PDA

View Full Version : Mcginn two match ban?



Greencore
12-12-2015, 05:51 PM
On the radio they said John mcginn would miss our next two matches. Queens and the Rangers? I thought it would only be the one game...

brog
12-12-2015, 06:15 PM
On the radio they said John mcginn would miss our next two matches. Queens and the Rangers? I thought it would only be the one game...


I assume he he was sent off for serious foul play rather than violent conduct? If that's the case it should be next game & probably one later. If Sevco was next week I have no doubt we would appeal regardless of circumstances. What's folks thoughts? Harsh red or deserved? Any chance of winning an appeal? ( I'm in London so not there today).

B.H.F.C
12-12-2015, 06:18 PM
I assume he he was sent off for serious foul play rather than violent conduct? If that's the case it should be next game & probably one later. If Sevco was next week I have no doubt we would appeal regardless of circumstances. What's folks thoughts? Harsh red or deserved? Any chance of winning an appeal? ( I'm in London so not there today).

Red all day long. No grounds for an appeal IMO.

Ozyhibby
12-12-2015, 06:19 PM
No chance of winning appeal but if the ref had just booked him I doubt there would be any complaints. Let's hope he's available for ibrox.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

O'Rourke3
12-12-2015, 06:32 PM
Red all day long. No grounds for an appeal IMO.

Was it? I didn't get a good look because there were players blocking my view. Did he lash out? At least 3 Falkirk players had a nibble as he made his way forward....

BTW not saying I didn't think it was a red card. Genuinely did't see it clearly.

GreenCastle
12-12-2015, 06:34 PM
Looked late and straight onto his ankle.

Though with the standard of refs we seem to get I've seen others get away with that this season.

Red for me - though it looked like an assault on Stevenson near the end. Didn't look good at all.

Thecat23
12-12-2015, 06:39 PM
Was it? I didn't get a good look because there were players blocking my view. Did he lash out? At least 3 Falkirk players had a nibble as he made his way forward....

BTW not saying I didn't think it was a red card. Genuinely did't see it clearly.

Straight red from my angle. You could tell he was losing the ball and just lunged in. Could have been a bad one and for me no complaints. But I'd still appeal as you just never know.

NORTHERNHIBBY
12-12-2015, 06:40 PM
If you appeal is there not an immediate deferral for the next game and then you would miss the two after that if the ban still stands?

lucky
12-12-2015, 06:42 PM
I thought it was a red. He was not in control as he launched at the ball

B.H.F.C
12-12-2015, 06:45 PM
Was it? I didn't get a good look because there were players blocking my view. Did he lash out? At least 3 Falkirk players had a nibble as he made his way forward....

BTW not saying I didn't think it was a red card. Genuinely did't see it clearly.

I just thought his studs were up and he completely missed the ball. Also flew in a bit so I don't think he can have any complaints.

You're right though, he could have had a free kick prior to it but tried to keep going.

Peevemor
12-12-2015, 07:14 PM
Straight red from my angle. You could tell he was losing the ball and just lunged in. Could have been a bad one and for me no complaints. But I'd still appeal as you just never know.

Ref had no choice. I don't think Stubbs will support an appeal, though it'll be interesting to see what he says about some of the other decisions, eg. Fontaine's booking.

Seveno
12-12-2015, 07:30 PM
Definite red. Straight leg with studs up. He wasn't having a very good game by his standards and I wondered if his head was in the right place following the death of that young boy. McGinn is still young and may not have had to deal with bereavement before.

Sir David Gray
12-12-2015, 07:36 PM
If you appeal is there not an immediate deferral for the next game and then you would miss the two after that if the ban still stands?

No, we'll have until some time next week (perhaps Wednesday or Thursday) to lodge any appeal and then it will be heard before next Saturday.

Tom Hart RIP
12-12-2015, 07:41 PM
Stubbs said after the game we would appeal.

21.05.2016
12-12-2015, 07:43 PM
Will be a massive blow for us if he misses ibrox.

SquashedFrogg
12-12-2015, 07:52 PM
Definite red. Straight leg with studs up. He wasn't having a very good game by his standards and I wondered if his head was in the right place following the death of that young boy. McGinn is still young and may not have had to deal with bereavement before.

Falkirk players reaction + standard inexperienced referee = Red card

Booking, talking to but nothing more...

IMO extremely poor decision :agree:

For me the break effected us today, looked rusty and Falkirk destroyed football with that performance.

Like playing Airdrie in the 90's under Alex MacDonald

Anti football

May2116
12-12-2015, 07:56 PM
It's all about consistency for me, there centre midfielder, Vaulks, gives away two fouls, on the second one shouts in the refs face, throws his arms about and then slams the ball in the ground, no yellow, his next foul he gets booked, he then gives four fouls away second half and escapes a second yellow!

McGinn's wasn't a 'lunge' it was a stretch as the ball was running away from him... The Falkirk player got there first but then rolls around and the rest surround McGinn! The ref raced in like Willie Collum does and it was only ever going to be red, had he given himself a couple of seconds and seen the player wasn't even injured he'd have realised a yellow sufficed!!

S4uzee
12-12-2015, 07:56 PM
Will he definitely miss the game at Ibrox or does nobody know?

whiskyhibby
12-12-2015, 08:00 PM
From the West upper it looked like a Red, as others say a bit of a rush of blood to the head, he will learn from it though


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sir David Gray
12-12-2015, 08:01 PM
Will he definitely miss the game at Ibrox or does nobody know?

I have a feeling it will be two games but I'm not certain.

SquashedFrogg
12-12-2015, 08:02 PM
It's all about consistency for me, there centre midfielder, Vaulks, gives away two fouls, on the second one shouts in the refs face, throws his arms about and then slams the ball in the ground, no yellow, his next foul he gets booked, he then gives four fouls away second half and escapes a second yellow!

McGinn's wasn't a 'lunge' it was a stretch as the ball was running away from him... The Falkirk player got there first but then rolls around and the rest surround McGinn! The ref raced in like Willie Collum does and it was only ever going to be red, had he given himself a couple of seconds and seen the player wasn't even injured he'd have realised a yellow sufficed!!

This for me :agree:

Crap referees shouldn't be accepted. That's not sour grapes - just a valid point. We've won lots of matches and I've still walked away shaking my head at refs.

Good referees give themselves time, speak to linesmen etc...

In all seriousness, it's actually frightening the standard we are seeing these days.

PatHead
12-12-2015, 08:04 PM
It's all about consistency for me, there centre midfielder, Vaulks, gives away two fouls, on the second one shouts in the refs face, throws his arms about and then slams the ball in the ground, no yellow, his next foul he gets booked, he then gives four fouls away second half and escapes a second yellow!

McGinn's wasn't a 'lunge' it was a stretch as the ball was running away from him... The Falkirk player got there first but then rolls around and the rest surround McGinn! The ref raced in like Willie Collum does and it was only ever going to be red, had he given himself a couple of seconds and seen the player wasn't even injured he'd have realised a yellow sufficed!!

That is how I saw it. The ref rushed his decision and Kerr made the most of it.

He was quite inconsistent throughout.

Did think it was a harsh booking for JC as well from FF. Contact was definitely made but he made the most of it which maybe stopped the ref from giving a penalty.

Steve20
12-12-2015, 08:07 PM
**** this it was a red crap. A Rangers player wouldn't get sent off and recieve a two match ban for it.

We should appeal and if we don't win the appeal, kick up a fuss.

Not a chance a home player at Ibrox gets sent off for the same thing.

Danderhall Hibs
12-12-2015, 08:10 PM
Will he definitely miss the game at Ibrox or does nobody know?

Seems like nobody knows!

You'd think there'd be a rule saying how long the ban is for the type of offence.

NORTHERNHIBBY
12-12-2015, 08:15 PM
No, we'll have until some time next week (perhaps Wednesday or Thursday) to lodge any appeal and then it will be heard before next Saturday.

How do some teams get acussed of bending the rules by appealing when they know that they have no chance of overturning the red card? Is that just down to logistics when the appeal can't be heard before the next game?

Sir David Gray
12-12-2015, 08:16 PM
**** this it was a red crap. A Rangers player wouldn't get sent off and recieve a two match ban for it.

We should appeal and if we don't win the appeal, kick up a fuss.

Not a chance a home player at Ibrox gets sent off for the same thing.

Oh dear, that definitely doesn't sound good.

Anyone know if he's been to see a doctor?

Sir David Gray
12-12-2015, 08:20 PM
How do some teams get acussed of bending the rules by appealing when they know that they have no chance of overturning the red card? Is that just down to logistics when the appeal can't be heard before the next game?

Think so, yeah.

If a player gets sent off on the Wednesday and they have another match on the Saturday then the club concerned may be able to put in a late appeal, which means that their player is able to play on the Saturday.

Considering we don't have a match for another week, there's no chance of that happening.

Tom Hart RIP
12-12-2015, 08:22 PM
Not deliberate but he did catch him. Houston said he didn't think it was a red at the time but when he saw the state of Kerr's leg at half time he changed his mind.
Kerr showed the press his injury after the game

Spike Mandela
12-12-2015, 08:23 PM
Serious foul play was always an automatic one match ban, where is the 2nd game suspension coming from?

NadeAteMyLunch!
12-12-2015, 08:28 PM
Can't believe how many are saying it was deserved. A booking would have been correct. Yeah he caught the boy but never a red. We'd lose an appeal though I'm fairly sure, especially since it would free him up for Ibrox [emoji57]

PatHead
12-12-2015, 08:31 PM
Serious foul play was always an automatic one match ban, where is the 2nd game suspension coming from?

Someone said to me it was totting up

emerald green
12-12-2015, 08:32 PM
It's all about consistency for me, there centre midfielder, Vaulks, gives away two fouls, on the second one shouts in the refs face, throws his arms about and then slams the ball in the ground, no yellow, his next foul he gets booked, he then gives four fouls away second half and escapes a second yellow!

:agree: It's ironic that it was Vaulks' shot which ultimately led to Falkirk's goal. If the referee had done his job properly Vaulks would not have been on the pitch at that stage of the game. He should have been sent off after having been booked earlier and subsequently committed several bad fouls.

Another example of a referee just not doing his job properly IMO, but as usual nothing appears to get done about it. Until it is, expect more of the same.

Hibeewilly
12-12-2015, 08:51 PM
Heard tonight from a decent source that Hibs are definitely lodging an appeal. I haven't seen the incident so cant comment but I'm assuming there are grounds for it. Fingers crossed!:aok:

Hibeewilly
12-12-2015, 08:53 PM
:agree: It's ironic that it was Vaulks' shot which ultimately led to Falkirk's goal. If the referee had done his job properly Vaulks would not have been on the pitch at that stage of the game. He should have been sent off after having been booked earlier and subsequently committed several bad fouls.

Another example of a referee just not doing his job properly IMO, but as usual nothing appears to get done about it. Until it is, expect more of the same.
And what about Alston their number 6. He should have been off in the first half far less the blatant one Glancy ignored second half:confused:

GreenCastle
12-12-2015, 08:55 PM
Here is an example of Aberdeen appealing a challenge recently.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34242317

Appeal not successful = 2 game bad for a red card.

I don't McGinn will get off this and expect him to miss the Rangers game unless we play Morton twice before then.

Scouse Hibee
12-12-2015, 10:19 PM
Red card all day for me, as soon as he lunged in, turned to my laddie and we both said he's off.

Carheenlea
12-12-2015, 10:42 PM
Red card all day for me, as soon as he lunged in, turned to my laddie and we both said he's off.

I had my head in my hands as soon as he made the challenge as I just knew he would be given a straight red. He will be missed alright, but fortunately we have a lot of good quality in the squad and the Hibs midfield will continue to be a very strong one in his absence, however many games that will be.

Dublin07
12-12-2015, 11:06 PM
The most annoyingly thing today was every time a hibs player made a challenge the ref had the card out before he even arrived at the player. Falkirk were fouling all over the place and he would take his time before having a wee chat. The assault on Lewis at the end was worse than McGinns challenge and he didn't even give a foul. For the red card it should have been a foul to hibs before McGinn lost control and caught Kerr late. Ref should have taken his time had a word with his assistant and booked McGinn.

Andy74
12-12-2015, 11:20 PM
Haven't seen it again yet but when you are attacking and just trying to reach a ball on a run a red is over the top unless it's a total shocker.

I think a yellow would have been right.

I'd have thought the ref would also have know about the applause for the young boy and McGinn's part in all that and would have know he may have felt some extra pressure to commit.

Tyler Durden
12-12-2015, 11:38 PM
It was a pretty clear cut red card. It doesn't matter that McGinn was fouled in the build up and McGinns state of mind due to personal circumstances is totally irrelevant.

The ref was poor but that type of challenge is always a red these days. Reckless, dangerous etc

Of course if there's any way we can appeal to ensure he's available for Rangers lets do it.

Thecat23
12-12-2015, 11:43 PM
Ref had no choice. I don't think Stubbs will support an appeal, though it'll be interesting to see what he says about some of the other decisions, eg. Fontaine's booking.

Fontaines booking was laughable, I couldn't believe it! Hope Stubbs mentions that.

ALF TUPPER
13-12-2015, 06:25 AM
As someone's already said , it seems Stubbsy may appeal it as he didn't think it was worthy of a red. Says he overstretched and caught him. He also said in his interview that Houston agreed - it was only a yellow.

This will run for a bit yet methinks

Libby Hibby
13-12-2015, 07:45 AM
As it was a straight red, he will automatically miss the next game, regardless of the competition, unless Hibs appeal this week...if, they don't and he misses the QoS game, then the next game or games he will miss will depend on how many disciplinary points this takes him over and the date of the next SPFL meeting to rubber stamp and letter the club with the ban.

In my experience with the standard disciplinary timelines, it will be miss 1 automatically, play the next and miss the next, meaning he should be available for ibrox.

brog
13-12-2015, 07:59 AM
As it was a straight red, he will automatically miss the next game, regardless of the competition, unless Hibs appeal this week...if, they don't and he misses the QoS game, then the next game or games he will miss will depend on how many disciplinary points this takes him over and the date of the next SPFL meeting to rubber stamp and letter the club with the ban.

In my experience with the standard disciplinary timelines, it will be miss 1 automatically, play the next and miss the next, meaning he should be available for ibrox.

That was wot i thot, see post 2. If thats case it may b better not appealing as if red is upheld & case is not heard this wk he would def miss Ibrox

JimBHibees
13-12-2015, 08:26 AM
That was wot i thot, see post 2. If thats case it may b better not appealing as if red is upheld & case is not heard this wk he would def miss Ibrox

If we appeal pretty sure it would be held this week though it is the SFA we are talking about wouldn't want to cancel a Xmas lunch. It is possible the sending off may take McGinn over the points threshold which would apply 14 days after the event which could rule him out of both games.

Onion
13-12-2015, 08:28 AM
That was wot i thot, see post 2. If thats case it may b better not appealing as if red is upheld & case is not heard this wk he would def miss Ibrox

If McGinn misses 45 mins of the Falkirk and whole of the QOS and Sevco games for that tackle, then the punishment is over the top. But that suits the SPFL's main objective and our chances on appeal are v low. In fact, better hold your breath at every Hibs tackle next week too !

My_Wife_Camille
13-12-2015, 11:53 AM
As it was a straight red, he will automatically miss the next game, regardless of the competition, unless Hibs appeal this week...if, they don't and he misses the QoS game, then the next game or games he will miss will depend on how many disciplinary points this takes him over and the date of the next SPFL meeting to rubber stamp and letter the club with the ban.

In my experience with the standard disciplinary timelines, it will be miss 1 automatically, play the next and miss the next, meaning he should be available for ibrox.
McGinn has only had 2 bookings this season. Anyone know how that fits into the disciplinary points situation?

hibs0666
13-12-2015, 12:02 PM
Watched it again on Hibs TV and Sky and it's easy to see why he was sent off.

Stuarty27
13-12-2015, 12:33 PM
Anyone watching Sheff Utd vs Coventry,

Jay Mceverly has just got a booking for a challenge ten times worse than Mcginns.

It was never a sending off, it was a booking. Ref was a joke yesterday

brog
13-12-2015, 12:40 PM
I've only seen it on Hibs TV & it's not very clear but it's a mistimed tackle, not malicious & it's time refs differentiated between the 2. Commonsense & Scottish refs are unlikely partners though, and as others have said Clancy's red card was out before Kerr hit the ground.

MWHIBBIES
13-12-2015, 12:47 PM
Anyone watching Sheff Utd vs Coventry,

Jay Mceverly has just got a booking for a challenge ten times worse than Mcginns.

It was never a sending off, it was a booking. Ref was a joke yesterdayIt was the only decision the ref got right yesterday, it was a clear red and every Hibs fan in the world would have wanted an opposition player off for it.

Simply because the ref has made a mistake in this game (shocking challenge from the Sheffield United player) doesn't make McGinns any less of a red.

brog
13-12-2015, 12:58 PM
I believe we will appeal the red card.

Sir David Gray
13-12-2015, 12:59 PM
Saw it last night on Sky Sports, I think a yellow card would have sufficed.

GreenLake
13-12-2015, 01:12 PM
It was the only decision the ref got right yesterday, it was a clear red and every Hibs fan in the world would have wanted an opposition player off for it.

Simply because the ref has made a mistake in this game (shocking challenge from the Sheffield United player) doesn't make McGinns any less of a red.

McGinn's tackle was less of a red than many of these kind of tackles. This was a mistake by McGinn and he got maximum punishment unlike the referee who blundered repeatedly without consequence except to Hibs.

It was a red card but just by a bawhair.

greenlex
13-12-2015, 01:46 PM
I believe we will appeal the red card.
If it means he plays against QOS and misses the Rangers game then that would be a ridiculous decision.

c31
13-12-2015, 01:51 PM
Never a red, just watched it on Sky sports and its a joke if he gets a ban for that...

CB_NO3
13-12-2015, 01:55 PM
Not seen it on TV but my initial thought was that it was a red. Tin hat on here but I think the ref had a good game yesterday and got most calls spot on.

scoopyboy
13-12-2015, 01:56 PM
If it means he plays against QOS and misses the Rangers game then that would be a ridiculous decision.

That's old hat.

The clubs get a copy of the referees report and then have 24 hours to appeal it.

The appeal will be heard before the club's next game.

So if the red is upheld then the QOTS game will be his first game suspension.

Depending on how the ref has classified the red will determine if more games are a possibility.

I think it's only violent conduct that carries a ban of more than one game.

I doubt it will be deemed violent conduct.

greenlex
13-12-2015, 01:59 PM
That's old hat.

The clubs get a copy of the referees report and then have 24 hours to appeal it.

The appeal will be heard before the club's next game.

So if the red is upheld then the QOTS game will be his first game suspension.

Depending on how the ref has classified the red will determine if more games are a possibility.

I think it's only violent conduct that carries a ban of more than one game.

I doubt it will be deemed violent conduct.
:aok: No chance it's violent conduct.

GreenLake
13-12-2015, 02:00 PM
Not seen it on TV but my initial thought was that it was a red. Tin hat on here but I think the ref had a good game yesterday and got most calls spot on.

I thought he was the worst ref we have had this season and except for the red card he didn't get much right.

brog
13-12-2015, 02:33 PM
That's old hat.

The clubs get a copy of the referees report and then have 24 hours to appeal it.

The appeal will be heard before the club's next game.

So if the red is upheld then the QOTS game will be his first game suspension.

Depending on how the ref has classified the red will determine if more games are a possibility.

I think it's only violent conduct that carries a ban of more than one game.

I doubt it will be deemed violent conduct.

I agree, see post 2, but the problem is with the blazers we never know when they may be available, especially in holiday time! Again, there's no doubt it will be, sorry, should be classified as serious foul play but the reason red cards often end up costing 2 games is because of the totting up process. In this case if John only has 2 yellows he should be ok with 1 game.

jodjam
13-12-2015, 05:36 PM
On ssn just now that hibs are appealing it

bigwheel
13-12-2015, 05:37 PM
not sure we have much chance of winning that appeal..having sad that, here was an identical challenge just now in the spurs v newcastle game - just a booking..

Col2
13-12-2015, 08:18 PM
Highlights on BBC website and for me Hibs have no chance of a successful appeal. I wonder if an appeal might conclude it was a standard red not a serious foul play 2 game ban type red.

He was late and off the ground.

Mikey09
13-12-2015, 08:39 PM
Just watched McGinn's red. I think Hibs have a good case for appealing. Yes he caught the lad but he wasn't out of control, went in with one foot, and it wasn't at speed. He over stretched basically. Going by reports on the radio it was brutal! Was nothing of the kind. Yellow card would have sufficed.

Onceinawhile
13-12-2015, 08:42 PM
No chance it's a red, studs down and in control.

Shambles

greenlex
13-12-2015, 08:44 PM
He was late. Over the ball and definitely not in control. Not nalcious but a defo red.

Slim Shady
13-12-2015, 08:45 PM
Highlights on BBC website and for me Hibs have no chance of a successful appeal. I wonder if an appeal might conclude it was a standard red not a serious foul play 2 game ban type red.

He was late and off the ground.

What's a standard red?

He was sent off for serious foul play and after watching the highlights we have no chance of winning the appeal imo.

cabbageandribs1875
13-12-2015, 08:48 PM
red yesterday

and red today

B.H.F.C
13-12-2015, 08:49 PM
No chance we will win an appeal.

blackpoolhibs
13-12-2015, 09:18 PM
red yesterday

and red today

will he never learn from his mistakes?

Tyler Durden
13-12-2015, 09:31 PM
No chance it's a red, studs down and in control.

Shambles

This picture would seem to contradict your take on it?

California-Hibs
13-12-2015, 09:32 PM
It was a red card everyday of the week.

Carheenlea
13-12-2015, 10:13 PM
I`ll be surprised if we are successful in an appeal after watching the video. Mind you, I don`t suppose Alan Stubbs would request we submit an appeal if he believed there was no chance of the red being rescinded.

matty_f
13-12-2015, 10:15 PM
will he never learn from his mistakes?

:hilarious:

Big L
13-12-2015, 10:21 PM
I watched it 6 times and I think he got to the ball first, unfortunately he made contact with the top of the ball and he slid of the top of it in to Kerr. Hopefully they show a close up on sportscene.

CB_NO3
13-12-2015, 10:27 PM
I thought he was the worst ref we have had this season and except for the red card he didn't get much right.
What decisions did you disagree with? Can't argue with the bookings for Gray and Fontaine. None of our penalty claims were penalties in the first half.

Andy74
13-12-2015, 10:44 PM
Similar challenge there in Newcastle Spurs game. Boy gets yellow then scored the winner.

Matt92
13-12-2015, 10:57 PM
Red all day long. Malicious/intent? Definitely not. Just a committed player with the ball at his feet in the box throwing anything to get on the end of it. Nothing dirty there so 2 games seems a bit harsh.

wookie70
13-12-2015, 11:11 PM
What decisions did you disagree with? Can't argue with the bookings for Gray and Fontaine. None of our penalty claims were penalties in the first half.

Fontaine's was never a booking. Minimal if any contact and Falkirk boy dived

hfc rd
13-12-2015, 11:17 PM
Hope I'm wrong but can't see us winning that appeal. Seen the incident a couple of times now and I think it was a red card.

Peevemor
13-12-2015, 11:21 PM
Fontaine's was never a booking. Minimal if any contact and Falkirk boy dived


It was ridiculous and came during a 5-10 minute spell when the ref had totally lost the plot.

Thecat23
13-12-2015, 11:22 PM
Just seen it on Sportscene. 100% red, not even debatable! Also that's one of the worst dives I've seen this season with Jason. Never in a million years a pen!

On a side note, Willie Milller looks like he's just jumped off the bus and sitting waiting in the doctors surgery!

Bishop Hibee
13-12-2015, 11:22 PM
Looked like a red to me. Not violent conduct though.

greenlex
13-12-2015, 11:27 PM
Just seen it on Sportscene. 100% red, not even debatable! Also that's one of the worst dives I've seen this season with Jason. Never in a million years a pen!

On a side note, Willie Milller looks like he's just jumped off the bus and sitting waiting in the doctors surgery!

The camera angle isn't great for the Jason incident. The defender dies make contact (however minimal) with his right foot. Jason is going down looking for it though and it looks like a dive but technically it's not and its a pen. Got a good view of it at the time.

SkintHibby
13-12-2015, 11:30 PM
Without reading the whole thread Pat Nevin smugly just said it is a one match ban???

Ozyhibby
13-12-2015, 11:37 PM
will he never learn from his mistakes?

LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Col2
13-12-2015, 11:37 PM
It's one match according to the rules. Or should be. He might have gone over the points barrier which could bring about another ban but don't know where he stands on this.

Hibeesmad
13-12-2015, 11:52 PM
Craig Gardner's challenge on Lovren was worse, didn't even get a yellow card

Leithenhibby
13-12-2015, 11:59 PM
It was ridiculous and came during a 5-10 minute spell when the ref had totally lost the plot.

:agree:

3 bookings for Hibs in 4 and half a minutes! :rolleyes:

neil7908
14-12-2015, 12:01 AM
Just saw the highlights - definite red. If one of our players was on the receiving end of a tackle like that we'd be going mental if they got away with just a yellow.

GreenLake
14-12-2015, 12:13 AM
What decisions did you disagree with? Can't argue with the bookings for Gray and Fontaine. None of our penalty claims were penalties in the first half.

It really started with Vaulks slamming down the ball in dissent getting let off to continue his thuggery. They were given freedom to hack and hinder repeatedly with no whistles or just finger wags and we got blown and booked. Maybe I had a bad mood or something but I can't remember being as furious at a ref for a long time. He tilted things against us over the game regardless of red cards and penalty decision.

Leithenhibby
14-12-2015, 01:42 AM
It's not the best photo ever taken, but it does show McGinn's foot on the ball. All be it the top of the ball. Yellow for me :wink:

15757

Thecat23
14-12-2015, 06:16 AM
What decisions did you disagree with? Can't argue with the bookings for Gray and Fontaine. None of our penalty claims were penalties in the first half.

Fontaine is never a booking and the Falkirk player dived. The challenge on Stevenson was assault but again Falkirk player gets away with it.

Can't believe you think he had a good game, he was one of the worst refs I've seen at ER in years.

Big_Franck
14-12-2015, 09:28 AM
Fontaine is never a booking and the Falkirk player dived. The challenge on Stevenson was assault but again Falkirk player gets away with it.

Can't believe you think he had a good game, he was one of the worst refs I've seen at ER in years.

I was straight in line with the Fontaine challenge in the east and it was definitely a yellow. The boy beat him and was going in to the box, Fontaine through his leg/thigh into the player's path knowing full well what he was doing. It was worth taking a yellow for though IMO.

The ref should have awarded us a penalty when the Falkirk player used his arm to knock the ball out for a corner after about 15/20 mins and he should have given Vaulks a second yellow for his challenge on Keatings in the second half.

Big_Franck
14-12-2015, 09:32 AM
It's not the best photo ever taken, but it does show McGinn's foot on the ball. All be it the top of the ball. Yellow for me :wink:

15757

If Hibs have access to this image in better quality, and you'd imagine they do, then this should definitely be used as part of the appeal. It shows he got his foot to the ball first and it doesn't appear that he is out of control.

Smartie
14-12-2015, 10:15 AM
It was a definite red card.

Really unlucky as he was knocked all over the shop and all he was guilty of was a lunge after he came out of the spin but it was a lunge over the ball and that is a red card.

There's no way we'd get this overturned. The only reason I can see for an appeal would be if it could free him up to play Rangers instead of someone else.

I'd be annoyed tbh if Hibs use the money from x number of season tickets/ half season tickets just to give money to the SFA to tell us to bolt.

FranckSuzy
14-12-2015, 10:36 AM
It was a definite red card.

Really unlucky as he was knocked all over the shop and all he was guilty of was a lunge after he came out of the spin but it was a lunge over the ball and that is a red card.

There's no way we'd get this overturned. The only reason I can see for an appeal would be if it could free him up to play Rangers instead of someone else.

I'd be annoyed tbh if Hibs use the money from x number of season tickets/ half season tickets just to give money to the SFA to tell us to bolt.

IIRC, season ticket revenue is ring-fenced to add to the playing squad so the above scenario should not come into it. FWIW, IF McGinn is to miss the game at Ibrox, I think we have to appeal.

burtis97
14-12-2015, 10:41 AM
Pat Nevin said a one game ban?

FranckSuzy
14-12-2015, 10:50 AM
Pat Nevin said a one game ban?

Here's hoping :pray: Not entirely sure how Pat would know one way or another but (show-off alert :greengrin), I was in the Directors Box on Saturday and the chat there was that it would definitely be a two match ban :aok:

FromTheCapital
14-12-2015, 10:58 AM
I think Hibs will appeal it to try and get it rescinded from violent conduct to serious foul play which is only a one game ban?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

brog
14-12-2015, 11:34 AM
There was an almost identical incident in the Spurs game yesterday when the Newcastle forward (Perez?) over ran the ball in the box & dived in just like McG. Alan Smith thought Perez unlucky to get a yellow & commented that Perez had to try & get the ball & it was not a malicious tackle. I made that point earlier, refs are meant to make that assessment, clumsy vs malicious but as Clancy's card was out his pocket almost instantaneously I doubt he made any kind of assessment. Re 1 game ban, that's what it should be, violent conduct is fighting/attacking a player, serious foul play is meant to be for a foul only.

Onion
14-12-2015, 12:40 PM
I think Hibs will appeal it to try and get it rescinded from violent conduct to serious foul play which is only a one game ban?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a big test of the authorities integrity and resolve to get the Huns promoted to the Prem. Mcginn was our best player last time out and, the way the Huns are playing, they need all the help they can get.

hibees 7062
14-12-2015, 01:02 PM
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=532976253536961&set=gm.1076068552405519&type=3

Moulin Yarns
14-12-2015, 01:47 PM
SFA rules

Suspensions incurred by players shall be served in the competition in which they are incurred and shall be measured by the relevant team of the club (i.e. the team in which the player normally plays) playing the requisite number of matches.
The following qualification applies:-



– A player who is sent off for serious foul play or violent conduct is suspended automatically until such time as his club's team(s) has completed a match in a competition for which he would otherwise be eligible for selection.


– A player who is sent off for spitting at an opponent or any other person is suspended automatically until such time as his club’s team(s) has completed its next two matches in competitions for which he would otherwise be eligible for selection.

(Please refer to Appendix 4 - Guidance Notes on Serving of Suspensions).

Moulin Yarns
14-12-2015, 01:58 PM
ALso gets 12 points on his record, 18 points and there is another suspension

steviehibsleith
14-12-2015, 01:59 PM
It's not the best photo ever taken, but it does show McGinn's foot on the ball. All be it the top of the ball. Yellow for me :wink:

15757

Making contact with the ball is irrelevant. You can interpret that photo as both feet of the ground and appears to be more stamping down on the ball.
The one thing does show for me this is serious foul play 1 match ban as he went for the ball definitely not violent conduct.
Law 12 SFA rules - serious foul play "jumps at a opponent " doesn't matter about making contact with the ball.
Also Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the

front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force
and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

GreenCastle
14-12-2015, 02:18 PM
At ER i thought it was a red but now watched it about ten times...and not sure...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/35088597 - 1 min 45 seconds

I don't think it is 2 footed - he goes in with left leg over stretched and his right with momentum follows through.

It is high and on the leg - but I see it more as reckless and late. If you are Kerr I am sure it hurt but we all all seen more worse which only gets a yellow.

I would say it's definitely a yellow but not 100% sure it's red and deserves a 2 game ban. Yellow and 15 minute sin bin would have made sense :greengrin

patlowe
14-12-2015, 02:19 PM
Thought it was going to be a red as soon as he left the ground - no complaints from me. I actually thought the ref got all the big calls pretty much right from where I was sat, although I accept that some feel differently and may have had a better view of things. Hopefully McGinn just misses the QOS game - what a blow it would be if he was out for Ibrox.

MB62
14-12-2015, 02:29 PM
I'm in two minds over the tackle. I don't think there was the slightest hint of malice in it and thought at the time a yellow card would probably have been good enough. However, having seen it on T.V. I can see why it was a straight red, although by the ref's reaction you would have thought McGinn was trying to slice Kerr in two with a machete, he couldn't get the card out of his pocket quick enough. There was absolutely no consideration given to circumstances in the build up to the challenge.

If it turns out to be a two match ban, which I can't possibly see how it would be, unless it takes him over the points limit, then appeal, but if it's a one match ban, just take it on the chin and move on.

Franck Stanton
14-12-2015, 02:46 PM
Was a red card, however, that ref was the worst I have ever seen at E/R - and that's saying something when you take that fud CT into consideration. I wouldn't put him in charge of a kids game never mind a championship game, two stone-wall penalty claims in first half, the Cummings fiasco, def penalty, Falkirk hatchet man right knee took Jasons r/leg at knee level. First half Stevenson on wing shielding the ball at touch line, Falkirk player two handed push to back of Steveson sent flying into advertisng boardings Falkirk player boots ball upfield game continues wtf ? Total fud of a ref.There were many other incidents -too many to list- suffice to say Fontaine's booking - god give me strength , seem we are not allowed to challenge the bnk an the establishment will do everything in their power to prevent us from doing so,

PatHead
14-12-2015, 02:56 PM
ALso gets 12 points on his record, 18 points and there is another suspension

How does he get 12 points? Is it 12 points for a sending off?

I don't know and am genuinely puzzled at that severity.

southsider
14-12-2015, 02:58 PM
I think things maybe got to John and he was trying so hard to win for poor Brandon. Never a dirty player and a one match ban. Any longer we appeal.

Moulin Yarns
14-12-2015, 03:11 PM
How does he get 12 points? Is it 12 points for a sending off?

I don't know and am genuinely puzzled at that severity.

From the SFA

A player who is sent off for serious foul play, violent conduct or spitting at an opponent or any other person, will have 12 penalty points added to his applicable League disciplinary record. In addition, he will automatically be suspended in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3.8.

When a player has accumulated a total of 18 or more penalty points in a League competition during a season, or of any extension thereof, he will be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with a Fixed Scale of Suspensions as provided for in Paragraph 3.7.2.

Moulin Yarns
14-12-2015, 03:22 PM
Hopefully this doesn't take him over the 18 points (don't think he has been booked this season) as it WOULD mean missing Ibrox

Any period of suspension incurred by a player as a result of his having accumulated 18 or more penalty points, shall commence on the 14th day following the date of the offence which resulted in the incurring of the suspension. The suspension shall apply until such time as the requisite number of matches have been completed by his club in the competition in which the suspension was incurred, in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3.8.

0762
14-12-2015, 03:40 PM
ALso gets 12 points on his record, 18 points and there is another suspension


For the league the points system was done away with a couple of seasons ago.

Its now 6 bookings 1 game, 12 bookings 2 games, etc (Cups are 2 or 3 bookings depending on the round that you enter at and booking in the league and cup comps are dealt with separately).

2 bookings in a game is an automatic 1 game suspensions in that competition (don't carry league to cup and visa versa) and the cards don't count to the 6 or to the cup running total as a suspension has been served.

Red cards I think are dealt with separately and fall into 1 and 2 games suspensions - Think there is also some sort of totting up system if you get a second or third red in the same season. Red cards are the only offence that crosses over into the league and cup comps.



Regardless of what we might think - its a red card any I'd be embarrassed if we tried to appeal it. He's lunged in and in the modern game you just cant do that.

The Leith Dutch
14-12-2015, 03:57 PM
Definite red surely - he's going in studs up.
Haven't read the rules lately in any great depth but I've seen a variety of challenges and studs up is pretty much always a red.
Most football fans instant reaction to sliding in studs up is "that's a red".

It surely isn't violent conduct though - that would have to be a deliberate attempt to injure or off the ball.

Difficult to find exact definitions but this would seem to suffice:
'Serious foul play is a foul committed using excessive force (i.e., "the player...is in danger of injuring his opponent")'

What I don't understand is why they're appealing it - it's a one match ban whether it's Serious foul play or violent conduct unless it takes him over the disciplinary threshold which, with two previous yellows it doesn't. A failed appeal is an automatic two match ban. I think you accept he's not playing QotS and get him back for the sevco match.

Surely the appeal is either Hibs knowing something we don't that suggests he'd be unavailable for the sevco match or they don't quite know the rules?

macca70
14-12-2015, 04:14 PM
Definite red surely - he's going in studs up.
Haven't read the rules lately in any great depth but I've seen a variety of challenges and studs up is pretty much always a red.
Most football fans instant reaction to sliding in studs up is "that's a red".

It surely isn't violent conduct though - that would have to be a deliberate attempt to injure or off the ball.

Difficult to find exact definitions but this would seem to suffice:
'Serious foul play is a foul committed using excessive force (i.e., "the player...is in danger of injuring his opponent")'

What I don't understand is why they're appealing it - it's a one match ban whether it's Serious foul play or violent conduct unless it takes him over the disciplinary threshold which, with two previous yellows it doesn't. A failed appeal is an automatic two match ban. I think you accept he's not playing QotS and get him back for the sevco match.

Surely the appeal is either Hibs knowing something we don't that suggests he'd be unavailable for the sevco match or they don't quite know the rules?

Think he's facing a 2 match ban therefore we have nothing to lose by appealing and trying to get him available for Rangers game.

brog
14-12-2015, 04:26 PM
[QUOTE=macca70;4523192]Think he's facing a 2 match ban therefore we have nothing to lose by appealing and trying to get him available for Rangers game.[/QUOT

It wouldnt necessarily be next 2 games. Appealing could work against us.

macca70
14-12-2015, 04:43 PM
[QUOTE=macca70;4523192]Think he's facing a 2 match ban therefore we have nothing to lose by appealing and trying to get him available for Rangers game.[/QUOT

It wouldnt necessarily be next 2 games. Appealing could work against us.

Fairly sure Hibs will have established if consequences of a failed appeal to ensure its not more detrimental.

Is the appeal not heard on Thursday and decision made on Thursday.

The Leith Dutch
14-12-2015, 05:02 PM
Think he's facing a 2 match ban therefore we have nothing to lose by appealing and trying to get him available for Rangers game.

That's the bit I don't get - everything I've read says one match ban.

The only thing that makes it a two match ban is that a red quite often takes you over the disciplinary threshold but that's not the case here (I think) as McGinn only has two yellows.

Not in any way doubting you as I only know what I've read on the SFA site today so would genuinely would like to understand why it's a two match ban :)

brog
14-12-2015, 05:09 PM
One thing we shouldn't do & that's get over anxious about John missing a couple of games. When AS was going out & signing midfielders in the summer there were people on here questioning the necessity. We started on Saturday without Dylan, Marvin & Liam & lost John before h/t. The other players, notably Fraser stepped up. We have the strongest squad in many years, I have no doubt we won't be find wanting if we lose John for 1 or 2 games.

FromTheCapital
14-12-2015, 05:10 PM
As it stands, I think McGinn has been give a two-match ban for 'violent conduct'.

However, if the SFA review it and come to the conclusion that it is 'serious foul play' which many journalists and pundits have mentioned then they will rescind it to a one-game ban, meaning he could play at Ibrox.

Anything other than 'serious foul play' is absolutely shocking, in my opinion. It's totally obvious for all to see that there was no malice in the tackle and labelling it 'violent conduct' is simply laughable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Argylehibby
14-12-2015, 05:17 PM
My understanding is that violent conduct is punching, kicking, spitting etc and not being rash or late when trying to win the ball which JM was doing. I don't see this being anything other than foul play and the punishment is 1 game. If he goes over the threshold then he will be banned for the game in Govan (normally kicks in 2 weeks after the threshold is breached and as our game is the Monday it will definately be in force by then). Hope I'm right!

0762
14-12-2015, 05:18 PM
Have the club actually appealed? Understand they would have had to notify the SFA today.

I've checked the rules :rules:and it is a two game suspension - Violent Conduct and Serious Foul Play both now carry two games.

If Hibs appeal failed they would loose a £250 fee for the appeal and the appeal would be heard on Thursday.

The one danger.

If deemed "Frivolous"

"13.10 Frivolous claims and submissions
13.10.1 Where a Tribunal considers a claim under proceedings brought by a PlayerReference, it shall be open to the Tribunal to also consider whether:
13.10.1.1 The individual bringing the Player Reference had no prospect ofsuccess;
13.10.1.2 The Player Reference is considered by the Tribunal to have beenan abuse of process or a delaying tactic for the sanction originallyimposed; and/or
13.10.1.3 The Player Reference is considered by the Tribunal to have been afrivolous claim.

13.10.2 If the proceedings brought by a Player Reference are considered by the Tribunalto fall within the parameters of Paragraph 13.10.1, an additional one matchsuspension will be imposed, to be served immediately, following the serving ofthe sanction already imposed by the Tribunal."


Having watched it a dozen times I think the club would loose the appeal - its a red card lets move on. There is no option for this being reduced to only one game through appeal. But more worryingly what's our chances of loosing McGinn for a third game with an appeal?

0762
14-12-2015, 05:22 PM
My understanding is that violent conduct is punching, kicking, spitting etc and not being rash or late when trying to win the ball which JM was doing. I don't see this being anything other than foul play and the punishment is 1 game. If he goes over the threshold then he will be banned for the game in Govan (normally kicks in 2 weeks after the threshold is breached and as our game is the Monday it will definately be in force by then). Hope I'm right!


Affraid not. His offence is a 2 game suspension. Lifted from SFA Judicial Panel Protocol 2015-2016.

The two weeks wait is on getting your 6th yellow card for the suspension kicking in.

Ronniekirk
14-12-2015, 06:03 PM
Have the club actually appealed? Understand they would have had to notify the SFA today.

I've checked the rules :rules:and it is a two game suspension - Violent Conduct and Serious Foul Play both now carry two games.

If Hibs appeal failed they would loose a £250 fee for the appeal and the appeal would be heard on Thursday.

The one danger.

If deemed "Frivolous"

"13.10 Frivolous claims and submissions
13.10.1 Where a Tribunal considers a claim under proceedings brought by a PlayerReference, it shall be open to the Tribunal to also consider whether:
13.10.1.1 The individual bringing the Player Reference had no prospect ofsuccess;
13.10.1.2 The Player Reference is considered by the Tribunal to have beenan abuse of process or a delaying tactic for the sanction originallyimposed; and/or
13.10.1.3 The Player Reference is considered by the Tribunal to have been afrivolous claim.

13.10.2 If the proceedings brought by a Player Reference are considered by the Tribunalto fall within the parameters of Paragraph 13.10.1, an additional one matchsuspension will be imposed, to be served immediately, following the serving ofthe sanction already imposed by the Tribunal."


Having watched it a dozen times I think the club would loose the appeal - its a red card lets move on. There is no option for this being reduced to only one game through appeal. But more worryingly what's our chances of loosing McGinn for a third game with an appeal?

Am Sure I read on Hibs news 24/7 that Stubbs was quoted saying the club were appealing but haven't seen this confirmed anywhere else .

Hibbyradge
14-12-2015, 06:13 PM
It was a bad challenge, the referee was correct to send him off, and I can not see any merit in Hibs appeal.

Law 12 Fouls and misconduct

Cautionable offences

A player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the
following seven offences:

• unsporting behaviour
• dissent by word or action
• persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game
• delaying the restart of play
• failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner
kick, free kick or throw-in
• entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission
• deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission

A substitute or substituted player is cautioned if he commits any of the
following three offences:

• unsporting behaviour
• dissent by word or action
• delaying the restart of play

Sending-off offences

A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the
following seven offences:

• serious foul play
• violent conduct
• spitting at an opponent or any other person
• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity
by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within
his own penalty area)
• denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving
towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a
penalty kick
• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
• receiving a second caution in the same match

Borderhibbie76
14-12-2015, 06:16 PM
According to STN news deffo a 2 match ban and we are deffo appealing

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

tamig
14-12-2015, 09:44 PM
From the SFA

A player who is sent off for serious foul play, violent conduct or spitting at an opponent or any other person, will have 12 penalty points added to his applicable League disciplinary record. In addition, he will automatically be suspended in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 3.8.

When a player has accumulated a total of 18 or more penalty points in a League competition during a season, or of any extension thereof, he will be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with a Fixed Scale of Suspensions as provided for in Paragraph 3.7.2.


Do we know if it's two or three points per booking? If three, that would take him to the 18 point threshold. I'm not sure if they also count public holidays in that 14 day period. Looks like he could miss the hun game if it's a straight 14 days.

*edit - the 14 day thing was quoted by another poster from the rule book.

GreenCastle
15-12-2015, 12:46 PM
Think we will find out today about this.

0762
15-12-2015, 01:21 PM
Do we know if it's two or three points per booking? If three, that would take him to the 18 point threshold. I'm not sure if they also count public holidays in that 14 day period. Looks like he could miss the hun game if it's a straight 14 days.

*edit - the 14 day thing was quoted by another poster from the rule book.


Point don't exist anymore for player discipline. 14 days is non applicable as this only relates to yellow cards - the red card he was issued is a two game suspension and would take effect immediately so would miss the next two games.

Summary from the current Rules:rules:

Yellow Cards
Offence suspension application of suspension accumulation of six cautionable offences in the same competition.
1 match dated suspension (For every further accumulation of six cautionable offences, the suspension applied will be extended by one match.) effective from 14th day following date of match when sixth cautionable offence occurred and to be served in the same competition.

Red Cards (2 games suspensions)
Serious Foul Play (A1)
Violent Conduct (A2)
Spitting at an opponent or any other person (A3)

Red Cards (1 game suspension)
Denying the opposing team or an opponent a goal or an obvious goal scoring opportunity (A4)
Offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures (A5)
Receiving a second caution in the same match (A6)


Club would have needed to lodge the appeal yesterday (3pm) with evidence submitted today (3pm)

Reading through this stuff its incredible 190+ pages. Better get back to the day job!!!

erin go bragh
15-12-2015, 01:23 PM
Think we will find out today about this.

Sure it's Thursday GD .

GGTTH

Since90+2
15-12-2015, 01:24 PM
If serious foul play is listed as a 2 game ban absolutely no chance it will get reduced or overturned.

He will miss the QOTS and Rangers games.

0762
15-12-2015, 01:33 PM
Sure it's Thursday GD .

GGTTH

From
Page 32 - SFA Judicial Panel Protocol 2015/16

Looks like;

Notification of Appeal to SFA would be Monday - 3pm
Evidence submission to SFA would be Tuesday - 3pm
Compliance Office Evidence back the way would be Wednesday - 3pm
Appeal Hearing - says next available hearing date but reading the Protocol think that would be the Thursday so all appears to move pretty quickly.

Phil MaGlass
15-12-2015, 02:02 PM
Should have rearranged the Morton game for next week.

hibees 7062
15-12-2015, 02:12 PM
MOM against them at ER . He's got no chance of playing against them at Hunbrox

Newry Hibs
15-12-2015, 02:32 PM
Well, if he is out for the The Rangers game - they will have to change their game plan to come up with someone else to kick the crap out of (without any bookings / freekicks). Might confuse them.

JimBHibees
15-12-2015, 02:40 PM
Well, if he is out for the The Rangers game - they will have to change their game plan to come up with someone else to kick the crap out of (without any bookings / freekicks). Might confuse them.

Agree when you compare the tackle Ball put in on him in that game and the one McGinn got sent off for on Saturday, asbolute night and day. One a yellow I think the other straight red.

Sir David Gray
15-12-2015, 06:28 PM
Think we should rearrange the Morton game for next Tuesday.

Scouse Hibee
15-12-2015, 09:40 PM
If Hibs have access to this image in better quality, and you'd imagine they do, then this should definitely be used as part of the appeal. It shows he got his foot to the ball first and it doesn't appear that he is out of control.

Just shows you how pictures do lie.

southern hibby
16-12-2015, 02:17 AM
Solution,

Let's offer to play Morton midweek no McGinn, they'd probably except as it means we're weaker and he's back for the Hun game.

GGTTH

Greenworld
16-12-2015, 05:02 AM
We are no one man team someone else will come in from our strong squad

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Ronniekirk
16-12-2015, 08:02 AM
We are no one man team someone else will come in from our strong squad

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Ours is a strong squad if we have everyone available .If McGinn is missing next two games , Mcgeoch injured and hasn't played for weeks so even if now fit ,he isn't match fit ,and Henderson just back for second half against Falkirk after mystery virus ,
so need to see how he has been this week .
It's not ideal for a trip to Ibrox and a game we don't want to loose
Hopefully Hendo gets full 90 minutes v Queen of The South and Mcgeoch gets some game time as if his first game back is at Ibrox he won't last 90'minutes and Bartley has also been out injured so would be good for him to get game time against Queens

Greenworld
16-12-2015, 09:55 AM
Ours is a strong squad if we have everyone available .If McGinn is missing next two games , Mcgeoch injured and hasn't played for weeks so even if now fit ,he isn't match fit ,and Henderson just back for second half against Falkirk after mystery virus ,
so need to see how he has been this week .
It's not ideal for a trip to Ibrox and a game we don't want to loose
Hopefully Hendo gets full 90 minutes v Queen of The South and Mcgeoch gets some game time as if his first game back is at Ibrox he won't last 90'minutes and Bartley has also been out injured so would be good for him to get game time against Queens
I hear you dont worry though we we win it...[emoji102]

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Spike Mandela
16-12-2015, 11:20 AM
Rangers up against the very physical Falkirk this weekend. Wouldn't surprise me if there are several instances where Rangers players could get booked and/or get sent off but don't.:cb

scoopyboy
17-12-2015, 11:46 AM
Lots of people on this thread were well wrong, really glad Mr. Stubbs didn't pay attention to the experts on here.
:cb

MWHIBBIES
17-12-2015, 11:49 AM
Lots of people on this thread were well wrong, really glad Mr. Stubbs didn't pay attention to the experts on here.
:cbThe one who is paid to get it right was also wrong :greengrin

scoopyboy
17-12-2015, 11:52 AM
The one who is paid to get it right was also wrong :greengrin

True.

Leithenhibby
17-12-2015, 12:06 PM
Lots of people on this thread were well wrong, really glad Mr. Stubbs didn't pay attention to the experts on here.
:cb


True.

:agree:

Well I'm not one to say "I told you so" but I told you so...... :greengrin

Delighted for our club and most definitely has made my day......... :cb

Since90+2
17-12-2015, 12:07 PM
Absolutely delighted he has had the ban overturned. I still think it was a red to be honest but delighted all the same.

I can imagine if the roles were reversed and it was Lee Wallace who had his ban overturned for that challenge allowing him to play against us this place would be in uproar.

Greencore
17-12-2015, 12:10 PM
The the rangers fans must be spewing!! Rest him for Saturday please!

Leithenhibby
17-12-2015, 12:14 PM
It's not the best photo ever taken, but it does show McGinn's foot on the ball. All be it the top of the ball. Yellow for me :wink:

15757


Making contact with the ball is irrelevant. You can interpret that photo as both feet of the ground and appears to be more stamping down on the ball.
The one thing does show for me this is serious foul play 1 match ban as he went for the ball definitely not violent conduct.
Law 12 SFA rules - serious foul play "jumps at a opponent " doesn't matter about making contact with the ball.
Also Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the

front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force
and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.





Apparently making contact with the ball isn't irrelevant... :greengrin

Delighted and we move forward to Saturday......

O'Rourke3
17-12-2015, 12:41 PM
The the rangers fans must be spewing!! Rest him for Saturday please!

They'll only find notice if the Record does some back page hatchet job on the appeal board. Cue some bald headed firebrand on the steps of Ayebrokes demanding to know the names of "these people" :wink:

Famous Fiver
17-12-2015, 12:55 PM
I don't doubt that McGinn was aggressive, but no more aggressive than the challenges that went in on him during the same passage of play.

Kerr made the most of it, and had that tackle been meant to hurt, rather than try to retreive the ball, Kerr would never have been able to continue.

I'll stop short of calling him a cheat but I will be very surprised if he, or any of the other Falkirk players 'mortally wounded' on Saturday are unable to play this weekend.

Ozyhibby
17-12-2015, 01:00 PM
The tackle was late but maybe it wouldn't have been late if he hadn't been impeded by the Falkirk player?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ALF TUPPER
17-12-2015, 01:17 PM
Any news folks ? Verdict passed ?

GGTTH

PatHead
17-12-2015, 01:24 PM
Always thought a yellow card would have sufficed. The referee was too quick to grab his card from his pocket and the reaction of the Falkirk players didn't help.

That decision could cost us the league title at the end of the season.

hibs0666
17-12-2015, 01:25 PM
Always thought a yellow card would have sufficed. The referee was too quick to grab his card from his pocket and the reaction of the Falkirk players didn't help.

That decision could cost us the league title at the end of the season.

No danger. Our destiny is in our own hands and, if we fail to win the league, it will be down to us and us alone.

Onion
17-12-2015, 01:27 PM
Big boost to McGinn and Hibs. He's guaranteed to to MOTM at Hunbrox now :ask:

S4uzee
17-12-2015, 01:34 PM
Big boost to McGinn and Hibs. He's guaranteed to to MOTM at Hunbrox now :ask:

Or he'll get sent off again this weekend 😂

PatHead
17-12-2015, 02:14 PM
No danger. Our destiny is in our own hands and, if we fail to win the league, it will be down to us and us alone.

Yes it is in our hands but these points could prove crucial at the end of the season.

superfurryhibby
17-12-2015, 03:03 PM
Always thought a yellow card would have sufficed. The referee was too quick to grab his card from his pocket and the reaction of the Falkirk players didn't help.

That decision could cost us the league title at the end of the season.

The red was right on the spot and he was in no doubt, that's his job. The opposition players reacted just like any other group of players, nowt unusual to be fair.

By the standards of the modern game, lunging in like that is always going to put you in danger of a red.
I thought it was a stupid tackle, no chance of the ball and just a bit of the old red mist descending.

McGinn's a lucky boy, it could have cost us more and we didn't lose ground. Hopefully it's a lesson learned for him.

As others say, the league is the for the winning, plenty fitbaw to come and if we maintain our form and our nerve we can do it.

Scouse Hibee
17-12-2015, 04:43 PM
We would be raging if that was overturned after a tackle on one of our own players. Authorities get it wrong again but this time to our advantage so happy days.

greenlex
17-12-2015, 04:53 PM
The tackle was late but maybe it wouldn't have been late if he hadn't been impeded by the Falkirk player?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is the only possible explaination. He was definitely not in control and was over the ball. The fact it wasn't his fault must have swung it. Pleasing.

Onion
17-12-2015, 05:13 PM
We would be raging if that was overturned after a tackle on one of our own players. Authorities get it wrong again but this time to our advantage so happy days.

Let's not grieve too much as there will be plenty of other decisions that'll not go so well. Good to see Hibs asking the questions though :aok:

Wilson
17-12-2015, 05:40 PM
We would be raging if that was overturned after a tackle on one of our own players. Authorities get it wrong again but this time to our advantage so happy days.

The people who think it is a red "all day long" would be raging. Those who thought it was harsh wouldn't.

There is a cost involved in appealing so we don't usually gamble on it. Stubbs thought there were grounds and was vindicated by the decision. Somebody called it wrong - the ref and many on here. Stubbs and the authorities got it right.

blackpoolhibs
17-12-2015, 06:23 PM
red yesterday

and red today

Not today though. :greengrin

Ringothedog
17-12-2015, 06:27 PM
Warburton being his usual anus of a man, by stating " am I surprised ? I reserve judgement on that one". Respectfully I despise that anus of a man more every time he opens his mouth.

allezsauzee
17-12-2015, 06:29 PM
I still think the red was warranted but given that Falkirk had only one yellow shown despite their usual overly aggressive approach to the game I think it's a fair result. For us to have three yellows and a red to their single yellow was ludicrous.

c31
17-12-2015, 07:08 PM
Never a red, just watched it on Sky sports and its a joke if he gets a ban for that...

told you....

Onion
17-12-2015, 07:35 PM
The the rangers fans must be spewing!! Rest him for Saturday please!

Respectfully, they're not bothered about Hibs and only concerned about their own club ..... :fibber:

kaimendhibs
17-12-2015, 07:57 PM
Respectfully, they're not bothered about Hibs and only concerned about their own club ..... :fibber:

Exactly. You wouldn't hear any of their players or manager talking about Hibs, they are far too respectful and only interested in the the Rangers. With respect

rcarter1
17-12-2015, 08:07 PM
Have only just seen the challenge on replay. Never a straight red. Its a clumsy attempt at regaining the ball, nothing more - no way directed deliberately at the player. I can imagine it looked a bit red at the time, but justice done for me. Jolly good result!

Sir David Gray
17-12-2015, 08:17 PM
I'm surprised it was overturned but I have seen it several times and I do think it was a yellow card offence.

Just delighted that he's going to be available now. :aok:

Eyrie
17-12-2015, 08:34 PM
Warburton being his usual anus of a man, by stating " am I surprised ? I reserve judgement on that one". Respectfully I despise that anus of a man more every time he opens his mouth.

Respectfully, that is disrespectful to anuses.

Sir David Gray
17-12-2015, 08:51 PM
Warburton being his usual anus of a man, by stating " am I surprised ? I reserve judgement on that one". Respectfully I despise that anus of a man more every time he opens his mouth.

With respect, I would respectfully decribe his comments as worthless.

Scouse Hibee
17-12-2015, 09:21 PM
The people who think it is a red "all day long" would be raging. Those who thought it was harsh wouldn't.

There is a cost involved in appealing so we don't usually gamble on it. Stubbs thought there were grounds and was vindicated by the decision. Somebody called it wrong - the ref and many on here. Stubbs and the authorities got it right.

Let me assure you that not many people would think it harsh if it was an opponent tackling our player and rightly so. The authorities have got it wrong again but I'm not raging because having watched it live and countless replays I still think it was a red all day. Happy days though we get our player back and another right is wronged or wrong is righted :-)

Jim44
17-12-2015, 09:32 PM
Warburton being his usual anus of a man, by stating " am I surprised ? I reserve judgement on that one". Respectfully I despise that anus of a man more every time he opens his mouth.

Why the hell did he choose to comment on this issue? It has absolutely nothing to do with him. This is proof that, in addition to his other faults, he is a liar as he continually maintains not to talk about other teams and other team's players. Absolutely classless.:bitchy:

PatHead
17-12-2015, 09:34 PM
Why the hell did he choose to comment on this issue? It has absolutely nothing to do with him. This is proof that, in addition to his other faults, he is a liar as he continually maintains not to talk about other teams and other team's players. Absolutely classless.:bitchy:

To be fair he was asked a question.

Mr White
17-12-2015, 09:37 PM
with respect he was asked a question.

Ftfy :greengrin

Ringothedog
17-12-2015, 09:40 PM
To be fair he was asked a question.

He certainly was asked a question, but his reply sums him up. He could have respectfully kept his opinion to himself.

Ronniekirk
17-12-2015, 10:05 PM
[QUOTE=ALF TUPPER;4524462]Any news folks ? Verdict passed ?

GGTTH[/QUOT
Keep up Alf ,have you been having another siesta :greengrin

Prof. Shaggy
17-12-2015, 10:19 PM
We would be raging if that was overturned after a tackle on one of our own players. Authorities get it wrong again but this time to our advantage so happy days.

No, we wouldn't be raging if we got to play one of our rivals and they were reduced to ten for the entire second half and we achieved a result we didn't deserve as a result.
If the red were subsequently reduced to a yellow I might even laugh.
If that, in turn released one of our rivals better players to play against another of our rivals I might even throw a party.:greengrin

Prof. Shaggy
17-12-2015, 10:24 PM
He certainly was asked a question, but his reply sums him up. He could have respectfully kept his opinion to himself.

To be fair, his answer was p***.

How can you reserve judgement on whether you're surprised or not? :clown:

PatHead
17-12-2015, 10:27 PM
He certainly was asked a question, but his reply sums him up. He could have respectfully kept his opinion to himself.

:top marks

Jim44
17-12-2015, 10:35 PM
To be fair he was asked a question.

Well his standard reply would be 'I don't comment on other teams and other team's players'. He could have taken that course to avoid answering the question you say he was asked. He and his team are uneasy about us not reading the script and it's showing.

Ringothedog
17-12-2015, 10:46 PM
Well his standard reply would be 'I don't comment on other teams and other team's players'. He could have taken that course to avoid answering the question you say he was asked. He and his team are uneasy about us not reading the script and it's showing.

The problem is that he does say things like that and then goes on to comment about other teams albeit respectfully. Aye right.

greenlex
17-12-2015, 11:32 PM
I can't believe the amount of folk that think it's only a red if it's deliberate. Quite incredible to be honest.

superfurryhibby
17-12-2015, 11:47 PM
I can't believe the amount of folk that think it's only a red if it's deliberate. Quite incredible to be honest.

You need to qualify that with those that think it's a red under the wimpish standards of the modern game. Very different concepta:wink:

Sir David Gray
17-12-2015, 11:57 PM
To be honest, I couldn't give a monkeys about whether it was or wasn't deserving of a red card.

The facts are that the red card has been rescinded by an appeals panel and he is now free to play on Saturday and also against Sevco.

GIRUY Mark Warburton. 15774

Jim44
18-12-2015, 12:02 AM
To be honest, I couldn't give a monkeys about whether it was or wasn't deserving of a red card.

The facts are that the red card has been rescinded by an appeals panel and he is now free to play on Saturday and also against Sevco.

GIRUY Mark Warburton. 15774

Without wishing to sound pedantic, I hope that, if he plays on Saturday and plcks up a yellow or red, he won't miss out on the Sevco match. Can we afford to rest him on Saturday and ensure he plays at Ibrox?

greenlex
18-12-2015, 03:12 AM
You need to qualify that with those that think it's a red under the wimpish standards of the modern game. Very different concepta:wink:

Next you'll be telling me a foul is only a foul if it's meant .

500miles
18-12-2015, 04:07 AM
Next you'll be telling me a foul is only a foul if it's meant .

I would guess the card was recinded for two reasons.

First of all, McGinn is actually fouled directly before his attempt to get the ball, knocking him off balance and making him late. The primary reason is he isn't control of the tackle is because of this, and we should have had a penalty.

Secondly, there was no malicious intent. Because he was sent off for "Serious Foul Play", there usually has to be intent for this to apply - it is what is otherwise known as a Professional Foul.

With these things in mind, reduction from a red to a yellow is probably the fairest result that a panel could give, although the referee should have given a penalty on the day.

ALF TUPPER
18-12-2015, 06:54 AM
[QUOTE=ALF TUPPER;4524462]Any news folks ? Verdict passed ?

GGTTH[/QUOT
Keep up Alf ,have you been having another siesta :greengrin

Hahahahaha I'm the Corporal Jones of the Hibs Support. Always a wee bit behind the rest Ronnie 😊

greenlex
18-12-2015, 08:18 AM
I would guess the card was recinded for two reasons.

First of all, McGinn is actually fouled directly before his attempt to get the ball, knocking him off balance and making him late. The primary reason is he isn't control of the tackle is because of this, and we should have had a penalty.

Secondly, there was no malicious intent. Because he was sent off for "Serious Foul Play", there usually has to be intent for this to apply - it is what is otherwise known as a Professional Foul.

With these things in mind, reduction from a red to a yellow is probably the fairest result that a panel could give, although the referee should have given a penalty on the day.

Agree with your first point and can be the only logical explaination as to the change. I do disagree with your second point though. A red for serious foul play does not necessarily mean their is intent but rather an outcome. Intent for me would be a red for violent conduct. Both carry the same 2 game ban which I think is bonkers as one is pre meditated and the other not.
My previous point I was making quite a few posts ago was there was a lot if folk who seemed to think that it should only be a red if there is intent. I clumsily was making the comparison of it only being a foul if there is intent to try and highlight that.

Iggy Pope
18-12-2015, 02:53 PM
Agree with your first point and can be the only logical explaination as to the change. I do disagree with your second point though. A red for serious foul play does not necessarily mean their is intent but rather an outcome. Intent for me would be a red for violent conduct. Both carry the same 2 game ban which I think is bonkers as one is pre meditated and the other not.
My previous point I was making quite a few posts ago was there was a lot if folk who seemed to think that it should only be a red if there is intent. I clumsily was making the comparison of it only being a foul if there is intent to try and highlight that.

Not sure your interpretation is right (while I agree with most of what you've said on the subject). If he's gone for the ball, recklessly, intentfully or otherwise, then Serious Foul Play and often a red. Violent Conduct is another state of affairs and seldom one that can be levelled against a player attempting to play the ball or the man that has the ball. Usually reserved for punches, headbutts, slaps, kicks off the ball. Or,correctly booting **** out of Crystal Palace fans in the case of Eric Cantona.

Sir David Gray
18-12-2015, 07:38 PM
Without wishing to sound pedantic, I hope that, if he plays on Saturday and plcks up a yellow or red, he won't miss out on the Sevco match. Can we afford to rest him on Saturday and ensure he plays at Ibrox?

I think that if John McGinn is fit and available, he's pretty much the first name on the team sheet for every single match.

If he gets booked tomorrow, he won't miss the Sevco game.