PDA

View Full Version : NHC Yoevil v Birmingham madness last night.



Hermit Crab
28-08-2013, 10:01 AM
@SkySports: Check out the controversy which marred Birmingham's Capital One Cup tie with Yeovil. Lee Clark not a happy bunny http://t.co/FnlWTYlZrO

Phil D. Rolls
28-08-2013, 10:09 AM
@SkySports: Check out the controversy which marred Birmingham's Capital One Cup tie with Yeovil. Lee Clark not a happy bunny http://t.co/FnlWTYlZrO

Utter nonsense from Birmingham. It was their player on the ground, might have been different if it was a Yeovil player.

It's for the ref to stop the game.

Sergio sledge
28-08-2013, 10:16 AM
Birmingham winning 2-1, injury time, player goes down "injured" and Birmingham goalie kicks it out of play. Player then gets up, doesn't leave the field, gets no treatment. IMHO Yeovil were perfectly within their rights to play on. Birmingham shouldn't have stopped playing.

The sooner this ridiculous habit, of putting the ball out for injuries and teams expecting to get the ball straight back, ends the better. If the referee stops the play then that's different but if a player is down play should go on and the physio should be allowed on, like in rugby.

Scouse Hibee
28-08-2013, 10:19 AM
Yoevil later allowed Birmingham to score an unchallenged goal!

scuttle
28-08-2013, 10:20 AM
Birmingham players must take some of the blame for not responding to the throw in in the first place. These things are always going to happen ,Yeovil didnt break any laws of the game. a bit unsavery all the same

easty
28-08-2013, 10:21 AM
I think Yeovil were quite right to play on, if there is an obvious serious injury then the ref should stop the game, if not then get on with things. If I was Gary Johnson I wouldn't have let Birmingham score in extra time either, just makes a nonsense of the game.

Bobby's Cinema
28-08-2013, 10:30 AM
Disagree totally with the views on this thread. I can't believe them actually. The ball should've been played back to the Birmingham keeper. Simple as that

Gus
28-08-2013, 10:32 AM
Disagree totally with the views on this thread. I can't believe them actually. The ball should've been played back to the Birmingham keeper. Simple as that

Why tho?

Billychaotic182
28-08-2013, 10:34 AM
It's poor sportsmanship but you can't expect anything in this game. Scott Brown is one for not giving the ball back.

Gatecrasher
28-08-2013, 10:34 AM
Whilst I agree the keeper should never have kicked it out in the first place, there is a thing called sportsmanship.

Sweet Left Peg
28-08-2013, 10:36 AM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?

JohnStephens91
28-08-2013, 10:37 AM
When the Webster goal went in to make it 2-2 that forced extra-time, then Yeovil went 3-2 up. It was only after this that Gary Johnson told his players to stand down and then Novak made it 3-3, that was 15 minutes after the original incident. Why then did he grow a conscience and let his side surrender the lead? I certainly wouldn't have let that happen, the Birmingham player looked like he was time wasting.

JohnStephens91
28-08-2013, 10:40 AM
It's poor sportsmanship but you can't expect anything in this game. Scott Brown is one for not giving the ball back.

Leigh Griffiths has previous for it too

hfc rd
28-08-2013, 10:41 AM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?


Totally agree with this.

Gus
28-08-2013, 10:41 AM
Sportsmanship.......birmingham put it out as one of their players was down. So if Yeovil played it bak to them and birmingham went straight up and scored would that be unsporting?

H18sry
28-08-2013, 10:47 AM
http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/8893264/johnson-stands-by-decisions :wink:

Dunderhall
28-08-2013, 10:48 AM
Matty Jack doesn't see where the issue is.:wink:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgBQlenWbBk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Gus Fring
28-08-2013, 10:49 AM
The first goal is just tough luck, bad sportmanship but allowed in the rules.

The second goal in that clip is more likely to come under scrutiny. That could be considered akin to match fixing.

Caversham Green
28-08-2013, 10:51 AM
When the Webster goal went in to make it 2-2 that forced extra-time, then Yeovil went 3-2 up. It was only after this that Gary Johnson told his players to stand down and then Novak made it 3-3, that was 15 minutes after the original incident. Why then did he grow a conscience and let his side surrender the lead? I certainly wouldn't have let that happen, the Birmingham player looked like he was time wasting.

Because he had a bet on 3-3 after extra time?

I don't like the giving the ball back thing because it can be abused, as could be the case here. I'm also uncomfortable with the idea of a team letting the opposition score unchallenged - it's effectively score or match fixing. Play to the rules of the game afaic.

truehibernian
28-08-2013, 11:10 AM
Because he had a bet on 3-3 after extra time?

I don't like the giving the ball back thing because it can be abused, as could be the case here. I'm also uncomfortable with the idea of a team letting the opposition score unchallenged - it's effectively score or match fixing. Play to the rules of the game afaic.

It would be very very interesting if someone had a 10 game accumulator (waiting on that 'result') or a correct score double, what Messrs William Hill et al would do CG - it opens up a world of legal ramifications too in my opinion. Has anyone had stakes returned on here when there has been similar ? I wonder if there would be grounds for a legal challenge too :cb

Saying that, motor sport is getting that way too - team orders put me off having a flutter on that sport.

WestEndHibee
28-08-2013, 11:14 AM
I think that yeovil were perfectly within their rights in this particular case. The number of times that the winning teams players will drop down towards the end of the game is obscene. It might have been that this guy was injured but there are so many feigning injury these days that it can't be trusted any more. These players feigning injury are abusing sportsmanship and yet there's not much made of them. Putting the ball out needs to be gotten rid of. The ref can stop the game if its serious otherwise play on.

frazeHFC
28-08-2013, 11:37 AM
Matty Jack doesn't see where the issue is.:wink:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgBQlenWbBk&feature=youtube_gdata_player



Love when the penalty goes in, it's almost more like a loud cry of joy from the crowd than a cheer. :thumbsup:

Quite right though, sick of players going down easily to waste time. If a player is hurt genuinely then fair play give them it back, but not over something like that. I remember Leigh last year and he was 100% right to play on as the opposition player had nothing wrong with him.

Peevemor
28-08-2013, 11:39 AM
Things were much simpler when play would only be stopped for a head knock - but not always! I remember being at Ibrox when Goram (still playing for us) was lying unconscious in his box and the ref allowed play to continue until the huns scored.

Posh Swanny
28-08-2013, 11:47 AM
On the subject of sportsmanship being abused - see also:

The game is stopped with one team in space in the attacking quarter of the pitch. At the resulting drop ball or throw-in, the opposition "sportingly" give the ball back by punting it to the goalie at the other end of the pitch - or even worse, out for a goal-kick. A Posh player nearly got into a fight with an opposing player last year because he refused his gracious offer and insisted on standing in place to contest the drop-ball, which just happened to be taking place on the edge of their penalty area. The other bloke banged on about it for about two minutes - he just could not believe that his sporting offer was being disgracefully snubbed by our skipper.

frazeHFC
28-08-2013, 11:55 AM
Anyone seen Lee Clarks interview with the one word answers? :tee hee: The Yeovil manager is defending his teams decision to play on and score, despite them having then given Birmingham a goal, a bit odd. :confused: And the winning penalty is a funny one, keeper saves it so the Yeovil fans go wild, then it comes back down and drops in. :hilarious

Phil MaGlass
28-08-2013, 12:05 PM
From what I remember was´nt it Cowdenbeath who sent out a letter to all clubs stating they would not kick the ball out if a player was injured and a ball would not be returned to the opposition if kicked out? Quite right, too many players going down and trying to kill/slow the game down.

BonnieFitbaTeam
28-08-2013, 12:05 PM
My take on it is that if you kick the ball out because one of your own players is injured then you don't get the ball back (probably time-wasting anyway!). If you play it out because one of your opponents is injured then that actually is a sporting thing to do. Your sportmanship should be rewarded by the ball being returned to you.

Simples

clerriehibs
28-08-2013, 12:53 PM
Whilst I agree the keeper should never have kicked it out in the first place, there is a thing called sportsmanship.

Very true, which birmingham weren't adhering to, they were wasting time and so cheating.

Matty Jack v Dundee United; they were cheating by wasting time, he was having none of it.
The arabs got their just deserts.

wearethehibs
28-08-2013, 01:21 PM
For anyone saying Yeovil did the right thing.... Would you be saying that if Hearts done that to us?

No they'd be the **** of the earth (even more so)

Just glad justice was done in the shoot out, Birmingham players celebrating in front of the Yeovil fans was a nice bonus!

--------
28-08-2013, 01:33 PM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?


Absolutely. :agree:

Posh Swanny
28-08-2013, 02:02 PM
For anyone saying Yeovil did the right thing.... Would you be saying that if Hearts done that to us?

No they'd be the **** of the earth (even more so)

Just glad justice was done in the shoot out, Birmingham players celebrating in front of the Yeovil fans was a nice bonus!

So if Hibs were pressing for a late equaliser at Tynie with 30 seconds to go and Ridger booted the ball into the stand because McHattie went down "injured", purely to run down the clock a wee bit more - you would advocate Hibs giving them the ball back?

mim
28-08-2013, 02:11 PM
FFS can we no just leave it to the ref??? :confused:
This is just one of the many ways in which our game is deteriorating.

Phil D. Rolls
28-08-2013, 02:28 PM
I thought this was all resolved after Arsenal actually got a cup tie replayed?

Eyrie
28-08-2013, 03:07 PM
The poor sportsmanship is a player feigning injury to disrupt the flow of the game and make it harder for the opposition. Certainly there will be times when a player is genuinely injured, but that should be left to the referee to decide.

As stated previously in this thread, rugby has the answer by letting the physio on to treat the injury whilst play continues.

basehibby
28-08-2013, 03:35 PM
I think this "sportsmanship" rule has long since gone too far. When it started off it was ONLY in the case of head injuries and broken legs that anyone would consider putting the ball out of play.

Nowadays it seems as if players will put the ball out for treatment for a grazed knee or perhaps if one of them's bust a fingernail and needs an emergency manicure! I didn't see the game last night but it sounds like a case in point whereby far from being sporting, the Birmingham goalie was actually attempting to waste time and therefore cheating, as his teammate was in no danger of serious injury from play continuing and had not even been fouled.

truehibernian
28-08-2013, 03:42 PM
I think this "sportsmanship" rule has long since gone too far. When it started off it was ONLY in the case of head injuries and broken legs that anyone would consider putting the ball out of play.

Nowadays it seems as if players will put the ball out for treatment for a grazed knee or perhaps if one of them's bust a fingernail and needs an emergency manicure! I didn't see the game last night but it sounds like a case in point whereby far from being sporting, the Birmingham goalie was actually attempting to waste time and therefore cheating, as his teammate was in no danger of serious injury from play continuing and had not even been fouled.

I hope Vince Lunny was listening to Sportsound this week and heard Jim Goodwin admit being embarrassed at the way he 'went down' when hit by Boyd - Goodwin admitted on air how foolish he felt and how he'd let himself down they way he 'reacted'. That's worth a ban in my book. Feigning or overstating an injury, admitting it, and doing so to gain an advantage in getting a player sent off ? Surely that's worth Vincent's intervention too as it's bringing the game into disrepute.

ancient hibee
28-08-2013, 05:23 PM
My take on it is that if you kick the ball out because one of your own players is injured then you don't get the ball back (probably time-wasting anyway!). If you play it out because one of your opponents is injured then that actually is a sporting thing to do. Your sportmanship should be rewarded by the ball being returned to you.

Simples


Spot on.I remember the Mattie Jack incident well.Dundee United were dropping like flies which is why there was so much injury time in the first place-Jack did the right thing.

Northernhibee
28-08-2013, 05:26 PM
So if Hibs were pressing for a late equaliser at Tynie with 30 seconds to go and Ridger booted the ball into the stand because McHattie went down "injured", purely to run down the clock a wee bit more - you would advocate Hibs giving them the ball back?

I'd advocate a two footed lunge from McPake just to make sure it's legit :giruy: :mcpake:

snooky
28-08-2013, 05:35 PM
Things were much simpler when play would only be stopped for a head knock - but not always! I remember being at Ibrox when Goram (still playing for us) was lying unconscious in his box and the ref allowed play to continue until the huns scored.

This is well within the SFA rules so what's the problem? :whistle:

Keith_M
28-08-2013, 05:40 PM
I'd be interested in the statistics on the number of these players that are so badly injured the ball is put out of play, only for them to make an almost immediate recovery.

The_Exile
28-08-2013, 05:43 PM
Easy solution, if the game's in injury time and a player goes down and the ref stops the game, the clock stops dead, then re-starts with a free kick to the team that was in possession. Is such s sensible suggestion allowed? :greengrin

brog
28-08-2013, 07:37 PM
I thought this was all resolved after Arsenal actually got a cup tie replayed?

Was a different situation & Arsenal offered replay, to Sheffield U I think. I also remember the Matty Jack game & Jim Lauchlan going down in agony about 3 times then getting up & sprinting when he realised Hibs were playing on. IMO the game should only be stopped by ref unless exceptional circumstances & similarly ball should only be returned to team putting ball out if it was opposition player who was injured.

Hibee Ryan
28-08-2013, 09:14 PM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?

Just don't think this would work in football, in rugby if a guy goes down it doesn't affect the game because its normally slow progress up the park but in football the ball gets fired all over the place and depending on where the guys is done it could affect offsides and if it serious enough that they need a stretcher then you'd still have to stop it

Eyrie
28-08-2013, 10:36 PM
Just don't think this would work in football, in rugby if a guy goes down it doesn't affect the game because its normally slow progress up the park but in football the ball gets fired all over the place and depending on where the guys is done it could affect offsides and if it serious enough that they need a stretcher then you'd still have to stop it

Rugby players don't tend to go down unless they're genuinely injured (except for props before a scrum!) and there is far more risk of the physio or injured player getting caught up in the play than there is in football simply because there are more players on the pitch.

You'd be surprised just how many football players would make a remarkable recovery if they knew that the game was continuing without them and their pathetic attempt at seeking sympathy was leaving their team a man down and possibly playing an opponent onside. The physio would be able to check if the injury was serious and if so communicate that to the referee who could then stop the game. He would also be able to assist the player in leaving the field without requiring permission, but the player's return would require the referee's permission.

I've had a healthy scepticism ever since I noticed how quickly players bounced up after a tackle in a pre-season game compared to a competitive match.

Sir David Gray
28-08-2013, 11:36 PM
What happened to the idea of playing to the whistle?

It's up to the referee to stop a match and unless it was obvious that it was a serious injury then if a team-mate puts the ball out then they should not automatically assume that it's going to come straight back to them.

The authorities need to get a grip of this and tell clubs not to do this. Leave that up to the referee.

greenlex
29-08-2013, 05:50 AM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?
Me too

Carheenlea
29-08-2013, 08:32 AM
I have been saying for years that football should follow rugby's lead on this kind of thing. If there is a player down, the game should carry on and the injured player can receive treatment from the physio. This would stop the farce that is players staying down, getting the game stopped, coming straight back on, frustrating fans, players, managers etc. The ref could always stop the game if he felt there was a danger to the player, but in general the flow of the game would continue which is what we want to see. After all, what player is going to feign injury, take himself out of the game and put his team at a disadvantage?

Totally agree. Something I have often thought would improve the game considerably.

brog
29-08-2013, 09:02 AM
Rugby players don't tend to go down unless they're genuinely injured (except for props before a scrum!) and there is far more risk of the physio or injured player getting caught up in the play than there is in football simply because there are more players on the pitch.

You'd be surprised just how many football players would make a remarkable recovery if they knew that the game was continuing without them and their pathetic attempt at seeking sympathy was leaving their team a man down and possibly playing an opponent onside. The physio would be able to check if the injury was serious and if so communicate that to the referee who could then stop the game. He would also be able to assist the player in leaving the field without requiring permission, but the player's return would require the referee's permission.

I've had a healthy scepticism ever since I noticed how quickly players bounced up after a tackle in a pre-season game compared to a competitive match.

No, they just have bags of liquid secreted in their mouth to make it look as if thay have a blood injury!
Seriously, I agree your point & I hate seeing footballers acting injured, are you listening Jamie Hamill, but while it sounds like a good idea I really think its impractical. I believe its been looked at at a very high level, as was the 10 yard punishment for talking back, but both were deemed not practical in a football context.

KWJ
29-08-2013, 09:06 AM
Can't believe it took 17 posts for Matty Jack to be brought up!

Shame you can't hear the chants of 'Keep the baw Matty, keep the baw' from the east. That was a brilliant win from a brilliant Hibs team.

Eyrie
29-08-2013, 09:28 AM
No, they just have bags of liquid secreted in their mouth to make it look as if thay have a blood injury!
Seriously, I agree your point & I hate seeing footballers acting injured, are you listening Jamie Hamill, but while it sounds like a good idea I really think its impractical. I believe its been looked at at a very high level, as was the 10 yard punishment for talking back, but both were deemed not practical in a football context.

Get your facts straight - it wasn't special effects with a bag of blood, it was method acting with a proper cut (as opposed to the over-acting of a footballer) :wink:

I suspect the main reason that neither suggestion has been enforced by football has more to do with the fact that another sport already uses these rules than any practicality issue. Mind you, given how footballers dispute every decision given against them the latter idea would see most free kicks taken inside the six yard box.

--------
29-08-2013, 10:00 AM
What happened to the idea of playing to the whistle?

It's up to the referee to stop a match and unless it was obvious that it was a serious injury then if a team-mate puts the ball out then they should not automatically assume that it's going to come straight back to them.

The authorities need to get a grip of this and tell clubs not to do this. Leave that up to the referee.


That was the main point made on The League Cup Show last night - the Birmingham keeper was out of order punting the ball into touch just so that his team-mate could receive treatment. Was the keeper time-wasting - sorry, 'running the clock down' late into added time? Was the 'injured Birmingham player doing the same? And since it wasn't a Yeovil player injured, where was the 'sportsmanship' in the goalkeeper stopping the game?

The Birmingham players should have been playing to the whistle. Just because the Birmingham keeper happens to be an idiot or a cheat is irrelevant in my view. HE should have cleared the ball down-field as normal to keep the game going. His team-mate wasn't seriously injured and would have been back on his feet as soon as he saw the ball going past him.

Lee Clark came over as a sanctimonious hypocrite in the post-match interviews TBH I've never taken to the guy), and Gary Johnston really didn't seem to be clear himself as to why he told his player to let Birmingham score unopposed, other than that he for some reason thought his player had taken an unfair advantage and he didn't want to cast as the bad guy. If I was the Yeovil winger, I'd be blazing angry that my boss has made ME the villain of the piece instead.

I don't see that the winger did anything particularly wrong - he played to the whistle. (He may even have thought that the keeper had sclaffed his clearance out of play unintentionally.)

And if I were a Yeovil fan this morning I'd still be seething at having had to watch the farce of that walk-in goal that ultimately put my team out of the Cup.

The authorities have to legislate here - tell clubs that if they deliberately put the ball out of play for whatever reason, including a player going down and staying down, they have NO RIGHT to expect the opposition to give the ball back to them on the restart.

And they should make it clear that in future teams MUST play to the whistle - if a manager or physio suspects that a player is in urgent need of assistance they can speak to the fourth official (he/she's there - use him/her) and get someone on to check the player out while the game's going on - but I suspect that we'd find a lot fewer 'serious' injuries occurring in the last 5-10 minutes of matches than happen now.

This is an area that needs cleared up NOW. It causes huge ill-feeling - just mention Matty Jack to an Arab and see what happens - and fans always line up defending their own players.

The bottom line is that I can't see any good reason for Birmingham having had any expectations of getting the ball back in the circumstances of Tuesday evening, and if I were a Yeovil fan, I'd feel we were robbed.



And as an aside - if Rugby players are such 'scholars and gentlemen', how come we hear of of them being 'cited' for serious violent play after matches? I seem to remember a certain Welsh prop-forward whose nickname was 'Tyson' - not because he had ambitions to become a heavyweight boxer, but because he tried to bite your ears in the scrums .... :wink:

Caversham Green
29-08-2013, 03:59 PM
It's not the first time Johnston and Yeovil have fixed the result of a match either - this one involves our old friend Blobby too.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2385494/Yeovil-happy-to-gift-goal-to-Plymouth.html