Today’s referee

[Seveno]

Craig Napier. Can’t remember seeing him before but good to see a ref giving Boyler some protection. Pretty good performance all round.

[neil7908]

Was just thinking this. Kinda depressing when you think how many poor refs we've got in Scotland but I thought he handled all the big decisions well.

Teams have got away with far too many fouls against us (and Boyle especially) so I hope his colleagues will continue to offer protection against repetitive fouling and niggling or down right dangerous tackles.

[Lancs Harp]

Was screaming at my laptop though when he gave a goal kick instead of a corner for Daz's chance. A definate white stick moment.

[blackpoolhibs]

He looked about 12, but handled the sending off well, he gave the foul and knew it was bad, but went to the linesman to see what he thought too.

It was not a rushed sending off like a Willie Collum.

[brianmc]

Thought he had a great game.

[kaimendhibs]

Agreed. He was good

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[calumhibee1]

Was never a penalty imo although I haven’t seen it again since the game.

Fair enough we never scored it, but it’s quite a pivotal decision to get wrong.

[Ryan91]

Was never a penalty imo although I haven’t seen it again since the game.

Fair enough we never scored it, but it’s quite a pivotal decision to get wrong.

Aberdeen's first visit to ER they got a penalty just like that - it's a stick on penalty IMO

[The Spaceman]

Craig Napier. Can’t remember seeing him before but good to see a ref giving Boyler some protection. Pretty good performance all round.

Thought he did a good job too. Let the game flow and got most of his decisions spot on.

[Eyrie]

He looked about 12, but handled the sending off well, he gave the foul and knew it was bad, but went to the linesman to see what he thought too.

It was not a rushed sending off like a Willie Collum.

I liked that collaborative approach, especially as the linesman was closer and had a better view.

[Ryan91]

He looked about 12, but handled the sending off well, he gave the foul and knew it was bad, but went to the linesman to see what he thought too.

It was not a rushed sending off like a Willie Collum.

:agree:

Knew his linesman had a good view of it, Ref had a decision in his mind, but wanted to confirm.

No doubt he'll be told that he can't go doing silly things like asking his linesman for his thoughts.

Ref let the game flow too, a few hefty challenges from both teams, but not a dirty game at all.

Only real decision he got wrong was not giving a corner when McGregor hit it off the keeper.

[PaulSmith]

It really wasn’t a difficult game to referee but if the red card and the pen was given against Hibs I’d be interested to read on here if he’d still had a good game.

There were some weird free kicks given today and missing the two handed save from McGregors header was a belter.

[allmodcons]

Was never a penalty imo although I haven’t seen it again since the game.

Fair enough we never scored it, but it’s quite a pivotal decision to get wrong.

I didn't think it was penalty either, very soft.

That said, with Hamilton down to 10 men and us already 1 up it was hardly a pivotal decision. A big decision maybe but not pivotal.

[CMurdoch]

It really wasn’t a difficult game to referee but if the red card and the pen was given against Hibs I’d be interested to read on here if he’d still had a good game.

There were some weird free kicks given today and missing the two handed save from McGregors header was a belter.

Yeah, strangely Brian Rice was less impressed by his refereeing and his consultation with his officials for the sending off.
Supporters and managers always see the referees decisions through the prism of what's best for their team.
Referees simply can't win.

[matty_f]

He got the sending off right and I’d say the penalty was right as well. Those were the two biggest moments in the game so I think he gets pass marks.

[PaulSmith]

From John Barnes at the BBC.

“Just wondering what is happening to Scottish football with the last three red cards I’ve witnessed. Peter Pawlett, Jack Fitzwater, and now Jamie Hamilton. In my opinion none of them should have been red.”

[ballengeich]

The question is how will he handle things when we're up against one of the gruesome twosome.

[1van Sprou7e]

Was nice to see him take his time before sending the guy off though I'm 50/50 on if it should have been red or yellow

Thought the penalty was a good desicion though

[matty_f]

From John Barnes at the BBC.

“Just wondering what is happening to Scottish football with the last three red cards I’ve witnessed. Peter Pawlett, Jack Fitzwater, and now Jamie Hamilton. In my opinion none of them should have been red.”

I’m sure the other two red cards were upheld after appeal, I wonder if John Barnes has questioned whether he knows as much as the referees in these instances?

[gaz1875]

I thought he was terrible, players were falling over and he gave fouls on almost every occasion. The penalty I can't see any foul, wasn't complaining about getting it, and the sending off was 50/50 probably.

[PaulSmith]

I’m sure the other two red cards were upheld after appeal, I wonder if John Barnes has questioned whether he knows as much as the referees in these instances?

I didn’t say he was right as the other two are stick on reds but the Hamilton one might split opinion.

[kaimendhibs]

If one of our players got breathed on in our own half I and the ref gave a pen I would take it.
Every time

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[CMurdoch]

From John Barnes at the BBC.

“Just wondering what is happening to Scottish football with the last three red cards I’ve witnessed. Peter Pawlett, Jack Fitzwater, and now Jamie Hamilton. In my opinion none of them should have been red.”

It's easy to make decisions after watching incidents over and over and in slow motion.
Much harder to do in real time.

I haven't rewatched the two main incidents of controversy from today.
When I watched them at real speed I thought:
The sending off was right because I thought the speed the defender came in at was reckless and as such endangered Boyle.
As for the penalty, I didn't think it should have been given.

If I now go and look at it over and over, slow it down etc I may well change my mind but the referee isn't afforded that luxury. Without VAR the scope for the referee to be wrong with one look at real time is massive. We either get VAR or have to accept referees decisions won't always be right.

[davy67 +]

As always the referees' performance depends on the result and who you support, if you win then he's usually great, if you lose or a contentious decision goes against you then he's usually ***** . The red card and the penalty are both debatable but I'm happy to accept them as we've had a few dodgy ones go against us in the past

[Onceinawhile]

Red card was probably 75/25 in terms of red. I thought so as soon as I saw it.

The penalty, I'm still not convinced by.

That aside I thought he tried to ay advantage and was willing to bring play back, so I liked that.

[1875Sean]

I’d be disappointment with the red and pen call if it was a Hibs player, I can see how he gave the red and the defender dived in and it was reckless but he did get the ball, seen McGregor and Porto get away with tackles that like before! Can’t see why it was a pen, think doidge goes down easy but looks like the other Hamilton player kicked the ball first

[Devonhibs]

I'm a qualified referee albeit U18 level but do some of the Plymouth Argyle u18 teams. It is impossible to get every decision right with a fraction of a second to make a judgment when your also trying to be in the right position so as not to get in the way and have a clear view. Its not easy at times.

[Dashing Bob S]

I think the referee gifted us three points today

[green day]

Laughable that Rice complained about tge ref consulting the assistant ref.......isn't the assistant actually there precisely for these instances??

[h1bs4life]

1st time have seen the referee think he was ok , thought at the time it was a sending off and after watching it on Sportscene it's still a sending off.
Been talking all season about Boyle getting protection from refs.
Hamilton's tackle might have been ok a few seasons ago but it was a lunge could even say out of control and a red card all day long.

[hibbysam]

Am I right in saying that Easton never complained about the penalty? Normally tells its own story. Watching back on sportscene they didn’t see the kick, but when the stopped it it looks to me as if Doidge gets his foot in first, and Easton boots the back of his leg onto the ball. Penalty for me. Ref had a great view as well.

[givescotlandfreedom]

John Barnes and Sportscene critical of the red card and penalty - particularly McFadden - which convinces me he got the decisions right.

[Ryan91]

John Barnes and Sportscene critical of the red card and penalty - particularly McFadden - which convinces me he got the decisions right.

The more I watch it the more it's a stick on Red for me. No control, jumps in to the tackle, studs up, it's a reckless challenge and player gets nowhere near the ball. Might even be considered a "last man" challenge.

As for the penalty, Boyle conceded one earlier in the season vs Aberdeen for almost the exact same thing. If Boyle's challenge is a pen, so is that one.

[Sir David Gray]

I think the penalty was a penalty, it's not of the stonewaller variety but I think it would be a free kick anywhere else on the pitch so that means it was a penalty.

I thought the red card was harsh, when I saw it back the first couple of times I actually thought that Boyle rolling over about 5 times was the thing that got him sent off and I initially thought there was no contact made at all.

Having seen it a few more times broken down on Sportscene, Hamilton's back leg makes contact with Boyle and when he was going at the pace he was going, that explains the number of rolls on the pitch.

I'm still not convinced it was a sending off though and clearly that changed the game as Hamilton went from almost going 2-0 up to being 1-0 down within seconds.

[hibee-boys]

Red card all day long, irrelevant how much contact, if any, he had with Boyle. If you go flying into a tackle off the ground with studs up you’re getting sent off, and rightly so. If he’d caught Boyle’s planted leg he potentially could’ve ended his career. It’s the intention, nothing to do with contact, suppose if a player swung a punch and missed he’d just get a stern talking to!I’m all for allowing a fair physical battle, and frustrates the heck out of me how quick some players go down play acting, but there’s no debate with that challenge.

[JimBHibees]

The more I watch it the more it's a stick on Red for me. No control, jumps in to the tackle, studs up, it's a reckless challenge and player gets nowhere near the ball. Might even be considered a "last man" challenge.

As for the penalty, Boyle conceded one earlier in the season vs Aberdeen for almost the exact same thing. If Boyle's challenge is a pen, so is that one.

The reckless nature of the tackle high foot straight leg studs showing out of control imo means it should be a red. Clear intention to take him out irrespective of any or minimal contact. If Boyle didn't get out of the way he would likely have been seriously injured. The linesman had a clear view and gave a red and rightly so.

[JimBHibees]

Red card all day long, irrelevant how much contact, if any, he had with Boyle. If you go flying into a tackle off the ground with studs up you’re getting sent off, and rightly so. If he’d caught Boyle’s planted leg he potentially could’ve ended his career. It’s the intention, nothing to do with contact, suppose if a player swung a punch and missed he’d just get a stern talking to!I’m all for allowing a fair physical battle, and frustrates the heck out of me how quick some players go down play acting, but there’s no debate with that challenge.

Agree with all of that.

[Broken Gnome]

I think there was one camera angle where Hamilton looked like he angled his foot towards Boyle - definitely seemed as if he was trying to leave one on him.

[Onion]

Going to just enjoy the rare feeling of what it's like for Hibs to be on the end of decisions that Celtic and Sevco get week in week out :wink:.

[flash]

I'm still not convinced it was a sending off though and clearly that changed the game as Hamilton went from almost going 2-0 up to being 1-0 down within seconds.

A bit puzzled by the last paragraph. How could Hamilton have almost gone 2-0 up when they were never 1-0 up?

[Alfred E Newman]

John Barnes and Sportscene critical of the red card and penalty - particularly McFadden - which convinces me he got the decisions right.

Unlike others McFadden comes across well and is pretty fair .
He did say he could see why at normal speed the tackle was deemed a red though when you slow it down you can see the guy got the ball and made no contact with Boyle with his leading leg.
After watching it a few times I still think it was reckless and dangerous and merited the red.

[Onion]

Unlike others McFadden comes across well and is pretty fair .
He did say he could see why at normal speed the tackle was deemed a red though when you slow it down you can see the guy got the ball and made no contact with Boyle with his leading leg.
After watching it a few times I still think it was reckless and dangerous and merited the red.

Then Hamilton will appeal it, and win the appeal. Let's see.

[wookie70]

The red card was a horrible challenge in my view and well deserved being sent off for. The penalty was very soft and Doidge played for it going down dramatically but as said we have had one against us for a similar offence

[CMurdoch]

It's easy to make decisions after watching incidents over and over and in slow motion.
Much harder to do in real time.

I haven't rewatched the two main incidents of controversy from today.
When I watched them at real speed I thought:
The sending off was right because I thought the speed the defender came in at was reckless and as such endangered Boyle.
As for the penalty, I didn't think it should have been given.

If I now go and look at it over and over, slow it down etc I may well change my mind but the referee isn't afforded that luxury. Without VAR the scope for the referee to be wrong with one look at real time is massive. We either get VAR or have to accept referees decisions won't always be right.

Watched Sportscene now.
Sending off correct. Reckless challenge by Hamilton which endangered Boyle. Potential to end players career, hence the law.

Penalty incident - looks pretty rubbish but under the present rule interpretation can be a penalty.
UEFA need to look at the penalty law and why it was created in the first place and get back to that spirit.
Basically it was created to stop defending players fouling an attacking player to stop them scoring or setting up a goal and to stop defenders stopping the ball with their hands and arms for the same purposes.
What we have now in most cases is trickery and stealth by the attackers to induce contact and that was not why the penalty rule was created and is thus a corruption of the rule.

[hibbysam]

Watched Sportscene now.
Sending off correct. Reckless challenge by Hamilton which endangered Boyle. Potential to end players career, hence the law.

Penalty incident - looks pretty rubbish but under the present rule interpretation can be a penalty.
UEFA need to look at the penalty law and why it was created in the first place and get back to that spirit.
Basically it was created to stop defending players fouling an attacking player to stop them scoring or setting up a goal and to stop defenders stopping the ball with their hands and arms for the same purposes.
What we have now in most cases is trickery and stealth by the attackers to induce contact and that was not why the penalty rule was created and is thus a corruption of the rule.

What do you recommend, we remove the penalty box? A foul is a foul whether inside the box or not, if it’s in the box it’s a penalty regardless of their intentions. According to Google, the first penalty was awarded in 1891, do you really know their thoughts back then on why it was created?

[KingPat4]

Red card all day long. Dangerous tackle with intent.

[Northernhibee]

Yesterdays sending off takes his average to something like a red card every eight games unless I'm mistaken. He's a player with form for getting himself an early bath.

[CMurdoch]

What do you recommend, we remove the penalty box? A foul is a foul whether inside the box or not, if it’s in the box it’s a penalty regardless of their intentions. According to Google, the first penalty was awarded in 1891, do you really know their thoughts back then on why it was created?

You are asking me a question that would take a UEFA committee 3 months together to come up with a definitive definition. I'm sure you appreciate my reluctance to spend lots of time on this for you :wink:
My issue is simply with players inducing contact.
As an example let's take Hibs v Aberdeen from earlier in the season. A match Hibs lost 1-0 to a penalty.
The penalty came about when an Aberdeen player saw Boyle about to clear the ball. He stepped from out of Boyle's vision into a position where the ball was so that when Boyle went to kick the ball he kicked the player instead. His sole purpose was to induce the foul and gain a penalty.
It's no more a foul than people who set up fraudulant schemes where they jump in front of cars and role onto the bonnet as the car strikes them is a genuine accident.
It's inducement, trickery or whatever you want to call it but it is not a foul.

[Key West]

About time a referee took some responsibility for the weekly kicking in turns that is handed out to Martin Boyle.

[Sir David Gray]

A bit puzzled by the last paragraph. How could Hamilton have almost gone 2-0 up when they were never 1-0 up?

They had two great chances before the red card, Marciano saved the first one at the far post and the other one hit the post.

[CMurdoch]

About time a referee took some responsibility for the weekly kicking in turns that is handed out to Martin Boyle.

The two 1st half sendings off in the last 3 games suggests there is more to it than that.
His timing of acceleration and the acceleration level itself fools opponents. The ball is there, they go for it and he nips it away and they clatter him.
A 1st half sending off more or less loses the game so it's not as if the offending player is trying to kick him.
As I commented in a post yesterday Boyle is very brave and I do worry about his stunt work resulting in a big injury.

[flash]

They had two great chances before the red card, Marciano saved the first one at the far post and the other one hit the post.

Aye but if they scored the first the second chance wouldn't have happened.:wink:

[CMurdoch]

Yesterdays sending off takes his average to something like a red card every eight games unless I'm mistaken. He's a player with form for getting himself an early bath.

His sending off yesterday was a bit like what Porteous had going on for a while where he put a maximum of force into everything.
Like Porteous the penny will eventually drop and he will begin to rely more on the big muscle between his ears for improved decision making.

[weecounty hibby]

Remember Portos red against the hun at ER. Same thing, reckless, endangered the opponent and was red carded. 2 years ago now I think and folk still can't accept that it's a red card for that type of thing. Touching the ball in the process means absolutely nothing

[we are hibs]

Porteous won the ball. It wasnt even a foul never mind a red. Complete joke decision.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

Porteous won the ball. It wasnt even a foul never mind a red. Complete joke decision.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
And as I say, folk don't want to accept that nowadays with the rule changes it is now a red card. It used to be seen as a great challenge, now uts a free kick and red

[thebakerboy]

It was good to see him consult with Lino as many Scottish refs tell Linos they are there for Throw ins and offsides only , Mr Beaton is one I believe , info came from an excellent source .

[Kato]

They had two great chances before the red card, Marciano saved the first one at the far post and the other one hit the post.So they got what they deserved, no goals.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Key West]

The two 1st half sendings off in the last 3 games suggests there is more to it than that.
His timing of acceleration and the acceleration level itself fools opponents. The ball is there, they go for it and he nips it away and they clatter him.
A 1st half sending off more or less loses the game so it's not as if the offending player is trying to kick him.
As I commented in a post yesterday Boyle is very brave and I do worry about his stunt work resulting in a big injury.

Boyle’s pace is a great asset and he gets done in every game, normally the opposition are allowed about three tackles before someone gets booked, it is the responsibility of the defenders to tackle properly.
He’s already suffered two bad injuries, refs need to do their job wether it is the first or last minute of a game.

[Sir David Gray]

So they got what they deserved, no goals.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

I think on platforms like this, what someone actually means can often get lost when people only look at a certain part of a post.

I'm not saying that they deserved to score, obviously hitting the post and a goalkeeper making a save is part of the game. Referring back to my original post, all I meant was they went from almost scoring on two occasions before the red card to conceding almost immediately after the red card and that the red card changed the game massively in our favour.

We'll never know what the outcome would have been if the red card hadn't happened but there's no doubt they were the better side before that happened and we looked pretty uncomfortable.

[Jones28]

John Barnes and Sportscene critical of the red card and penalty - particularly McFadden - which convinces me he got the decisions right.

What’s the justification for it not being a red?

Out of control, reckless, high on the player, off the ground. The only thing is that he takes the ball while he takes Boyle out. Everything else ticks the boxes for a red card. You can’t make challenges like that in this day and age.

[Alfred E Newman]

What do you recommend, we remove the penalty box? A foul is a foul whether inside the box or not, if it’s in the box it’s a penalty regardless of their intentions. According to Google, the first penalty was awarded in 1891, do you really know their thoughts back then on why it was created?

The thing is, these soft fouls would not have been given 20 years ago. It’s the scourge of the modern game and its time refs started waving play on when players crumple in a heap at slightest contact.

[Northernhibee]

The thing is, these soft fouls would not have been given 20 years ago. It’s the scourge of the modern game and its time refs started waving play on when players crumple in a heap at slightest contact.

I don't want us to go back to "how the game was" though, nostalgia is a wonderful thing. Wimbledon managed to be a top flight team down south and they made Hearts look like tiki-taka era Barcelona. A foul shouldn't need to be 'crunching' to be given. Some players will make the most of contact but the game up here as we have it - with albeit more competant referees - but no VAR is just about right for entertainment IMO.

[Kato]

I think on platforms like this, what someone actually means can often get lost when people only look at a certain part of a post.

I'm not saying that they deserved to score, obviously hitting the post and a goalkeeper making a save is part of the game. Referring back to my original post, all I meant was they went from almost scoring on two occasions before the red card to conceding almost immediately after the red card and that the red card changed the game massively in our favour.

We'll never know what the outcome would have been if the red card hadn't happened but there's no doubt they were the better side before that happened and we looked pretty uncomfortable.

Fair enough, SDG. Games swing on decisions sometimes but the team favoured still have to put a performance in. Hamilton are one of those teams whose resilience goes goes a long way but they are also very fragile. A good opening ten minutes, true, but they still didn't score.

[hibbysam]

You are asking me a question that would take a UEFA committee 3 months together to come up with a definitive definition. I'm sure you appreciate my reluctance to spend lots of time on this for you :wink:
My issue is simply with players inducing contact.
As an example let's take Hibs v Aberdeen from earlier in the season. A match Hibs lost 1-0 to a penalty.
The penalty came about when an Aberdeen player saw Boyle about to clear the ball. He stepped from out of Boyle's vision into a position where the ball was so that when Boyle went to kick the ball he kicked the player instead. His sole purpose was to induce the foul and gain a penalty.
It's no more a foul than people who set up fraudulant schemes where they jump in front of cars and role onto the bonnet as the car strikes them is a genuine accident.
It's inducement, trickery or whatever you want to call it but it is not a foul.

That’s nonsense. The Aberdeen player nicked in and touched the ball away before Boyle kicked it which resulted in Martin booting him. The exact same happened yesterday, Doidge touched the ball away. So you reckon the attacking players should step back and just let the defender clear it?

UEFA also don’t make up the rules. You also stated that this wasn’t why the penalty rule was brought in 130 years ago. As if we all know why it was brought in.

[hibbysam]

The thing is, these soft fouls would not have been given 20 years ago. It’s the scourge of the modern game and its time refs started waving play on when players crumple in a heap at slightest contact.

It wasn’t soft, he tried to kick the ball, missed and booted the player. That’s always been a foul. The red card wouldn’t have been a foul but player safety has taken over, can’t steam into tackles at that speed with studs showing now, and rightly so.

[h1bs4life]

Brian Rice still moaning about the red card.
Definite red card , no doubt they will be putting in an appeal 1st thing Monday morning then.
Hopefully this will be the season that they and there crappy plastic pitch go down and with a bit of luck Kilmarnock will go down them.

[CMurdoch]

That’s nonsense. The Aberdeen player nicked in and touched the ball away before Boyle kicked it which resulted in Martin booting him. The exact same happened yesterday, Doidge touched the ball away. So you reckon the attacking players should step back and just let the defender clear it?

UEFA also don’t make up the rules. You also stated that this wasn’t why the penalty rule was brought in 130 years ago. As if we all know why it was brought in.

Just looked at the Boyle one again and I was indeed speaking rubbish. Green specs on.

[Alfred E Newman]

It wasn’t soft, he tried to kick the ball, missed and booted the player. That’s always been a foul. The red card wouldn’t have been a foul but player safety has taken over, can’t steam into tackles at that speed with studs showing now, and rightly so.

I never said it was. We were discussing the penalty.

[hibbysam]

I never said it was. We were discussing the penalty.

And I was comparing it to the red card, the penalty has always been a foul, booting players without touching the ball isn’t allowed and never has been.

The red card was allowed back in the day, but not nowadays. That’s the one that’s changed over the years.

[Bishop Hibee]

Part of the problem with people claiming the foul on Boyle wasn’t a red is that refs in Scotland are very lenient compared to other leagues. VAR with lots more angles than the sub-standard BBC coverage would have shown the defenders back leg catches Boyle and it’s an out of control off the ground lunge. Times have changed and the ball players are better protected. Well done the ref and dinosaurs like John Barnes need to catch up.

[Peevemor]

Part of the problem with people claiming the foul on Boyle wasn’t a red is that refs in Scotland are very lenient compared to other leagues. VAR with lots more angles than the sub-standard BBC coverage would have shown the defenders back leg catches Boyle and it’s an out of control off the ground lunge. Times have changed and the ball players are better protected. Well done the ref and dinosaurs like John Barnes need to catch up.I noticed that too. I think at one time it was an automatic red if the trailing leg caught the player but the rules change so often these days I didn't want to say anything unless the "we know the up-to-date rules" brigade jumped on my back.

That last bit was a joke BTW.