that's why. Same reason we are miffed that Pawlett dived at the weekend. We need to ban divers for at least 3 games

Andy74
19-12-2011, 09:03 AM
It got us 3 points that's why. Same reason we are miffed that Pawlett dived at the weekend. We need to ban divers for at least 3 games

Only Garry was fouled. That's the difference. We had footage from another angle showing him being pushed. The feet were nothing to do with it.

johnrebus
19-12-2011, 09:09 AM
It got us 3 points that's why. Same reason we are miffed that Pawlett dived at the weekend. We need to ban divers for at least 3 games


We led 2-1 at the time. No guarantee that St Johnstone would have scored again.


:confused:

big-mo
19-12-2011, 09:14 AM
Blatant dive for the penalty. Shocking decision.

The tackle for the red card was dangerous but no contact was made. I guess it was a straight red for dangerous play although its difficult to tell whether he was trying to play Stevenson or block the clearance. Dirty wee sheep doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt as he dived for the penalty.

Sodje's miss was pretty bad but, although he should have scored, the keeper came out quickly and wasn't the shocker I was expecting.

Based on the highlights, it looked like an even game between 2 poor teams and could have gone either way.

If you watch Sodje's chance again, have a look at the defender whom he turned and you will see that he had a hold of Sodje's arm just like Hart did last week which resulted in the Gers penalty. Where is the consistency, also none of the pundits picked up on it either.

big-mo
19-12-2011, 09:24 AM
While we are on about bad refereeing decisions, in last week's game the linesman (sorry assistant referee) was standing over Griffiths when he made his gesture to the Rangers fans and even had a smile about it so why was the assistant referee not pulled up for missing the incident, if he had brought it to the ref's attention Griffiths would have got a yellow card but because of the ineptitude of the officials the player gets banned. I am not apologising for Griffiths actions but as was pointed out 'fans can give players abuse all day but players are never allowed to show any reactions to the fans'.

TRIALIST
19-12-2011, 09:30 AM
Didn't think either decision from Thompson was correct - not a penalty but never a red card either. Even Stevenson said he was shocked that Pawlett was sent off.

Unlike the penalty decision against us though, the red card didn't cost them anything yesterday and even the disciplinary panel handing Pawlett a ban won't undo the damage it will ultimately do to us, which was cost us a point.

Really - how difficult would it have been for the 4th official to have a quick glance at a video replay and say "no - book him for diving".

Watching the NFL again tonight and it's such a quick process which football is prehistoric to keep avoiding.


Craig Thompson is quite rightly getting stick as he is in charge...but the linesman in front of us had the best view of both incidents. If Thomson made the decision on his own for the penalty the lino should have told him he was wrong, for the sending off Thomson could clearly be seen taking the lino's advice that it was a sending off.
Ive no problem with the sending off he clearly went in studs up thats dangerous play, but for such an experienced referee to be conned by this dive and especially after other similar simulation incidents have been highlighted on tv, he either has an agenda or is just crap at refereeing.

Hibrandenburg
19-12-2011, 09:40 AM
Didn't think either decision from Thompson was correct - not a penalty but never a red card either. Even Stevenson said he was shocked that Pawlett was sent off.

Unlike the penalty decision against us though, the red card didn't cost them anything yesterday and even the disciplinary panel handing Pawlett a ban won't undo the damage it will ultimately do to us, which was cost us a point.

Really - how difficult would it have been for the 4th official to have a quick glance at a video replay and say "no - book him for diving".

Watching the NFL again tonight and it's such a quick process which football is prehistoric to keep avoiding.

IMHO the few minutes that it takes to study the video footage adds to the excitement. Also it would be another stone in the way of corruption and I think this is the real reason that Blatter is against it.

silverhibee
19-12-2011, 11:37 AM
Penalty that never was, Pawlett should be hauled up in front of the beaks for his dive, we were cheated .



I dont think he will be for some reason or another, he will get his red card brought down to yellow on appeal, Ivan will get a two match ban and be fined by the club for telling the truth about the ref after the game. imo

JimBHibees
19-12-2011, 11:54 AM
I dont think he will be for some reason or another, he will get his red card brought down to yellow on appeal, Ivan will get a two match ban and be fined by the club for telling the truth about the ref after the game. imo

There are times that players should learn that the truth will only get you in more trouble. I think one of the reasons Ivan left originally was that he had stated that he thought some refs were going out of their way to punish him given that he really should learn to button it, getting a booking for dissent on Saturday was stupid also.

silverhibee
19-12-2011, 12:37 PM
There are times that players should learn that the truth will only get you in more trouble. I think one of the reasons Ivan left originally was that he had stated that he thought some refs were going out of their way to punish him given that he really should learn to button it, getting a booking for dissent on Saturday was stupid also.


Had Ivan got booked for the tackle on the Dons player at the dug out then he would have seen red as well on Saturday, and it certainly was a booking if Pawlett's was a red.

We cant afford to have players picking up silly bookings or red cards that would see them suspended for the end of the season games.

Sir David Gray
19-12-2011, 03:04 PM
How would a review system work in football?

Would it only apply when a penalty is awarded? Would the award only be cancelled if the replay showed no contact between defender and attacker, or that the ball did not strike the defender's hand? If there is no clear visual evidence, or it is a judgement call, would the original decision to award a penalty still stand?

Would a manager be able to challenge the decision by a referee not to award a penalty? How often could he do this? When would such a review take place? At the next stoppage? Imagine the outcry if the defending team counter attacked and scored, only for their goal to cancelled because the review took priority and a penalty should have been awarded? But how could the game be stopped just because a manager wanted a non-award reviewed?

In rugby it is only used when the ball is over the line and play has stopped. There is an obvious break after every play in the NFL, or afeter a delivery in cricket. I'm not sure that it would be practical in football.

Quite simple.

I would work in a similar way to the review system in tennis.

At the start of every match, both teams have 3 challenges available to them. They can use it for the goal lines, for yellow/red cards, for penalty decisions and for off the ball incidents which are missed by the officials.

If they are correct in using their review then they keep their 3 challenges, if they are deemed to be incorrect then they lose one.

The video referee would have the final say on whether a review was successful or not.


While we are on about bad refereeing decisions, in last week's game the linesman (sorry assistant referee) was standing over Griffiths when he made his gesture to the Rangers fans and even had a smile about it so why was the assistant referee not pulled up for missing the incident, if he had brought it to the ref's attention Griffiths would have got a yellow card but because of the ineptitude of the officials the player gets banned. I am not apologising for Griffiths actions but as was pointed out 'fans can give players abuse all day but players are never allowed to show any reactions to the fans'.

I thought this as well, however it was brought to my attention last week by someone on here that what Griffiths did to the Rangers fans was actually a sending off offence (the use of insulting, offensive or absusive words and/or gestures). So therefore if the referee had been made aware of the gesture made by Leigh Griffiths, he would have been duty bound to show him a red card.

Speedway
20-12-2011, 09:51 AM
Only Garry was fouled. That's the difference. We had footage from another angle showing him being pushed. The feet were nothing to do with it.

Give me a break, it was a blatant dive and he should have been booked for it.

Geo_1875
20-12-2011, 11:43 AM
Give me a break, it was a blatant dive and he should have been booked for it.

So you disagree with the SPL team of 3 experts who had all the video evidence to replay as many times as they wished. That'll make you right then.