PDA

View Full Version : Craigan



Hexham Hibee
29-10-2012, 10:17 AM
Was shocked to hear him say that O'Reilly shouldn't ref any more SPL games in the near future. WTF. It was the linesman that got both dubious calls wrong. I thought he had a good game, certainly had Higden sussed with his backing in, use of arms etc.

Craigan, or anybody else for that matter, did not mention that O'Reilly missed Henrik Pyjamma's fore arm smash on Hanlon. Pyjamma is a wee turd and has previous for off the ball stuff like that.

The BBC needs to have a look at who it uses and what the say. If Preston, Robbo and now Craigan can't be impartial then get rid of them. Pat Nevin, Tony Higgins, Craig Patterson all show how it should be done.

Tricla
29-10-2012, 10:22 AM
Craigan is a bellend

HIBERNIAN-0762
29-10-2012, 10:55 AM
His obvious bias against us on Friday was embarrassing but it's the norm for people like him to line up and slag us off all the time, managers, commentators and so called experts have been disrespecting us for an age now, some of it particularly last season I suppose was merited but FFS give us a break!

SkintHibby
29-10-2012, 11:05 AM
To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

JimBHibees
29-10-2012, 11:20 AM
To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

The two contentious calls were the goal that wasnt and the Spoony pen. The other two pens were IMO both soft and that in many cases neither would be given however I think it is important to clarify we did win 4-0 not 1 or 2-0.

easty
29-10-2012, 11:21 AM
The two contentious calls were the goal that wasnt and the Spoony pen. The other two pens were IMO both soft and that in many cases neither would be given however I think it is important to clarify we did win 4-0 not 1 or 2-0.

I dont think our first pen was soft at all.

JimBHibees
29-10-2012, 11:25 AM
I dont think our first pen was soft at all.

Agree to an extent though was personally surprised it was given however I think it was on a par with the Well pen which to me wasnt one.

Pretty Boy
29-10-2012, 11:27 AM
The Griffiths penalty was a stonewaller imo. Went past the keeper who gave him a wee push and bundled him over.

The 'goal' was over the line but the ref did the right thing in checking with his linesman who should have been in a better position. Watch the replay, the ref looks straight over to the linesman and then makes the decision. It was a bad call but the pace at which it all happened made it a tough decision.

The motherwell penalty was also a stonewaller imo. McPake has to be smarter than that. Higdon is clever and just stands his ground and McPake climbs all over him.

Spoony penalty was a bad call. Was outside the box and possibly a good tackle too.

So the ref made one very bad call, 2 correct calls and got another wrong but understandbly so imo. Not great but about what you'd expect from the standard of referee in Scotland. About time we got a couple of dodgy decsions in our favour anyway.

NORTHERNHIBBY
29-10-2012, 11:39 AM
Motherwell could still be playing now and not scored yet. Faced with an empty net, they would probably put it out for a goal kick. The ref and the officials had a real stinker. Just get over it. It happened in the " best league in the world " at the weekend as well.

Treadstone
29-10-2012, 11:39 AM
We caught the breaks on Friday no doubt . The thing that irks me is Craigan and Houston talking about 'Wells first half performance and how they shouldn't be behind at the break . No mention of Spoonys back heel that just went wide and Sparkys shot that went even closer . If they go in the game is finished after half an hour.

The_Sauz
29-10-2012, 12:07 PM
To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

What makes you come to this conclusion :confused:

"The header" The linesman had 2 choices to make! Did the whole ball cross the line or did it not!
In real time there was no chance he could tell as Williams body had covered his line off sight off the whole ball, so he decided it did not cross the line. It was not until you see it in slow motion that you you could tell that the ball had crossed the line.....JUST!

Hibs 1st Pen was called correctly as the Keeper pushed then blocked Sparky with his arm.

Hibs 2nd pen was also called correctly! Everybody says that initial contact was outside the box! Well if you look at it again, then you will see that it was in fact DW who made stood on the defenders foot outside the box! It was not until the defender lifted his knee that contact was made (inside the box) and the Ref had a clear view of this!

Well pen was soft, but called correct (higgdon played for it, but James should know not to put his hands on a players shoulders in the box)

Officials will have good & bad games through out a season, just like players.......it's called being Human! (plus it gives us something to moan about on .Net :greengrin)

So the use of the word NIGHTMARE was a bit harsh and should only be used for one official........... Craig "The Official Nightmare" Thompson :agree:

Alfred E Newman
29-10-2012, 12:11 PM
If these decisions had went the way of the OF they would have been written off by now as "these things even themselves out over the season"

mikethehibee69
29-10-2012, 12:14 PM
:top marksAlthough he is also known as a cheating git and any other expletives you care to use:wink:I hate that CT with a passion
What makes you come to this conclusion :confused:

"The header" The linesman had 2 choices to make! Did the whole ball cross the line or did it not!
In real time there was no chance he could tell as Williams body had covered his line off sight off the whole ball, so he decided it did not cross the line. It was not until you see it in slow motion that you you could tell that the ball had crossed the line.....JUST!

Hibs 1st Pen was called correctly as the Keeper pushed then blocked Sparky with his arm.

Hibs 2nd pen was also called correctly! Everybody says that initial contact was outside the box! Well if you look at it again, then you will see that it was in fact DW who made stood on the defenders foot outside the box! It was not until the defender lifted his knee that contact was made (inside the box) and the Ref had a clear view of this!

Well pen was soft, but called correct (higgdon played for it, but James should know not to put his hands on a players shoulders in the box)

Officials will have good & bad games through out a season, just like players.......it's called being Human! (plus it gives us something to moan about on .Net :greengrin)

So the use of the word NIGHTMARE was a bit harsh and should only be used for one official........... Craig "The Official Nightmare" Thompson :agree:

LeighLoyal
29-10-2012, 12:16 PM
If these decisions had went the way of the OF they would have been written off by now as "these things even themselves out over the season"



Yep, via Chic Dung, Traynor, Keevins etc.... The only team that got any regular favours was Rangers (RIP). So no longer an issue. Craigan is just sore his team didn't get the rub, then he'd be silent as a church mouse.

Baldy
29-10-2012, 12:17 PM
I actually like Craigan .. he is the best of the summerisers ... says what he thinks and although it was Motherwell he was sticking up for, he is usually impartial.

Lets also be honest if the decisions we got on Friday went against us we would all be saying the same thing ...

I am just worried we may now get absolutely no decisions in our favour for months

truehibernian
29-10-2012, 12:43 PM
For me I think he is well out of order singling out one ref in particular, and I would say Stevie O'Reilly is definitely not the worst ref - in fact he is one of the most consistent in my opinion.

Regards Friday night - without a shadow of a doubt we got lucky with the Ben Williams 'save' - however in Stevie's defence he is relying on his farside linesman to assist, which clearly he didn't (to our advantage).

First penalty - very soft, but how many times do we see defenders in particular shield the ball out of play, often in my opinion fouling the attacking player by obstructing him. Randolph really could and should have ushered Leigh out of play, but he chose to grab and use physcial force to force Leigh off and away from the ball. Soft but a penalty.

Second penalty - again, maybe green tinted specs but I think Stevie saw the second movement of Hammell's leg and body, not the initial infringement - if he was obscured then he may have seen what he thought was a cute attempt by the defender to reposition his body (in this case watch Hammell's thigh movement closely as he consciously in my opinion raises it) - this looks to be marginally inside the box. Again the linesman could have helped.

I think he got 'Well's penalty right as James McPake falls for Higdon's cleverness and dives over at an angle.

As Pat Nevin said today on 5Live - bring in technology and these decisions then won't be major talking points nor will they hopefully mean the difference between 3 points, relegation, a Euro spot, etc. Every single other sport has it - I simply don't see what makes top flight football any different (although I would hazard a guess that it is cost - if it is cost then the SFA or SPL should be bearing it, not the clubs). In saying that even technology wouldn't stop Craig Thomson being inept - he follows the 'Charlie Richmond laws of refereeing manual' :greengrin

SaulGoodman
29-10-2012, 12:43 PM
Okay then Craigan, let's give Motherwell the goal and get rid of that bad penalty decision by the ref.. Oh look at that, we still won 3-1!

:wink:

3pm
29-10-2012, 12:53 PM
What did he say when the lights went out last year? How did he get on with his win bonus in the rearranged game?!

Hibs deserved to win that game, no doubt. We got a bit of luck but there wasn't too much sympathy when we never got any last year.

Up Motherwell, Up Stephen Craigan. Move on.

NEXT.

Future17
29-10-2012, 01:02 PM
Couldn't really give a toss about Craigan and I'm delighted we won 4-0, but the actual issue, which is totally separate to those things, is whether O'Reilly is of the requisite standard to ref in the SPL.

I think he made major mistakes in awarding the penalty for the foul on Spoony and for not even booking Higdon for his challenge on Taiwo which could easily have been a red card.

If he refereed Hibs next week and made major mistakes which resulted in us losing the game, I'd be angry that he'd been allowed to continue on unchecked from his previous errors.

Golden Bear
29-10-2012, 01:30 PM
I wonder how long it will be before someone of a Hibs persuasion appears as a guest on Sportscenes Sunday night program? Maybe it's just me, but the studio guest more often than not is someone who has a connection with the team that Hibs were playing against.

Craigan is normally quite fair but last night he overstepped his remit when he said that it should be a long time before Steve O'Reilly is awarded another SPL match. I don't suppose anything can be done by the Authorities to reprimand him either.

patlowe
29-10-2012, 01:38 PM
I actually like Craigan .. he is the best of the summerisers ... says what he thinks and although it was Motherwell he was sticking up for, he is usually impartial.

Lets also be honest if the decisions we got on Friday went against us we would all be saying the same thing ...

I am just worried we may now get absolutely no decisions in our favour for months

Personally I'm not that fussed about his criticism of the decisions, it's the unbelievable bias he displayed pretty much until it was clear that we'd handed Well a pumping. He repeatedly went on about how Motherwell were so on top in the first half and completely ignored the good things Hibs were doing. Hibs created 3 decent chances and attacked well generally in the first half, while Motherwell also had their chances, including the one over the line. We weren't amazing by any means but you would think Motherwell had battered Hibs. That was simply not the case. Having said all that, the longer we go being underestimated the better I suppose.

ALF TUPPER
29-10-2012, 01:50 PM
I thought spoony's penalty was a pen. He was riding the challenge until the Well defender brough his knee up and the Spoonmesieter went down ( in the box) . Soft but a pen nevertheless.

The disallowed goal was a goal - defo.

We still won 4-0. So any amount of posturing from Greetin Craigen wont make any difference. Last season we had no luck at all, a poor team, poor results and a dejected support.


Look at us now. We've a good solid team, great results and a support looking forward to games. Glorry Glory - get it up ye Craigen.
:fenlon


...................... Now where have i put my Hibby tinted glasses :partyhibb

allezsauzee
29-10-2012, 02:04 PM
Craigan is a walloper. End of.

--------
29-10-2012, 02:44 PM
I thought spoony's penalty was a pen. He was riding the challenge until the Well defender brough his knee up and the Spoonmesieter went down ( in the box) . Soft but a pen nevertheless.

The disallowed goal was a goal - defo.

We still won 4-0. So any amount of posturing from Greetin Craigen wont make any difference. Last season we had no luck at all, a poor team, poor results and a dejected support.


Look at us now. We've a good solid team, great results and a support looking forward to games. Glorry Glory - get it up ye Craigen.
:fenlon


...................... Now where have i put my Hibby tinted glasses :partyhibb


:top marks

I really don't know why some of us are so apologetic about this match. The only thing Motherwell have a real beef about IMO is the 'goal' that wasn't awarded. An equaliser at that point in the game could have roused Motherwell; the game could have had a different result had the goal been allowed.

However, in the assistant referee's defence, he was down in the corner where he was supposed to be, but not only did Ben Williams' body obscure his view of the ball, there were a number of players (4 or 5, IIRC) between him and Williams. The camera that showed the ball over the line so clearly was set about 12 feet above the ground down in the corner - the assistant, on the other hand, was normal size - about 5'9", or a wee bit more, I'd judge. He didn't have the very clear view that the camera had, and unless he's absolutely certain that the ball was all the way over the goal-line, he could not advise the referee to award the goal. Mr O'Reilly was also in his correct position - but from where he was, facing the goal, he had no way of knowing whether the ball had crossed the line or not.

Neither official, IMO should be blamed for the incident - it was one of those things that happen in football. When it benefits us, we grin and take it. When we lose, we rage about it for as long as folks are prepared to listen. That's what being a football fan means. Commentators and summarisers, on the other hand, should be a lot cooler and more careful in what they say.

The first Hibs penalty was a stonewaller - Randolph clearly pushed Griffiths away from the ball, then as Leigh gets ahead of him Randolph clips his heels. There is - or should be - no argument about this. It was a penalty, clearly and unequivocally.

The Motherwell penalty was also clear and unequivocal. McPake rose to challenge for a ball when he really didn't need to - he was leaning into Higdon and he really can have no complaints that the referee penalised him. Tough on them that Higdon missed the penalty, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.

Our second penalty was for an illegal challenge on Wotherspoon by Hamill. The BBC website's blow-by-blow commentary said it happened 'well outside the penalty area' - well, it didn't. When contact was made Hamill was ON THE 18-YARD LINE, as was Wotherspoon. The 18-yard line is part of the penalty area.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2012_e.pdf

"The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries." (top of page 6)

If you're on the line, you're in the area. End of. Hamill, straddling the 18-yard line, brought down Wotherspoon, who was also on the 18-yard line and came down inside the 18-yard box. The line is part of the box. It was a foul. It was a penalty. The referee was right.

The problem has been exacerbated by two things - the incompetence of your average BBC Scotland football presenter, and the fact that one of the 'commentators' at the game was Craigan, who clearly is a committed Motherwell fan and reacts to what he sees as a fan rather than as a professional commentator or summariser. His comments on Sunday night were way out of order - I can understand him lbeing upset on the Friday night, but by the Sunday he should have sat down, looked at the videotapes, and arrived at a balanced and reasonable opinion. It doesn't seem to me that he's either willing or capable of doing so, and he should not be allowed anywhere near a microphone until he learns what the word 'impartiality' means.

For the record, Hibs played well. Maybe not quite deserving 4-0, but 3-0 or 4-1 would have been a fair reflection of the game - and that would still have been an emphatic margin of victory away from home. There are still rough edges, and it's a worry how many of our better players are likely to leave in January. But on the night we played well, and while no one can reasonably expect the morons at BBC Scotland to be happy, I can't see why the Hibs fans should be so ready to join in the criticism of a referee who for once gave us what we deserved.

iwasthere1972
29-10-2012, 03:00 PM
Haven't looked at previous posts because I'm in a hurry to go out but there was the occasion in the second half when one of their players bundled Paul Cairney off the ball and his shot went wide of the Hibs goal. The ref blew for a foul for us and yet Craigan said that we got let off. :confused: Their player missed anyway and it was definitely a foul on Cairney.

truehibernian
29-10-2012, 03:11 PM
:top marks

I really don't know why some of us are so apologetic about this match. The only thing Motherwell have a real beef about IMO is the 'goal' that wasn't awarded. An equaliser at that point in the game could have roused Motherwell; the game could have had a different result had the goal been allowed.

However, in the assistant referee's defence, he was down in the corner where he was supposed to be, but not only did Ben Williams' body obscure his view of the ball, there were a number of players (4 or 5, IIRC) between him and Williams. The camera that showed the ball over the line so clearly was set about 12 feet above the ground down in the corner - the assistant, on the other hand, was normal size - about 5'9", or a wee bit more, I'd judge. He didn't have the very clear view that the camera had, and unless he's absolutely certain that the ball was all the way over the goal-line, he could not advise the referee to award the goal. Mr O'Reilly was also in his correct position - but from where he was, facing the goal, he had no way of knowing whether the ball had crossed the line or not.

Neither official, IMO should be blamed for the incident - it was one of those things that happen in football. When it benefits us, we grin and take it. When we lose, we rage about it for as long as folks are prepared to listen. That's what being a football fan means. Commentators and summarisers, on the other hand, should be a lot cooler and more careful in what they say.

The first Hibs penalty was a stonewaller - Randolph clearly pushed Griffiths away from the ball, then as Leigh gets ahead of him Randolph clips his heels. There is - or should be - no argument about this. It was a penalty, clearly and unequivocally.

The Motherwell penalty was also clear and unequivocal. McPake rose to challenge for a ball when he really didn't need to - he was leaning into Higdon and he really can have no complaints that the referee penalised him. Tough on them that Higdon missed the penalty, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.

Our second penalty was for an illegal challenge on Wotherspoon by Hamill. The BBC website's blow-by-blow commentary said it happened 'well outside the penalty area' - well, it didn't. When contact was made Hamill was ON THE 18-YARD LINE, as was Wotherspoon. The 18-yard line is part of the penalty area.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2012_e.pdf

"The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries." (top of page 6)

If you're on the line, you're in the area. End of. Hamill, straddling the 18-yard line, brought down Wotherspoon, who was also on the 18-yard line and came down inside the 18-yard box. The line is part of the box. It was a foul. It was a penalty. The referee was right.

The problem has been exacerbated by two things - the incompetence of your average BBC Scotland football presenter, and the fact that one of the 'commentators' at the game was Craigan, who clearly is a committed Motherwell fan and reacts to what he sees as a fan rather than as a professional commentator or summariser. His comments on Sunday night were way out of order - I can understand him lbeing upset on the Friday night, but by the Sunday he should have sat down, looked at the videotapes, and arrived at a balanced and reasonable opinion. It doesn't seem to me that he's either willing or capable of doing so, and he should not be allowed anywhere near a microphone until he learns what the word 'impartiality' means.

For the record, Hibs played well. Maybe not quite deserving 4-0, but 3-0 or 4-1 would have been a fair reflection of the game - and that would still have been an emphatic margin of victory away from home. There are still rough edges, and it's a worry how many of our better players are likely to leave in January. But on the night we played well, and while no one can reasonably expect the morons at BBC Scotland to be happy, I can't see why the Hibs fans should be so ready to join in the criticism of a referee who for once gave us what we deserved.

Good post Doddie, however if you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the box starts I'm pretty sure his answer would be Mount Florida :greengrin

--------
29-10-2012, 03:18 PM
Haven't looked at previous posts because I'm in a hurry to go out but there was the occasion in the second half when one of their players bundled Paul Cairney off the ball and his shot went wide of the Hibs goal. The ref blew for a foul for us and yet Craigan said that we got let off. :confused: Their player missed anyway and it was definitely a foul on Cairney.


Their own stats on their own website state that Hibs had 58% of the possession on Friday evening. That would be just about exactly right, IMO.

That's a lot of possession, and a team that can keep the ball away from the opposition for that proportion of a game (and score four times while doing so) are probably playing not too badly.

--------
29-10-2012, 03:21 PM
Good post Doddie, however if you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the box starts I'm pretty sure his answer would be Mount Florida :greengrin


If you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the penalty area is, I suspect he'd say, "Wherever I want it to be."

JimBHibees
29-10-2012, 03:34 PM
If you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the penalty area is, I suspect he'd say, "Wherever Hearts want it to be."

Fixed that for you. :greengrin

brog
29-10-2012, 04:19 PM
There's no doubt we got the rub of the green on Friday but I honestly can't remember another occasion in recent memory where that was the case. Last year, we got a pen against St J. GOC was then handed a 2 match ban ( wrongly ) Although we won the appeal GOC never got a decision in his favour after that. At Pittodrie last season Craig Thomson got 2 major decisions wrong, one a pen cost us the game & Pawlett won his appeal against a sending off then got banned for diving for the pen, you couldn't make it up!! CT's punishment for these catastrophic errors ( in a live TV game ) was to be awarded the cup final!! Where was the indignation from TV commentators then??
Sheer hypocrisy & we're an easy target!

SkintHibby
29-10-2012, 04:26 PM
What makes you come to this conclusion :confused:

3 really bad calls from the officials.... 2 penalties for Hibs that should not have been and a perfectly good goal not given for Motherwell.

It's easy for people here to say the final score was 4-0 and not 1-0 but if that Motherwell 'goal' had stood, who knows what the final score might have been - Motherwell were looking really good.

Anyway, the point is, I want Hibs to win and win well as much the next Hibby but I don't want us getting help from officials. It was embarassing.

Oh if we'd beat Hearts 4-0 with help from the officials - that would be OK!:greengrin

The_Sauz
29-10-2012, 04:42 PM
3 really bad calls from the officials.... 2 penalties for Hibs that should not have been and a perfectly good goal not given for Motherwell.

It's easy for people here to say the final score was 4-0 and not 1-0 but if that Motherwell 'goal' had stood, who knows what the final score might have been - Motherwell were looking really good.

Anyway, the point is, I want Hibs to win and win well as much the next Hibby but I don't want us getting help from officials. It was embarassing.

Oh if we'd beat Hearts 4-0 with help from the officials - that would be OK!:greengrin
I guess you don't know the rules of the game then! Embarrassing...have a look in the mirror :rolleyes:

blackpoolhibs
29-10-2012, 04:44 PM
If you watch the first penalty again, Randolph has a grip of sparkys shirt = clear penalty.

I think the 2nd penalty was outside the box, just. They should have had a goal, we are all agreed on that.

I'm glad we dont have video technology, we'd have nothing to argue about if we did. :greengrin

--------
29-10-2012, 05:45 PM
Fixed that for you. :greengrin

Thank you, Jim.

Other referees' earpieces are for communcating with the assistants and fourth official. Thomson's is tuned to the old Soviet Baltic Fleet submarine channel - direct from MadVlad's secret bunker deep in the wastes of wildest Lith-land ...



3 really bad calls from the officials.... 2 penalties for Hibs that should not have been and a perfectly good goal not given for Motherwell.

It's easy for people here to say the final score was 4-0 and not 1-0 but if that Motherwell 'goal' had stood, who knows what the final score might have been - Motherwell were looking really good.

Anyway, the point is, I want Hibs to win and win well as much the next Hibby but I don't want us getting help from officials. It was embarassing.

Oh if we'd beat Hearts 4-0 with help from the officials - that would be OK!:greengrin


FYI.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2012_e.pdf


Read it. Then at least you'll be able to disagree with people intelligently. :rolleyes:

malcolm
29-10-2012, 08:17 PM
I find Craigan a bit irritating probably a bit unfairly but woo hoo with him was summarising on ESPB with his motherwell scarf round his neck and his winging thereafter I now feel full justified for my dislike.


Lost interest in watching scottish highlight shows or any scottish game without Hibs as but it's the first time I've seen a 'pundit' wearing his colours on the job it is a bit unprofessional. Mind you with most of the talking donkeys we are lumbered with it might be right good fun to slip on a blindfold and have a go at 'nail the colours on the donkey/succulent lamb'. :greengrin

Hibernia Na Eir
29-10-2012, 09:36 PM
Craigan is a bellend

he is indeed. never liked the twat. pity he's not still playing, our forwards could have ripped him up.

Sir David Gray
29-10-2012, 11:27 PM
From what I have seen of the replays of the incidents, the 'goal' should obviously have been given as it was clearly over the line.

The Motherwell penalty was a stonewaller and although most people have said that our 2nd penalty should have been a free kick, looking at it from one particular angle, I don't actually see any contact at all on Wotherspoon until he gets into the box when the defender catches his leg.

For our first penalty, I personally felt that was very soft and although you do see Randolph giving Griffiths a little nudge, if that had been given against us, I would have been really upset with that.

It was a poor night for the officials but I can't say that I feel sorry for Motherwell. It's swings and roundabouts as far as that's concerned and there's been numerous games over the years where we've suffered at the hands of poor decisions by the officials so we shouldn't feel guilty about the fact that we benefited on Friday night.

ekhibee
30-10-2012, 02:05 PM
From what I have seen of the replays of the incidents, the 'goal' should obviously have been given as it was clearly over the line.

The Motherwell penalty was a stonewaller and although most people have said that our 2nd penalty should have been a free kick, looking at it from one particular angle, I don't actually see any contact at all on Wotherspoon until he gets into the box when the defender catches his leg.

For our first penalty, I personally felt that was very soft and although you do see Randolph giving Griffiths a little nudge, if that had been given against us, I would have been really upset with that.

It was a poor night for the officials but I can't say that I feel sorry for Motherwell. It's swings and roundabouts as far as that's concerned and there's been numerous games over the years where we've suffered at the hands of poor decisions by the officials so we shouldn't feel guilty about the fact that we benefited on Friday night.

I agree, as most people do, that the Motherwell 'goal' should have stood, and that their penalty was definitely a penalty (although Richard Gordon didn't think it was when he was speaking in Off The Ball the day after). I disagree with you about the 1st Hibs penalty though, Randolph didn't just 'nudge' him once, and I thought it was a pretty straightforward decision to give the penalty. Generally you're right though, I don't feel sorry for Motherwell. They didn't create nearly enough chances in the game to suggest they should have got a draw, never mind all 3 points. And what makes it even better is that a Motherwell fan at my work was convinced THEY were going to win 4-0 before the game had kicked off.

Hibercelona
30-10-2012, 02:20 PM
I can guarantee you, that if those decisions had fell in Motherwells favour, very little would have been said about it.

Season after season, decisions like that have gone against us and nobody has raised an eyebrow about it. But as soon as a rare occurrence like this happens, they're all over it like a rash to ensure that it doesn't happen again for at least another 10 seasons.

Did anybody hear any pundits talk about how Craig Thompson shouldn't be refereeing another game at SPL level for a very long time after the cup final?

Of course not. Nobody gave a ****, because the decisions went against us, which is considered standard order by the fuds that run our game, or talk about it in the media.

Expect everything to go against us against St Mirren and for there to be no mention of it afterwards.

marinello59
30-10-2012, 03:56 PM
I can guarantee you, that if those decisions had fell in Motherwells favour, very little would have been said about it.

Season after season, decisions like that have gone against us and nobody has raised an eyebrow about it. But as soon as a rare occurrence like this happens, they're all over it like a rash to ensure that it doesn't happen again for at least another 10 seasons.

Did anybody hear any pundits talk about how Craig Thompson shouldn't be refereeing another game at SPL level for a very long time after the cup final?

Of course not. Nobody gave a ****, because the decisions went against us, which is considered standard order by the fuds that run our game, or talk about it in the media.

Expect everything to go against us against St Mirren and for there to be no mention of it afterwards.

That's almost as paranoid as some of the stuff Celtc fans come out with. There is an agenda against Hibs? :faf:

Hibercelona
30-10-2012, 03:59 PM
That's almost as paranoid as some of the stuff Celtc fans come out with. There is an agenda against Hibs? :faf:

Paranoid...... maybe...


Incorrect?.... :cool2:

marinello59
30-10-2012, 04:07 PM
Paranoid...... maybe...


Incorrect?.... :cool2:

What did you see in the reporting of the refereeing decisions from Friday night that would not have got the same coverage if they had gone the other way? There seemed to be no bias there at all to me. We get big decisions going our way yet some Hibs fans still take from it proof of some sort of conspiracy. That is simply hilarious.

Bill Milne
30-10-2012, 05:00 PM
Surely the real problem is that so few people in Scotland are capable of remaining nuetral what commenting on games. Maybe they need to bring in outsiders with no previous connection with clubs concerned. Craigan was hopelessly partial in this case.

Hibercelona
30-10-2012, 05:48 PM
What did you see in the reporting of the refereeing decisions from Friday night that would not have got the same coverage if they had gone the other way? There seemed to be no bias there at all to me. We get big decisions going our way yet some Hibs fans still take from it proof of some sort of conspiracy. That is simply hilarious.

I'm talking about pundits mouthing off in the media, about how such & such shouldn't be referring a game at this level, just because they had a bad game that favoured us for a change.

Yet, whenever we're on the receiving end of poor decisions, you never hear pundits mouthing off in the media about it, they seem to keep a tighter lid on it.

Not paranoia, just an honest observation. :wink:

SouthMoroccoStu
30-10-2012, 10:34 PM
That's almost as paranoid as some of the stuff Celtc fans come out with. There is an agenda against Hibs? :faf:

You can't be paranoid when they're really out to get you....:wink:

marinello59
30-10-2012, 11:48 PM
I'm talking about pundits mouthing off in the media, about how such & such shouldn't be referring a game at this level, just because they had a bad game that favoured us for a change.Yet, whenever we're on the receiving end of poor decisions, you never hear pundits mouthing off in the media about it, they seem to keep a tighter lid on it.

Not paranoia, just an honest observation. :wink:

Care to list the games where the media turned on the ref just because the decisions favoured us. I think your green tinted glasses are a wee bit too strong for you.

Hibercelona
30-10-2012, 11:59 PM
Care to list the games where the media turned on the ref just because the decisions favoured us. I think your green tinted glasses are a wee bit too strong for you.

I didn't say " the media". I said "pundits mouthing off in the media".

And some were mouthing off, saying that O'Reilly shouldn't be refereeing at this level.

I don't recall any of them saying anything about Craig Thompson's dire performance after the final.

Say what you want, but what I'm saying is completely factual.

marinello59
31-10-2012, 12:11 AM
I didn't say " the media". I said "pundits mouthing off in the media".

And some were mouthing off, saying that O'Reilly shouldn't be refereeing at this level.

I don't recall any of them saying anything about Craig Thompson's dire performance after the final.

Say what you want, but what I'm saying is completely factual.

Factual? Surely it's only your opinion. Unless you add FACT after your posts of course.:greengrin

Pedantic_Hibee
31-10-2012, 12:38 AM
Ah hate the fast-talking welt.

HIBERNIAN-0762
31-10-2012, 08:59 AM
I don't recall any of them saying anything about Craig Thompson's dire performance after the final.



This.....

Hiber-nation
31-10-2012, 09:05 AM
Paranoia beyond belief. I thought we were better than this.

Craigan's good. Who exactly are we wanting to do the punditry? Dodds, Murdo etc are awful. I think some on here are expecting Pat Stanton and Jimmy O'Rourke on Sportscene every week!