Ryan Porteous appreciation thread

[500miles]

Total stitch up. We should publicly kick up **** and make a point of dragging every referee we get through the mud post match. If they're going to be dishonest and cheat, we need to be nasty about it.

[JimBHibees]

Wrong team and player to use as an example, Goldson would get a booking and if by some miracle got sent off it would be overturned. How many reds should rangers and Celtic have seen that never get shown, and they seem to be the only teams to appeal successfully.

The game is rigged and Ryan is an example of what happens when you don’t fall in line. He is easily one of the best defenders in the league and would be starting for Scotland if he was at one of the Glasgow clubs.

Your last point is true proven by Craig Halkett being added to the Scotland squad a player with about a quarter of Portos ability.

[B.H.F.C]

A three match ban with another added in accordance with SFA JPP 13.21.8.2: "the claim had no prospect of success".

Guessing they just use that when it suits. Funnily enough, we just happen to have had a bit of a pop at them publicly relatively recently.

[GreenCastle]

Waste of time and money appealing it.

4 games is mad though.

That will be 9 games he’s been suspended for this season.

[basehibby]

Not a sensible move appealing on this occasion - regardless of the fact he was going for the ball he still took their player out and it could have been construed as a red for preventing a goal scoring opportunity. On top of this there is an obvious agenda in the press to gun for Ryan at every opportunity and this could only result in additional pressure on the panel to be firm. The result is we have lost him for an additional game - not very clever!

Haste ye back Ryan!

[Carheenlea]

Your last point is true proven by Craig Halkett being added to the Scotland squad a player with about a quarter of Portos ability.

100% :agree:

[weecounty hibby]

I am only going to say one thing that shows up the frankly ludicrous and biased ****ing shambles that is the compliance and appeals team in Scottish football. Ryan Jack against Dundee Utd!!!!!! Porto is on the wrong end of a witch hunt

[Orchard_Hibs]

Your last point is true proven by Craig Halkett being added to the Scotland squad a player with about a quarter of Portos ability.

Halkett in the Scotland squad is a joke

[Billy Whizz]

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/football-governance/disciplinary/disciplinary-updates/

[JimBHibees]

Guessing they just use that when it suits. Funnily enough, we just happen to have had a bit of a pop at them publicly relatively recently.

That is exactly why these bitter social misfits who only get the gig because of who they know and where they live dont like being told how absolutely atrocious they are. Didnt think we would win this appeal however to add another game shows to me an agenda at play when so many other appeals get no addition. Absolutely rigged.

[Stuart93]

First two games after the split will be Hearts and Aberdeen, he'll be back for our third game (Rangers) so they can send him off again.

You seem awfy confident we’ll be there

Ryan needs to move on for the good of his career. An absolute target up here

[JimBHibees]

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/football-governance/disciplinary/disciplinary-updates/

Wonder who was on the panel. Tom English and Levein ? Dont understand the added game given it isnt like he was able to play in a game in between times like other teams have used. Clearly shows we need to stfu about refs and use it as a motivation to win the next few games.

[cammy1969]

That is exactly why these bitter social misfits who only get the gig because of who they know and where they live dont like being told how absolutely atrocious they are. Didnt think we would win this appeal however to add another game shows to me an agenda at play when so many other appeals get no addition. Absolutely rigged.

Agree jim[emoji817]% adding the extra game is there way of saying don’t question us. For me I can see why he sent him off but can also see hibs point of view, so can understand them turning it down but to add a game to the suspension is bang out of order


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lago]

I didn’t realise it would be increased if the appeal was unsuccesful.

I’m sorry, but that is sheer idiocy from Hibs appealing that. It was a clear red card. If there was no potential extra game then fair enough but getting an extra game added on when it was clearly a red card and had very little chance of being successful is a ridiculous decision.
Totally agree, never anything other than a straight red, now money wasted and extra time of for Porto, daft.

[Unseen work]

Porteous now posting about it on Instagram.

The will be the DR cover soon.

[JimBHibees]

Corrupt decisions recently Napier v St Johnstone to not give that as a red was bent his reaction to JDH after the incident showed the total contempt he had for him. The two at Dundee also both stick on reds by David Munro who then sent off Rocky rightly but in context nowhere near as bad as the ones he ignored. Same ref on Saturday gave a yellow for a Saints defender who ran to forearm smash Van Veen in the back of the head. Something absolutely not right with the punishments being given out imo

[JimBHibees]

Porteous now posting about it on Instagram.

The will be the DR cover soon.

He needs to not do that imo

[hibee_girl]

Porteous now posting about it on Instagram.

The will be the DR cover soon.

He’ll be lucky not to get pulled up about that too

[Sir David Gray]

Porteous now posting about it on Instagram.

The will be the DR cover soon.

What's he said?

[500miles]

He’ll be lucky not to get pulled up about that too

Doesn't matter, he's got maybe 3 games left in a hibs shirt.

[Paulie Walnuts]

What's he said?

“Stonewall penalty. However eyes clearly focused on the ball and a genuine attempt made, yellow card going by the rules of the game.”

Not enough for another suspension but it would probably be worse for Hibs and Porteous to just accept it now.

[easty]

“Stonewall penalty. However eyes clearly focused on the ball and a genuine attempt made, yellow card going by the rules of the game.”

Not enough for another suspension but it would probably be worse for Hibs and Porteous to just accept it now.

There’s nothing wrong with what he’s posted.

[Sir David Gray]

Appeal rejected

Not surprised it's been rejected but increasing the ban because they consider the appeal to have been frivolous is a scandal and is the biggest indication that we are now being dealt with in a different way to any other club in the country by the SFA.

When was the last time that happened in Scotland?

[Hibs90]

https://i.ibb.co/nQPbG8D/B59-A7-A47-A14-C-45-D7-8933-4-AD6-F7737585.png

He’s bang on.

Glad he’s calling it out. He’s been driven out of Scotland by the media, starting with the huns.

[Sir David Gray]

“Stonewall penalty. However eyes clearly focused on the ball and a genuine attempt made, yellow card going by the rules of the game.”

Not enough for another suspension but it would probably be worse for Hibs and Porteous to just accept it now.

That was nowhere near as bad as what I thought he might have come out with if I'm honest.

Still I wouldn't be surprised if a further notice of complaint is served against him this afternoon.

[overdrive]

Absolute witch hunt against him by the media, refs and now the SFA.

The thing is we can’t do much about it as the corrupt SFA punish you for calling out corrupt behaviour by them and their staff. Ironically, whistleblowing on refs isn’t allowed.

Only a small thing, but I’d hope the club instruct the players and staff to refuse to shake the hand of the match officials. A handshake is a sign of respect. Respect is earned, not a right and 99% of Scottish referees do not deserve respect.

[Paulie Walnuts]

There’s nothing wrong with what he’s posted.

I agree.

I still don’t think it’s wise to come out and criticise the decision though. We’ve all seen before that any criticism of referees, decisions etc can quite easily be a punishable offence.

[hibee_girl]

There’s nothing wrong with what he’s posted.

There is nothing wrong with it and I totally support him coming out and saying it.

Just wouldn’t be surprised if he’s pulled up about it that’s all.

[Hibs90]

I agree.

I still don’t think it’s wise to come out and criticise the decision though. We’ve all seen before that any criticism of referees, decisions etc can quite easily be a punishable offence.


If he can’t call it out and the club won’t come o it and say it then who can and what is the point? He’s absolutely bang on to call it out.

[CL0762]

Referees in Scotland are absolutely honking. Only in this country could we have an excellent centre half who wears his heart on his sleeve and gets torn down by outside forces at every opportunity. The club need to start making noises about this because I’m sick of the way we get treated on a match day.

Tackle on JDH at home, the disdain in which the referee speaks to him afterwards is nothing short of disgraceful.

[davhibby]

Was never going to be overturned which made it silly us appealing it imo.

The rules might say as long as you make a genuine attempt for the ball and whilst he did he also swiped clean through McCrorie in order to do it.

If Goldson done that for rangers against us for example we’d be screaming for a red card and be in disbelief if it was overturned.

4 games is a huge loss especially when we already have loads of players out and are struggling for wins.

If there was a penalty awarded for Hibs for that challenge a red card wouldn’t even cross my mind.

[500miles]

If there was a penalty awarded for Hibs for that challenge a red card wouldn’t even cross my mind.

Double jeopardy rule would be the first thing to cross my mind.

[Paulie Walnuts]

If he can’t call it out and the club won’t come o it and say it then who can and what is the point? He’s absolutely bang on to call it out.

He’s not bang on because he’s quite simply wrong.

It was a blatant red card. He’s not calling out anything. There’s nothing untoward about the red card.

It was clear as day the appeal wouldn’t be successful because it was a clear red card. The decision to appeal it is really quite unbelievably stupid.

[hibee_girl]

He’s not bang on because he’s quite simply wrong.

It was a blatant red card. He’s not calling out anything. There’s nothing untoward about the red card.

It was clear as day the appeal wouldn’t be successful because it was a clear red card. The decision to appeal it is really quite unbelievably stupid.

It absolutely wasn’t a red card imo. The rules are clear, if he’s making a play for the ball (which he is) then it can’t be a penalty and a red card. A yellow and a penalty would have been correct.

[Danderhall Hibs]

It absolutely wasn’t a red card imo. The rules are clear, if he’s making a play for the ball (which he is) then it can’t be a penalty and a red card. A yellow and a penalty would have been correct.

Think the issue is the rules aren’t clear - the line about having no chance of winning the ball is the clincher for them to throw the appeal out.

[JamesHFC]

He’s going to have the whole hearts team in his back pocket again next month. Wouldn’t put it past him to score the winner 🤫

[Sir David Gray]

Obviously the club can't/won't do anything but I think we need a fans led protest against the SFA before or during the semi final.

As I have said earlier I'm not angry about the appeal failing but increasing the ban is a disgrace and I think is genuinely unheard of within Scottish football.

I'd contribute to any planned protest at this game.

[Paulie Walnuts]

It absolutely wasn’t a red card imo. The rules are clear, if he’s making a play for the ball (which he is) then it can’t be a penalty and a red card. A yellow and a penalty would have been correct.

He had absolutely no chance of winning the ball cleanly with the tackle he put in. The balls dropping to the left foot of the Aberdeen attacker. Porteous is standing directly behind him and has swiped his right leg around the right hand side of the attacker.

You’re not making a play for the ball if the tackle you put in has absolutely zero chance of cleanly playing the ball.

[Booked4Being-Ugly]

Game is corrupt and the refs are bent AF.

We’ll need to toe the line and accept the corruption as we’re now being targeted.

[Daniel 1875]

Totally lost with the double jeopardy rule.

Porteous clearly attempts to play the ball, who wouldn’t ‘attempt’ to play the ball six yards from goal with the opposition about to score?

By the letter of the law it’s a stonewall penalty and a yellow card.

The extra game ban is even more difficult to understand but the way justice works in Scottish football I wouldn’t expect to hear a justification from the Compliance Officer or anyone at the SFA, just get on with it or we’ll ban you ever longer.

[500miles]

The additional game ban gives away the SFAs intent by the way. It's nothing to do with the challenge, it's about the player.

[Since90+2]

Totally lost with the double jeopardy rule.

Porteous clearly attempts to play the ball, who wouldn’t ‘attempt’ to play the ball six yards from goal with the opposition about to score?

By the letter of the law it’s a stonewall penalty and a yellow card.

The extra game ban is even more difficult to understand but the way justice works in Scottish football I wouldn’t expect to hear a justification from the Compliance Officer or anyone at the SFA, just get on with it or we’ll ban you ever longer.

Exactly. Every single centre half in that position is going to make an attempt to play the ball, they'd be absolutely slaughtered if they just stood there and allowed a tap in from 5 yards out.

It's a yellow card. Absolutely ridiculous.

[Sir David Gray]

The additional game ban gives away the SFAs intent by the way. It's nothing to do with the challenge, it's about the player.

Yep.

If the appeal had failed and he had been banned for 3 games I wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Increasing the ban to 4 games shows there's something quite sinister going on.

[LunasBoots]

We where always losing that, shouldn't have bothered appealing.

[Unseen work]

The ridiculous thing with the rule imo is they make out could the player have reasonably won the ball and if he could have and tried to play it it’s a yellow.

Slowing it down and watching it back most would say Porteous was never winning the ball. But in real time when the ball hits the bar and drops to the opposition in the 6 yard box Porteous has all eyes and intent on clearly the ball. We’re talking decision making within 1 second and I genuinely believe he would have thought he could have won the ball, there was zero malice.

The added ban is ridiculous and will only put clubs off appealing in the future.

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

Absolute disgrace like. A witch hunt and corruption. Not even trying to hide it. As if for a second they would increase the ban if this was rangers or celtic appealing. Wouldn’t have been a red to begin with of course [emoji2959]

[Fuzzywuzzy]

He’s going to have the whole hearts team in his back pocket again next month. Wouldn’t put it past him to score the winner 🤫

I'd be more concerned with them going out of their way to get him sent off. I think he'll be a nap for a red card in the semi

[Paulie Walnuts]

Exactly. Every single centre half in that position is going to make an attempt to play the ball, they'd be absolutely slaughtered if they just stood there and allowed a tap in from 5 yards out.

It's a yellow card. Absolutely ridiculous.

The fact he’d have been slaughtered doesn’t matter at all.

I’d have slaughtered our players had they not wiped someone out 30 yards from goal when they’re through on-on-one in the last minute with us in the lead. It’s still a red card though and it doesn’t get downgraded to a yellow because it’s what is expected of a centre half.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Totally lost with the double jeopardy rule.

Porteous clearly attempts to play the ball, who wouldn’t ‘attempt’ to play the ball six yards from goal with the opposition about to score?

By the letter of the law it’s a stonewall penalty and a yellow card.

The extra game ban is even more difficult to understand but the way justice works in Scottish football I wouldn’t expect to hear a justification from the Compliance Officer or anyone at the SFA, just get on with it or we’ll ban you ever longer.

The SFA would tell you you’ve not read all the letters in the law.

[silverhibee]

Total stitch up. We should publicly kick up **** and make a point of dragging every referee we get through the mud post match. If they're going to be dishonest and cheat, we need to be nasty about it.

Surprised Maloney hasn’t been charged after his comments about the ref after the game, we really are getting pissed on big time this season from the officials this season.

[Since90+2]

The fact he’d have been slaughtered doesn’t matter at all.

I’d have slaughtered our players had they not wiped someone out 30 yards from goal when they’re through on-on-one in the last minute with us in the lead. It’s still a red card though and it doesn’t get downgraded to a yellow because it’s what is expected of a centre half.

You genuinely think he reacted that quickly with an intention to bring the player down? He's reacts almost immediately to it happening, with natural instinct as a defender, to try and win the ball. Which by the letter of the law means it's a yellow not a red.

[Danderhall Hibs]

You genuinely think he reacted that quickly with an intention to bring the player down? He's reacts almost immediately to it happening, with natural instinct as a defender, to try and win the ball. Which by the letter of the law means it's a yellow not a red.

Letter of the law says it has to be winnable (or words to that effect).

[Paulie Walnuts]

You genuinely think he reacted that quickly with an intention to bring the player down? He's reacts almost immediately to it happening, with natural instinct as a defender, to try and win the ball. Which by the letter of the law means it's a yellow not a red.

I think he put in a tackle that had no chance of winning the ball. Whether you put that tackle in instinctively or not, you were never getting the ball. If you have no prospect of winning the ball from the challenge you’ve made then you can’t realistically claim that’s what you were trying to do.

Players make instinctive decisions all the time that lead to red cards. You don’t get off with it because you didn’t have the time to think of something else to do.

[SChibs]

Letter of the law says it has to be winnable (or words to that effect).

That's such an ambiguous term though. As far as Porto was aware it was winninable because he didn't see the player. Also if he was half a second quicker he would have got there first and won it

[Since90+2]

Letter of the law says it has to be winnable (or words to that effect).

I think it was winnable, both of them react within a second so I'm pretty sure he thought in that split second he could win it. He never, but I don't think you can say there's absolutely no chance he could have, he's about half a second away from getting the ball.

[overdrive]

Yep.

If the appeal had failed and he had been banned for 3 games I wouldn't have batted an eyelid. Increasing the ban to 4 games shows there's something quite sinister going on.

It is a disincentive to whistleblowing on unacceptable, corrupt behaviour. I'd love to know what would happen if a player became aware of a referee being involved in match fixing and reported it in Scotland. I have a suspicion the SFA would come down hard on the player.

[blackpoolhibs]

Just to make sure they really piss us off, they have also given Alex Edwards another 3 games suspension too.:rolleyes:

[McGruber]

Ryan Kent swings a punch at Brown's face - a punch. Decision appealed and rejected, you know.. because he punched him in the face- no extra game ban.

Ryan Jack v Dundee Utd, leg breaking challenge no card & no retrospective action. So someone looked at it and deemed it fine. Referee at the game did have the balls to award a free kick though - not reported if there was retrospective action for that.

Not all Ryan's treated equal it seems, maybe it's not the colour of the shirt or club.. maybe it's the surname that's the problem. The appeal money might have been better spent at the deed poll. Ryan John Paul Billyhunson

[MKHIBEE]

Just to make sure they really piss us off, they have also given Alex Edwards another 3 games suspension too.:rolleyes:

I hope he doesn’t appeal it, banned sine die if he does

[500miles]

Letter of the law says it has to be winnable (or words to that effect).

No challenge is winnable if the other player gets there first.

[SHODAN]

The last few games of the season will be his last with us, and he'll be better off for it.

I wouldn't put up with this witch hunt if I was a 22 year old professional, even if playing for my childhood team. Absolutely disgraceful treatment from Rangers, the SFA and the MSM.

[B.H.F.C]

Exactly. Every single centre half in that position is going to make an attempt to play the ball, they'd be absolutely slaughtered if they just stood there and allowed a tap in from 5 yards out.

It's a yellow card. Absolutely ridiculous.

I can’t believe he’s getting any criticism for trying to win the ball.

When he gave Ramirez a dig, he deserved criticism. But not for this. All he’s tried to do is win the ball. However unlikely it might have been, that was it, and no defender just stands and watches someone tap the ball in.

[norhfc]

Ryan Kent swings a punch at Brown's face - a punch. Decision appealed and rejected, you know.. because he punched him in the face- no extra game ban.

Ryan Jack v Dundee Utd, leg breaking challenge no card & no retrospective action. So someone looked at it and deemed it fine. Referee at the game did have the balls to award a free kick though - not reported if there was retrospective action for that.

Not all Ryan's treated equal it seems, maybe it's not the colour of the shirt or club.. maybe it's the surname that's the problem. The appeal money might have been better spent at the deed poll. Ryan John Paul Billyhunson

Exactly this, we all see so many bad tackles, punches, elbows in Scottish football every week. Most are not even discussed on Sportscene or wherever. They are out to get him cos the huns took a dislike to him over his spats with Morelos.

[nickwhibs]

How many games has he been suspended for in total this season? It seems crazy given that he has only had say three bad/mistimed tackles. The team are punished enough as it is being down to 10 men for the game that the tackle happened in. And to be punished further for having the audacity to question the decisions of referees and appeal through the correct channel is insane.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I can’t believe he’s getting any criticism for trying to win the ball.

When he gave Ramirez a dig, he deserved criticism. But not for this. All he’s tried to do is win the ball. However unlikely it might have been, that was it, and no defender just stands and watches someone tap the ball in.

No defender let’s someone run through one-on-one in the last minute of a game if they can wipe them out outside the box and win the game for their team.

It’s still a red card though. Not sure where this argument is coming from that he’s a defender and it’s what defenders do. It might well be but that doesn’t mean it’s no longer a red card.

[Paulie Walnuts]

How many games has he been suspended for in total this season? It seems crazy given that he has only had say three bad/mistimed tackles. The team are punished enough as it is being down to 10 men for the game that the tackle happened in. And to be punished further for having the audacity to question the decisions of referees and appeal through the correct channel is insane.

This is at least 9 possibly 10 games.

[Sir David Gray]

How many games has he been suspended for in total this season? It seems crazy given that he has only had say three bad/mistimed tackles. The team are punished enough as it is being down to 10 men for the game that the tackle happened in. And to be punished further for having the audacity to question the decisions of referees and appeal through the correct channel is insane.

I think he'll have been suspended for 9 games once this current ban's been served.

[B.H.F.C]

No defender let’s someone run through one-on-one in the last minute of a game if they can wipe them out outside the box and win the game for their team.

It’s still a red card though. Not sure where this argument is coming from that he’s a defender and it’s what defenders do. It might well be but that doesn’t mean it’s no longer a red card.

The argument about whether it’s a red card is a separate argument. But any argument about whether he should have tried to make the challenge or not is just stupid. He sees the ball, goes for it, doesn’t get it. Anyone criticising him for that is at it, irrespective of the outcome.

[Hermit Crab]

Apparently its 4 games. I'm not certain though. I think it would be the next 4 games semi included no?


It will be a three game ban, all in the league.

He would only have been suspended for the semi final if his red card had been for violent conduct or serious foul play.


If the appeal fails is it not 4 games?


No, 3.



So I was right.

[Paulie Walnuts]

The argument about whether it’s a red card is a separate argument. But any argument about whether he should have tried to make the challenge or not is just stupid. He sees the ball, goes for it, doesn’t get it. Anyone criticising him for that is at it.

I haven’t seen all that much criticism of him for that tbh. At the time I thought it was a stupid challenge but I would agree now that you can’t really blame him for making it.

[Sir David Gray]

So I was right.

Only because the SFA decided the appeal was frivolous. He didn't face a 4 match ban because of his previous disciplinary record.

Even Hibs said last night the ban would be 3 games if the appeal failed. I don't think anyone saw the increased ban coming unless you had inside knowledge.

[Ronniekirk]

Only because the SFA decided the appeal was frivolous. He didn't face a 4 match ban because of his previous disciplinary record.

Even Hibs said last night the ban would be 3 games if the appeal failed. I don't think anyone saw the increased ban coming unless you had inside knowledge.

So has he got the extra one match ban because the authorities felt the appeal was frivolous
When was the last time a player got a four game ban ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Spaceman]

Hopefully Ron Gordon on the phone to the Danes and Norweigians about our Atlantic League. Obviously no place for us in this rigged bigot-pond.

[Hermit Crab]

Only because the SFA decided the appeal was frivolous. He didn't face a 4 match ban because of his previous disciplinary record.

Even Hibs said last night the ban would be 3 games if the appeal failed. I don't think anyone saw the increased ban coming unless you had inside knowledge.


I did say it was a waste of time as well. We'll just have to deal with it. However a player suspended for a quarter of a season really is no good to us in the long run. Needs to stop being so reckless

[Winston Ingram]

He needs to head south and tell the SFA to gtf.

THe treatment of this laddie is a disgrace.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I did say it was a waste of time as well. We'll just have to deal with it. However a player suspended for a quarter of a season really is no good to us in the long run. Needs to stop being so reckless

To be fair I’ve not seen anybody other than some who are connected with Hibs who thought it was a sensible idea to appeal it. It was utter stupidity to appeal.

I don’t think it’s that outrageous to decide it was frivolous. In fact I don’t think the appeal had any merit so I would agree it’s frivolous.

I do think though that it’s ridiculous to have added a game on for that though when it doesn’t seem to ever happen any other time and other such frivolous appeals haven’t had games added.

[A Hi-Bee]

I did say it was a waste of time as well. We'll just have to deal with it. However a player suspended for a quarter of a season really is no good to us in the long run. Needs to stop being so reckless

You should be pretty pleased then as he will not be at Hibs after the summer. Or perhaps I am being a wee bit frivolous, who says Scottish Fitba is not corrupt. Has to be a hun or part hun. The amount of horsesheite about this young player around gives a new meaning to Anal.....
:rules:

[Sir David Gray]

So has he got the extra one match ban because the authorities felt the appeal was frivolous
When was the last time a player got a four game ban ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No idea.

I've also no idea when the SFA last increased a ban for a frivolous appeal. A precedent's been set now and a lot of bans must now be increased if a club fails with their appeal.

[Winston Ingram]

No idea.

I've also no idea when the SFA last increased a ban for a frivolous appeal. A precedent's been set now and a lot of bans must now be increased if a club fails with their appeal.

Guarantee they've never done it to the uglies.

[I'm Spartacus]

Wait. Has he been banned for 4 games? Am I reading this correctly or is this some ****ty photoshop?

[Mainstandman]

No defender let’s someone run through one-on-one in the last minute of a game if they can wipe them out outside the box and win the game for their team.

It’s still a red card though. Not sure where this argument is coming from that he’s a defender and it’s what defenders do. It might well be but that doesn’t mean it’s no longer a red card.



tell that to Dave Beaumont, i still have nightmares about that.

[Heisenberg]

I didn’t realise it was extended because they deemed it “frivolous”. What a precedent to set. Will they hold everyone else to the same standard? No chance.

[Danderhall Hibs]

So I was right.

Can we all just stop to take a moment to acknowledge this momentous day? :greengrin

[I'm Spartacus]

Reading it now. Jesus. A 4 game ban? 1 game for asking for it to be looked at? WTF? He's not missing the semi but FFS, we need top 6 and this has not helped. I'd rather he was out for 3 games that included the semi than 4 games when we need those 12 points.

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

To be fair I’ve not seen anybody other than some who are connected with Hibs who thought it was a sensible idea to appeal it. It was utter stupidity to appeal.

I don’t think it’s that outrageous to decide it was frivolous. In fact I don’t think the appeal had any merit so I would agree it’s frivolous.

I do think though that it’s ridiculous to have added a game on for that though when it doesn’t seem to ever happen any other time and other such frivolous appeals haven’t had games added.

Lots of fans, myself included, thought it was fair game to appeal it. The double jeopardy rule is ambiguous. There is a solid argument that he tries to win the ball regardless of whether he did or not. He didn’t pull the guys shirt or chop him down when the ball was nowhere near them. Did I expect us to win? No, but that’s not a reason not to try with big games coming up. It is definitely not a frivolous appeal as so many, including Maloney, thought it may have been a yellow. Amazes me that any Hibs fan is defending blatant corruption. No other player in the league gets a 4th game added for that, not a chance.

[Lago]

I think he'll have been suspended for 9 games once this current ban's been served.
That's a lot.
I wonder what transfer price Hibs will put on him in the summer?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Lots of fans, myself included, thought it was fair game to appeal it. The double jeopardy rule is ambiguous. There is a solid argument that he tries to win the ball regardless of whether he did or not. He didn’t pull the guys shirt or chop him down when the ball was nowhere near them. Did I expect us to win? No, but that’s not a reason not to try with big games coming up. It is definitely not a frivolous appeal as so many, including Maloney, thought it may have been a yellow. Amazes me that any Hibs fan is defending blatant corruption. No other player in the league gets a 4th game added for that, not a chance.

Of course, and that’s what I said, people connected with Hibs whether that’s fans or staff. I’ve not seen anybody other than that think that it was anything other than a red card, be that officials, ex officials, tv presenters, fans of other clubs etc.

Other than some people connected with Hibs (whether fans or staff) near enough everyone involved in football that has voiced their opinion on it thought it was a clear red and that appealing it was mental. It’s probably safe to assume they also then think it is frivolous.

I would agree though that the actual use of the rule to add the 4th game seems strange seeing as they have almost always ignored that rule previously. When that rule is there though and available to be used it was a stupid decision by Hibs to appeal it when it never stood a chance imo.

[Sir David Gray]

Wait. Has he been banned for 4 games? Am I reading this correctly or is this some ****ty photoshop?

You're reading it correctly, there's no photoshop.

[Billy Whizz]

That's a lot.
I wonder what transfer price Hibs will put on him in the summer?

He’s only got a year left, so we’re not in a great position

[Callum_62]

Guarantee they've never done it to the uglies.Well rangers appealed the red card Kent received from flooring Scott Brown

That wasn't deemed frivolous

Naturally.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Paulie Walnuts]

He’s only got a year left, so we’re not in a great position

I’d expect £1m would see him go.

[JimBHibees]

Doesn't matter, he's got maybe 3 games left in a hibs shirt.

4 if you include the final. :greengrin

[Since90+2]

Well rangers appealed the red card Kent received from flooring Scott Brown

That wasn't deemed frivolous

Naturally.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I'd actually love someone in a position of authority at the club to come out and state this. It's as blatant corruption as you'll ever see.

[JimBHibees]

Just to make sure they really piss us off, they have also given Alex Edwards another 3 games suspension too.:rolleyes:

Wouldn't surprise me. :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

I'd actually love someone in a position of authority at the club to come out and state this. It's as blatant corruption as you'll ever see.

Someone from Hibs should definitely come out and challenge this decision.

[A Hi-Bee]

I’d expect £1m would see him go.

Woah that is very cheap for one of the best young players we have produced at Easter Rd in a generation or two, now the big question is who are you going to turn the vitriol on once Ryan goes eh!
Who is going to have to suffer your evil tongue :faf:

[JimBHibees]

Someone from Hibs should definitely come out and challenge this decision.

With statistics outlining how rare this actually is. Can't remember this happening for years which when you look at some of the appeals is laughable.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Woah that is very cheap for one of the best young players we have produced at Easter Rd in a generation or two, now the big question is who are you going to turn the vitriol on once Ryan goes eh!
Who is going to have to suffer your evil tongue :faf:

What do you reckon we’d get? We got offered £1m previously. He’s now got less time left on his contract. What makes you think we’d get significantly more money?

Do you actually have any thoughts on any of the topics being discussed on this forum or is it only me you’re interested in? :confused: because it certainly seems like the latter.

Also I’m not quite sure what part of saying it was a red card qualifies as vitriol. Maybe you could help me out with that?

[Sergio sledge]

Well rangers appealed the red card Kent received from flooring Scott Brown

That wasn't deemed frivolous

Naturally.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I mean technically that wasn't frivolous as they had a purpose to their appeal, they wanted Kent available for a game against Hearts so stuck an appeal in so he was free to play in the game until his appeal was decided....

Its crazy that Porteous gets an extra game for this when you see some of the other appeals that have gone in.

[A Hi-Bee]

What do you reckon we’d get?

Do you actually have any thoughts on any of the topics being discussed on this forum or is it only me you’re interested in? :confused: because it certainly seems like the latter.

Also I’m not quite sure what part of saying it was a red card qualifies as vitriol. Maybe you could help me out with that?

We will get what the other team are willing to pay, like I say please dont take things personal it just seems to me that you are always on your rocking chair going over and over with the same thing, almost like you need to have the last word, it is not normal for a Hibs supporter to just keep on hammering away at the same young player, thats all. just daft in my humble opinion.
:tub4:

[Danderhall Hibs]

Woah that is very cheap for one of the best young players we have produced at Easter Rd in a generation or two, now the big question is who are you going to turn the vitriol on once Ryan goes eh!
Who is going to have to suffer your evil tongue :faf:

He’s let his contract wind down and has a pretty poor (on the face of it) disciplinary record. Will depend on how much someone’s willing to pay although he might decide to let his last year run down and go for free. We’d probably qualify for some kind of development fee.

[JimBHibees]

I mean technically that wasn't frivolous as they had a purpose to their appeal, they wanted Kent available for a game against Hearts so stuck an appeal in so he was free to play in the game until his appeal was decided....

Its crazy that Porteous gets an extra game for this when you see some of the other appeals that have gone in.

Yep Porto didn't even get the benefit of playing in another game. Makes the decision even more ridiculous. Always thought this appealing to get someone off for a game was a nonsense.

[The dalmeny]

Someone from Hibs should definitely come out and challenge this decision.

what would be the benefit of this?

[Sir David Gray]

what would be the benefit of this?

We've not got anything to lose.

[MikeyS]

He’s let his contract wind down and has a pretty poor (on the face of it) disciplinary record. Will depend on how much someone’s willing to pay although he might decide to let his last year run down and go for free. We’d probably qualify for some kind of development fee.

I'd imagine that his agent is probably suggesting something similar. See it out another year and put himself in a better position wages wise with any potential new club. I suppose it may depend on how fed up he is of the press, he might not be wanting another year of the intrusion.

[weecounty hibby]

Being at work thus has probably been on my mind more than it should be. In my opinion this is the biggest witch hunt I've seen in Scottish football since Ally McLeod in 78! This started last season and surprise surprise it was started by the hun and their compliant media chums. It then got worse this year when Gerrard piled in and then again the media lackies jumped on the bandwagon again. His 1st red of the season may or may not have been right but taken in context of what happened with Hellander in the first few mins that wasn't even given as a free kick it was not. He then had a fellow pro grass him up on twitter when the ref at the game and even the media hadn't picked up the Ramirez issue. Surprise surprise the compliance team and media then get a hold of it and he is suspended.
Saturday could easily have been downgraded to yellow but as we have seen there is NO fair principle being applied to Porto or Hibs at the moment.
Ryan Jack's "tackle" v utd was reviewed they saw nothing wrong with it. Scottish football is corrupt and we are seeing the worst of it directed towards Hibs at the moment

[The dalmeny]

We've not got anything to lose.

except piss folk off for next time round

[Paulie Walnuts]

We will get what the other team are willing to pay, like I say please dont take things personal it just seems to me that you are always on your rocking chair going over and over with the same thing, almost like you need to have the last word, it is not normal for a Hibs supporter to just keep on hammering away at the same young player, thats all. just daft in my humble opinion.
:tub4:

You do realise you’ve posted a variation of this to me numerous times now.. :rolleyes:

[A Hi-Bee]

He’s let his contract wind down and has a pretty poor (on the face of it) disciplinary record. Will depend on how much someone’s willing to pay although he might decide to let his last year run down and go for free. We’d probably qualify for some kind of development fee.

Why hang around for another year of the same treatment or worse, I know he is a Hibby, but if it was me I would already have the flight ticket ready to get the hell out.
Once the pitch forks are out no way to stop them, that is Scotland in the 21st century.

[Paulie Walnuts]

He’s let his contract wind down and has a pretty poor (on the face of it) disciplinary record. Will depend on how much someone’s willing to pay although he might decide to let his last year run down and go for free. We’d probably qualify for some kind of development fee.

I’d imagine we’ll look to cash in. Seems like Gordon wasn’t happy with us not managing a sale in the summer, id be surprised if he would want to see RP leave for free.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Why hang around for another year of the same treatment or worse, I know he is a Hibby, but if it was me I would already have the flight ticket ready to get the hell out.
Once the pitch forks are out no way to stop them, that is Scotland in the 21st century.

The media stuff has been OTT - the last one from that former referee. As for the last 2 red cards I don’t think he can really complain. Most non Hibs folk would say all 3 are deserved reds. That’s not anyone giving him treatment.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I’d imagine we’ll look to cash in. Seems like Gordon wasn’t happy with us not managing a sale in the summer, id be surprised if he would want to see RP leave for free.

Agreed - although he might choose to stay. We can’t make him leave.

[SHODAN]

I know we rip into Rangers for it but just this once I'd actually like to see a statement calling the SFA out on this one.

The rejection of the appeal was expected. Adding on an extra game is just a big "**** you" from them.

[Ronniekirk]

what would be the benefit of this?

None they would probably give him a five game ban for us being even more frivolous


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sir David Gray]

I know we rip into Rangers for it but just this once I'd actually like to see a statement calling the SFA out on this one.

The rejection of the appeal was expected. Adding on an extra game is just a big "**** you" from them.

Yep the club should be issuing a strongly worded statement off the back of this astonishing decision.

[jeffers]

Be surprised to see anything from the club re this. BK made it pretty clear at the AGM that if we wanted a ceo who was always making comments/statements to the media we should look for someone else.

[blackpoolhibs]

Its just another decision from the clowns in charge, that have me thinking what is the point of supporting football in Scotland anymore. From the cheating refs to the totally corrupt football authorities, its become a complete waste of time.

[Dashing Bob S]

They are bigots and cowards.

[I'm Spartacus]

9 games through suspension this season? If found guilty with the assault charge could he be banned by the SPFL in relation to that?

If so, we need class on the park and not in the stands every week.

Ryan, sort it out, or move on and get us a chunky fee.

[Stokesy's on fire]

Proof the SFA are corrupt to the core

[Stokesy's on fire]

Its just another decision from the clowns in charge, that have me thinking what is the point of supporting football in Scotland anymore. From the cheating refs to the totally corrupt football authorities, its become a complete waste of time.

Im in the same boat i close to giving up on scottish football its rigged.

[The dalmeny]

9 games through suspension this season? If found guilty with the assault charge could he be banned by the SPFL in relation to that?

If so, we need class on the park and not in the stands every week.

Ryan, sort it out, or move on and get us a chunky fee.

Aye, reset required

[angus hibby]

It absolutely wasn’t a red card imo. The rules are clear, if he’s making a play for the ball (which he is) then it can’t be a penalty and a red card. A yellow and a penalty would have been correct.

Correct. Only been sent off/failed the appeal because of who it is. If that was Mueller, Jasper, Henderson etc making the challenge (ie, players with no reputation), it’s not a sending off, or we at least win the appeal.

[Sir David Gray]

Its just another decision from the clowns in charge, that have me thinking what is the point of supporting football in Scotland anymore. From the cheating refs to the totally corrupt football authorities, its become a complete waste of time.

I'm coming round to that way of thinking too.

[erin go bragh]

Very naive of Hibs appealing this as we all know how corrupt this system is . Should have accepted the one match ban . Now missing a vital player for four league games .

[easty]

I’d imagine we’ll look to cash in. Seems like Gordon wasn’t happy with us not managing a sale in the summer, id be surprised if he would want to see RP leave for free.

I’ve never seen anything that suggests Ron Gordon was unhappy we didn’t sell him last summer.

Where’s that come from?

[I'm Spartacus]

It absolutely wasn’t a red card imo. The rules are clear, if he’s making a play for the ball (which he is) then it can’t be a penalty and a red card. A yellow and a penalty would have been correct.

It was 100% a red card. You need to stop watching sport in general if you are this blind. The player was 2 yards away and about to score.

Are there elements of our support that are this thick? Even if you take the exact same layout of players and slide them all up to the edge of the box and then play the exact same tackle - IT'S STILL A RED CARD!

"But he tried to play the ball" FFS, he has halved a player who was about to score a near open goal.

[MWHIBBIES]

Very naive of Hibs appealing this as we all know how corrupt this system is . Should have accepted the one match ban . Now missing a vital player for four league games .

It was 3 games or appeal and get 4. No option to just take 1 match.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I’ve never seen anything that suggests Ron Gordon was unhappy we didn’t sell him last summer.

Where’s that come from?

Is that generally accepted as the reason why Mathie is gone?

I’m not talking about Porteous in particular btw. Just that the claim was we were supposed to be looking to sell someone (presumably Porteous, Nisbet or Doig) and didn’t manage it.

If that’s the model we’re following I can’t see us wanting anyone with value going for free.

[flash]

I think there was an argument that yellow was correct but I can also see why it was a red.
The one at Ibrox was arguably either colour too and the one against Aberdeen was red all day.
There is definitely a huge element of defending one of our own at work here but if these offences had been committed by Goldson or Souttar for example the vast majority of us would have been expecting a red card in all three scenarios.

[Hibs90]

He’s not bang on because he’s quite simply wrong.

It was a blatant red card. He’s not calling out anything. There’s nothing untoward about the red card.

It was clear as day the appeal wouldn’t be successful because it was a clear red card. The decision to appeal it is really quite unbelievably stupid.

It's not blatant at all.

Are you actually a Hibs fan?

[Paulie Walnuts]

It was 100% a red card. You need to stop watching sport in general if you are this blind. The player was 2 yards away and about to score.

Are there elements of our support that are this thick? Even if you take the exact same layout of players and slide them all up to the edge of the box and then play the exact same tackle - IT'S STILL A RED CARD!

"But he tried to play the ball" FFS, he has halved a player who was about to score a near open goal.

It’s quite telling that absolutely nobody else outside of some Hibs fans and some Hibs officials thinks the decision is incorrect.

Usually you’d get some reasonable St Mirren, Kilmarnock or Dundee United fans etc on the likes of Twitter saying they didn’t think it was a red. Absolutely nobody other than some Hibs fans seems to think it wasn’t a red and most people are absolutely stunned we even appealed it.

[JimBHibees]

I think there was an argument that yellow was correct but I can also see why it was a red.
The one at Ibrox was arguably either colour too and the one against Aberdeen was red all day.
There is definitely a huge element of defending one of our own at work here but if these offences had been committed by Goldson or Souttar for example the vast majority of us would have been expecting a red card in all three scenarios.

Think that is right to be honest. The one on Saturday can understand it being a red however there is an argument for it being a yellow too and if you look at the photo Ryan posted you can definitely understand the case. The biggest issue to me is the nonsensical addition of an extra game that is completely putting the boot in for absolutely no reason and definitely smacks of us getting the rough end of the stick especially when you consider other recent decisions which actually seem to be part of a catalogue of decisions none of which have gone our way.

[JimBHibees]

It’s quite telling that absolutely nobody else outside of some Hibs fans and some Hibs officials thinks the decision is incorrect.

Usually you’d get some reasonable St Mirren, Kilmarnock or Dundee United fans etc on the likes of Twitter saying they didn’t think it was a red. Absolutely nobody other than some Hibs fans seems to think it wasn’t a red and most people are absolutely stunned we even appealed it.

Have you seen the photo Ryan posted himself?

[I'm Spartacus]

He's a great player, of that there is no doubt. - "He needs to move abroad because he's being targeted" - no, he needs to move away from Scotland because he has some bam like tendencies that he clearly cannot shake off within his circle.

I'm very much for standing up for our players, fans and club as a whole (we should all be like that), but I'm actually embarrassed Shaun wanted to appeal this and I'm pissed off nobody within the club had the balls to stand up to whoever wanted this appealed. I'm also flabbergasted by our blinkered fans who argue this wasn't a red card and I'm pissed off we have wasted money appealing this.

Do we honestly have no common sense within our club?

Raging to be honest.

[BoomtownHibees]

It’s quite telling that absolutely nobody else outside of some Hibs fans and some Hibs officials thinks the decision is incorrect.

Usually you’d get some reasonable St Mirren, Kilmarnock or Dundee United fans etc on the likes of Twitter saying they didn’t think it was a red. Absolutely nobody other than some Hibs fans seems to think it wasn’t a red and most people are absolutely stunned we even appealed it.

Small sample size however in a works group chat, the resident Jambo and Hun don’t think it should have been a red and think we had grounds for appeal. The only one who thinks it should have def been a red was a Celtc fan

[flash]

Small sample size however in a works group chat, the resident Jambo and Hun don’t think it should have been a red and think we had grounds for appeal. The only one who thinks it should have def been a red was a Celtc fan

To be honest I spend far too much time on twitter and haven't seen a single supporter of another club who doesn't think it was a red.

[Wheat Hound]

To be honest I spend far too much time on twitter and haven't seen a single supporter of another club who doesn't think it was a red.

Porto is the player that ALL rival clubs love to hate, much like Scott Brown. No surprise there's not any support for him.

[flash]

Porto is the player that ALL rival clubs love to hate, much like Scott Brown. No surprise there's not any support for him.

He is indeed but, unlike Brown, he doesn't get away with anything.

[weecounty hibby]

He's a great player, of that there is no doubt. - "He needs to move abroad because he's being targeted" - no, he needs to move away from Scotland because he has some bam like tendencies that he clearly cannot shake off within his circle.

I'm very much for standing up for our players, fans and club as a whole (we should all be like that), but I'm actually embarrassed Shaun wanted to appeal this and I'm pissed off nobody within the club had the balls to stand up to whoever wanted this appealed. I'm also flabbergasted by our blinkered fans who argue this wasn't a red card and I'm pissed off we have wasted money appealing this.

Do we honestly have no common sense within our club?

Raging to be honest.
Good to know you're raging about Ryan, Hibs, club officials, the manager, the Hibs fans who don't agree with you but not the Scottish football authorities!! Mental

[Paulie Walnuts]

Have you seen the photo Ryan posted himself?

I have. Its done nothing to make me think it’s anything but a red.

[Sioux]

I have. Its done nothing to make me think it’s anything but a red.

So you keep saying, over and over and over again. Give it a *** rest.

[CentreLine]

So what happens if the club go to the court of arbitration for sport? Does the suspension get suspended until that case is heard? Just asking for a friend

[Paulie Walnuts]

So you keep saying, over and over and over again. Give it a *** rest.

No thanks. If someone asks me a question I’ll happily reply. You can stick me on ignore, that should fix the issue you’ve got pretty easily really 👍🏼

[Hermit Crab]

He needs to leave Hibs and Scotland to further his career.

[Sir David Gray]

So what happens if the club go to the court of arbitration for sport? Does the suspension get suspended until that case is heard? Just asking for a friend

Yes I think it would although it won't go that far.

[Mrimbetween]

Appeal , lose Appeal ,nothing new

What a state some are getting into

It was a red all day long for me, lets put this to bed and move on, unlikely i dare say

[Danderhall Hibs]

He needs to leave Hibs and Scotland to further his career.

And stop getting sent off as well.

[EHZERO7]

Its just another decision from the clowns in charge, that have me thinking what is the point of supporting football in Scotland anymore. From the cheating refs to the totally corrupt football authorities, its become a complete waste of time.

Exactly what I am thinking at this moment

[A Hi-Bee]

He's a great player, of that there is no doubt. - "He needs to move abroad because he's being targeted" - no, he needs to move away from Scotland because he has some bam like tendencies that he clearly cannot shake off within his circle.

I'm very much for standing up for our players, fans and club as a whole (we should all be like that), but I'm actually embarrassed Shaun wanted to appeal this and I'm pissed off nobody within the club had the balls to stand up to whoever wanted this appealed. I'm also flabbergasted by our blinkered fans who argue this wasn't a red card and I'm pissed off we have wasted money appealing this.

Do we honestly have no common sense within our club?

Raging to be honest.

"Raging" at what Mr, Angry can I ask, he was in the wrong, as the defender he should have just left the nice young hun sorry Aberdeen type player to just score the goal.
Is that what you are saying, and that everyone else is a clown, but you are the ultimate ringmaster in this particular circus.
:not worth

[Since90+2]

So what happens if the club go to the court of arbitration for sport? Does the suspension get suspended until that case is heard? Just asking for a friend

Would never happen. Would cost the club a fortune on legal fees.

[The Harp Awakes]

The outcome of the appeal is so predictable. Regardless of whether it was the correct decision or not, Hibs are very naive for appealing it.

I'm undecided whether Porteous should have got the red on Saturday. One thing is for sure though, Alan Muir is another in a list of cheating referees in Scotland. He proved that before in our game v Falkirk many years ago.

He also turned the game on Saturday with a blatantly incorrect decision to award Aberdeen their 1st penalty. It does make you want to throw in the towel with Scottish football when you are the receiving end of corruption.

[greenlex]

I reckon that was a 50/50 chance of being successful.but possibly not in Ryans case. If that had been any other defender in the country the chances of a successful appeal would have been greatly increased. Given our injuries it was always worth the appeal. Ryan does need to reign in his aggression when there isn’t really a need for it. He will be away in the Sumner and that’s undoubtably the best thing for his career at this point.

[Iggy Pope]

When Ryan Porteous moves on where are we going to find such another ready made home grown target for our puritans?

[SHODAN]

He needs to leave Hibs and Scotland to further his career.

Agreed. He dared to incite one half of the duopoly and has been punished accordingly.

[May21/05/216]

Ryan needs to leave in the summer as the media are never going to leave him alone I wonder what the daily rag headlines will be

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

[Lago]

He’s only got a year left, so we’re not in a great position
It really should have been sorted out before now.

[Alfred E Newman]

When Ryan Porteous moves on where are we going to find such another ready made home grown target for our puritans?

Don’t worry, they will soon find someone else.

[Alfred E Newman]

Ryan needs to leave in the summer as the media are never going to leave him alone I wonder what the daily rag headlines will be

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

Unfortunately we have no Hibs sympathisers in the media, it’s been that way for years. We are a soft target.

[erin go bragh]

It was 3 games or appeal and get 4. No option to just take 1 match.

Pretty sure it was reported as a one match ban .

[James70]

He is a marked man in Scottish football and he needs to get away for the sake of his career. You could even say that Hibs are a marked club in the Scottish media but unfortunately don't have that option of leaving.

[JimBHibees]

I have. Its done nothing to make me think it’s anything but a red.

Why he is trying to hook his leg around the player to block the shot? Definitely grounds for doubt but no doubt decided by bitter sad sacks who have never kicked a ball in their life's never mind played at a high professional level

[Danderhall Hibs]

Why he is trying to hook his leg around the player to block the shot? Definitely grounds for doubt but no doubt decided by bitter sad sacks who have never kicked a ball in their life's never mind played at a high professional level

All the pundits that used to play at a high professional level seemed surprised we planned to appeal?

[LaMotta]

All the pundits that used to play at a high professional level seemed surprised we planned to appeal?

:agree: I also havent seen a "neutral" anywhere state that they think it wasn't a red card.

[majorhibs]

Sorry but hang yer heads everyone o ye here & elsewhere giving this he needs to move for his career! Nothings over till it’s over. Might be weedge bias what else is new! Just do one you lot! I like this player, his endeavour & what he is becoming. I’ve enjoyed watching his progress. I hope I can see a bit more for a while more before he steps up. I think there’s plenty wooses around here who masquerade as Hibbys who should just let Hibs & mgmt & Ryan get on with it & we’ll see where it goes. But personally I cannae for a second hack aw this “he NEEDS to go”??? WTF he’s here when he goes he goes he’s ours the now. That’s a guid thing in my book, & needs Hibbys behind it & no bein sycophants tae the despicably OF SFA or alleged press in this weedgie biased country!

[JimBHibees]

All the pundits that used to play at a high professional level seemed surprised we planned to appeal?

Not heard that many have an opinion about it to be honest think it was worth a go given that they players are not meant to be double punished in the situation. Pen and red. Utter nonsense the additional game.

[Sir David Gray]

Pretty sure it was reported as a one match ban .

The offence itself carried a one match ban, he got an extra two matches because of his poor disciplinary record this season and he got a further match following Hibs' decision to appeal as the SFA felt it was frivolous.

[Del Boy]

Thought it was a red at the time and I didn’t think we should have appealed it. However, adding on another game is a joke!

[majorhibs]

All the pundits that used to play at a high professional level seemed surprised we planned to appeal?

If the game is serious about progressing anywhere in future in Scotland, it needs a real TV deal, with real professional pundits. That means ZERO from Scotland seriously. It need’s a clean sweep & get rid of the total gloating bias from yer boyds & suttons about a team with a budget 10X more minimum. Seeing gloating smug glory hunters? That what we need?

[Halmyre Hibee]

I would so much love Ryan to score a last minute winner in the Scottish Cup Final v Rangers. Can you imagine the seethe.

[Logie Green]

I would so much love Ryan to score a last minute winner in the Scottish Cup Final v Rangers. Can you imagine the seethe.

Can you imagine him still being on the pitch in the last minute?

[Danderhall Hibs]

Not heard that many have an opinion about it to be honest think it was worth a go given that they players are not meant to be double punished in the situation. Pen and red. Utter nonsense the additional game.

Iwelumo and McFadden on BBC then Warnock and Smith on Sky laughed at the suggestion of an appeal (the latter 2 literally).

The double punished thing seems to be the accepted understanding but the law has additional wording that is being ignored.

Agree on the extra game though - appeal was worth it just in case but to give an extra game is unprecedented.

[Danderhall Hibs]

If the game is serious about progressing anywhere in future in Scotland, it needs a real TV deal, with real professional pundits. That means ZERO from Scotland seriously. It need’s a clean sweep & get rid of the total gloating bias from yer boyds & suttons about a team with a budget 10X more minimum. Seeing gloating smug glory hunters? That what we need?

Don’t disagree but the English pundits I’ve seen asked also agree it’s a red card.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Why he is trying to hook his leg around the player to block the shot? Definitely grounds for doubt but no doubt decided by bitter sad sacks who have never kicked a ball in their life's never mind played at a high professional level

If he went with his left leg I think he’d almost start to have a case.

It was a physical impossibility to hook his right leg around the player considering where he is (directly behind the player)and where the ball is (slightly left of the player) without wiping out the man.

His leg is also completely straight in the photo and is pretty much completely straight throughout the whole challenge, so it’s not exactly hooking round.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Iwelumo and McFadden on BBC then Warnock and Smith on Sky laughed at the suggestion of an appeal (the latter 2 literally).

The double punished thing seems to be the accepted understanding but the law has additional wording that is being ignored.

Agree on the extra game though - appeal was worth it just in case but to give an extra game is unprecedented.

:agree:

[JimBHibees]

If he went with his left leg I think he’d almost start to have a case.

It was a physical impossibility to hook his right leg around the player considering where he is (directly behind the player)and where the ball is (slightly left of the player) without wiping out the man.

His leg is also completely straight in the photo, so it’s not exactly hooking round.

Fair enough I think the only way he could have stopped a goal legitimately was to block the shot with his right leg. As it was he committed a foul and now has an extra game added for no reason imo.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Fair enough I think the only way he could have stopped a goal legitimately was to block the shot with his right leg. As it was he committed a foul and now has an extra game added for no reason imo.

I’d agree about the extra game. It’s a nonsense purely because it’s never used in other cases. I would agree it was frivolous but to hand out the punishment when it never ever gets used for other frivolous appeals is ridiculous.

[Alfred E Newman]

I’d agree about the extra game. It’s a nonsense purely because it’s never used in other cases. I would agree it was frivolous but to hand out the punishment when it never ever gets used for other frivolous appeals is ridiculous.

I've got to admit I've never heard of it. Must be something new for clubs out with the "Big Four ".

[Mixu1875]

The extra game being added is a joke however it was a red card and ridiculous decision from the club to even attempt an appeal.

The person letting Porto down is himself, imo. He does have some real disciplinary concerns and it's going to hold him back in his career. He has the potential to get himself a big move but he needs to curb the suspensions. Nobody is paying us big money or him big wages to sit in the stand on suspensions for 25% of the season.

[BoomtownHibees]

The extra game being added is a joke however it was a red card and ridiculous decision from the club to even attempt an appeal.

The person letting Porto down is himself, imo. He does have some real disciplinary concerns and it's going to hold him back in his career. He has the potential to get himself a big move but he needs to curb the suspensions. Nobody is paying us big money or him big wages to sit in the stand on suspensions for 25% of the season.

What should he have done in this case? Just let the boy roll the ball in to the net?

[Danderhall Hibs]

What should he have done in this case? Just let the boy roll the ball in to the net?

It’s a tough one - if he hadn’t made a challenge he’d have been criticised but on the other hand we would’ve still had 11 on the pitch and our “leader” available for more than half of the games that are left this season. I think he thought “the letter of the law” was he got a free go at it - like most of us did until the law was posted.

Could he have got closer, gone with a different leg or less aggressively? Could Cadden have got over to bail him out?

[Carheenlea]

The extra game being added is a joke however it was a red card and ridiculous decision from the club to even attempt an appeal.

The person letting Porto down is himself, imo. He does have some real disciplinary concerns and it's going to hold him back in his career. He has the potential to get himself a big move but he needs to curb the suspensions. Nobody is paying us big money or him big wages to sit in the stand on suspensions for 25% of the season.

You’re being sucked into the narrative. Don’t be fooled.

[BoomtownHibees]

It’s a tough one - if he hadn’t made a challenge he’d have been criticised but on the other hand we would’ve still had 11 on the pitch and our “leader” available for more than half of the games that are left this season. I think he thought “the letter of the law” was he got a free go at it - like most of us did until the law was posted.

Could he have got closer, gone with a different leg or less aggressively? Could Cadden have got over to bail him out?

I don’t think it’s a tough one at all. His instinct got him diving in to stop the guy scoring. He wouldn’t have had time to consider what the implications might be if he didn’t win the ball. To put it down to him having a disciplinary problem is just wrong

[I'm Spartacus]

Good to know you're raging about Ryan, Hibs, club officials, the manager, the Hibs fans who don't agree with you but not the Scottish football authorities!! Mental

I feel the authorities are correct in this case, I don't agree with the additional game suspension. But I think it was a red card and that's because he was denying a goal scoring opportunity. I don't like how he has scythed the guy down (I mean do it, but accept the obvious consequences and hope he misses the penalty), I don't like that we have spent money appealing such an obvious decision, and I don't like that we have lost the strongest player in the squad for 4 games.

There's not much to be impressed about to be honest.

[Mixu1875]

What should he have done in this case? Just let the boy roll the ball in to the net?

Quite simply, yes. There was no chance he was winning any challenge there and as a good defender he should have known it. Then we were one down but 11 players on the park and have one of our most important players available for the most crucial part of the league season. Instead we lost anyway and he's out for more than half the league remaining.

[Paulie Walnuts]

What should he have done in this case? Just let the boy roll the ball in to the net?

Would you agree with hindsight that we’d have been better off had he done that?

If so, then I’d suggest that’s absolutely what he should have done.

Fair enough if you don’t want to criticise him particularly heavily for it but he’s made a poor decision, albeit very quickly.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I don’t think it’s a tough one at all. His instinct got him diving in to stop the guy scoring. He wouldn’t have had time to consider what the implications might be if he didn’t win the ball. To put it down to him having a disciplinary problem is just wrong

It’s a tough one cos his instinct tells him to throw himself at the ball rather than let him have a free shot at goal. Problem is the consequence.

[I'm Spartacus]

"Raging" at what Mr, Angry can I ask, he was in the wrong, as the defender he should have just left the nice young hun sorry Aberdeen type player to just score the goal.
Is that what you are saying, and that everyone else is a clown, but you are the ultimate ringmaster in this particular circus.
:not worth

This, but accept with a sane mind that there is a well deserved red card coming and not waste time and money on the obvious!

[BoomtownHibees]

Would you agree with hindsight that we’d have been better off had he done that?

If so, then I’d suggest that’s absolutely what he should have done.

Fair enough if you don’t want to criticise him particularly heavily for it but he’s made a poor decision, albeit very quickly.

No I don’t. I think he genuinely thought he could win the ball and made an attempt to get there. I don’t see any defender in the world at any level not attempt to make a tackle in exactly the same position

[A Hi-Bee]

I feel the authorities are correct in this case, I don't agree with the additional game suspension. But I think it was a red card and that's because he was denying a goal scoring opportunity. I don't like how he has scythed the guy down (I mean do it, but accept the obvious consequences and hope he misses the penalty), I don't like that we have spent money appealing such an obvious decision, and I don't like that we have lost the strongest player in the squad for 4 games.

There's not much to be impressed about to be honest.

I am Sparklers :faf::faf::faf::faf::bye: FFS.

[Paulie Walnuts]

No I don’t. I think he genuinely thought he could win the ball and made an attempt to get there. I don’t see any defender in the world at any level not attempt to make a tackle in exactly the same position

You don’t agree we’d have been better off 2-1 down with Porteous on the pitch and not suspended for the next 3 games? As opposed to us still being 2-1 down regardless but down to 10 men and Porteous suspended for 3 games :confused:

That’s also not taking into account that McRorie, a defender, would still have had to finish a ball that arrived at him quickly, under pressure, on his weak foot and at waist height.

I reckon he’d have scored it but I’m not sure I’d have given him more chance of scoring it than I’d have given Ferguson to score a penalty.

Ferguson has taken 12 pens and missed 1. Give McRorie that chance 12 times I reckon he’d miss at least 1 as well.

As I said, all with the benefit of hindsight and I wouldn’t criticise Porteous too heavily for making the challenge because he doesn’t have the benefit of hindsight that we do. But I’m not sure there can be any debate that we’d have been better off had Porteous just let McRorie have a go at it seeing as we ended up 2-1 down anyway which was the worst case scenario had he not made the challenge. That was then compounded with a red making it even worse.

So when people keep asking “should he just have let McRorie tap it in?” I’m not sure how the answer can be anything other than yes, he should have.

[I'm Spartacus]

I am Sparklers :faf::faf::faf::faf::bye: FFS.

I'd be saying the same if I was watching Spartans, Liverpool, East Stirling, Scotland or even the Wimmins game, but because it's us I'm a clown?

You need to understand football a bit better before you are allowed access to even start debating it on a forum.

[Gmack7]

What should he have done in this case? Just let the boy roll the ball in to the net?

Yes, then leathered Rocky for his non attempt at a challenge and putting him in that position, at least it would be a justified Red

[A Hi-Bee]

Just my own humble opinion, but would it not be a wee bit more productive, if some on this thread spent a bit more of the time and energy supporting such as Dnipro Kids and others, rather than all the time they have spent chastising one of our best young players.
Go on, tell me I am wrong or Sparklers, support (look up the word)
:aok:

[SHODAN]

I would so much love Ryan to score a last minute winner in the Scottish Cup Final v Rangers. Can you imagine the seethe.

The goal would be disallowed and he would be sent off for celebrating.

[superfurryhibby]

Just my own humble opinion, but would it not be a wee bit more productive, if some on this thread spent a bit more of the time and energy supporting such as Dnipro Kids and others, rather than all the time they have spent chastising one of our best young players.
Go on, tell me I am wrong or Sparklers, support (look up the word)
:aok:

There’s not much that’s humble about you or your opinions

[McD]

Just my own humble opinion, but would it not be a wee bit more productive, if some on this thread spent a bit more of the time and energy supporting such as Dnipro Kids and others, rather than all the time they have spent chastising one of our best young players.
Go on, tell me I am wrong or Sparklers, support (look up the word)
:aok:


A similar point could be made for those doing the same to criticise fans with different opinions to their own :wink:

[blackpoolhibs]

You don’t agree we’d have been better off 2-1 down with Porteous on the pitch and not suspended for the next 3 games? As opposed to us still being 2-1 down regardless but down to 10 men and Porteous suspended for 3 games :confused:

That’s also not taking into account that McRorie, a defender, would still have had to finish a ball that arrived at him quickly, under pressure, on his weak foot and at waist height.

I reckon he’d have scored it but I’m not sure I’d have given him more chance of scoring it than I’d have given Ferguson to score a penalty.

Ferguson has taken 12 pens and missed 1. Give McRorie that chance 12 times I reckon he’d miss at least 1 as well.

As I said, all with the benefit of hindsight and I wouldn’t criticise Porteous too heavily for making the challenge because he doesn’t have the benefit of hindsight that we do. But I’m not sure there can be any debate that we’d have been better off had Porteous just let McRorie have a go at it seeing as we ended up 2-1 down anyway which was the worst case scenario had he not made the challenge. That was then compounded with a red making it even worse.

So when people keep asking “should he just have let McRorie tap it in?” I’m not sure how the answer can be anything other than yes, he should have.

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

[Hermit Crab]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?


I can think of one at Easter rd involving a certain Dave Beaumont.

[JimBHibees]

I can think of one at Easter rd involving a certain Dave Beaumont.

😃

[GRA]

Defenders instinct makes Ryan make that challenge. He has a split second to make that decision and if he doesn't make an attempt to make the challenge he gets slaughtered. Similar to when defenders deliberately take out the last man or handball on the line. They know it will be a red card and down to 10 men but sometimes comes off (e.g. Suarez v Ghana in 2010).

It's subjective whether it's a red card offence, could be viewed both ways, but don't think he can be criticised for attempting to make the challenge in those circumstances. Unlike some of his previous stupid red cards.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

There’s millions of goals where defenders haven’t made a challenge where they can’t win the ball but could have wiped out the player, handballed it, pulled them back and and taken a red etc :confused:

Cadden probably could have thrown his arms at the ball for the 3rd goal and blocked it. He didn’t though cause that would have lead to him being sent off and a penalty being awarded.

Being a defender isn’t a case of if you can’t get the ball then just wipe out the man anymore. It’s not the 60s.

[A Hi-Bee]

There’s millions of goals where defenders haven’t made a challenge where they can’t win the ball but could have wiped out the player. :confused:

If you’re going to argue that defenders will always make a challenge, even when they can’t win the ball then the only goals scored would be by players who are out with touching distance of defenders and there’d be god knows how many sending offs.

Being a defender isn’t a case of put in a tackle at all times that the opposition is posing a threat even if you have no chance of winning it.

I would have to say that in my humble opinion, the defenders job is to try his/her best to prevent a goal being scored, 100% to prevent this happening to his/her team. As they happen with no time to think on most occasions then the defender must use whatever means at his/her disposal to try and prevent the goal. Have I missed anything out from the job description, and the point of your call was?
:greengrin

[Orchard_Hibs]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

Latapy’s in the 6-2 game

[Gmack7]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

Tavernier in 2016

[Iggy Pope]

There’s millions of goals where defenders haven’t made a challenge where they can’t win the ball but could have wiped out the player, handballed it, pulled them back and and taken a red etc :confused:

Cadden probably could have thrown his arms at the ball for the 3rd goal and blocked it. He didn’t though cause that would have lead to him being sent off and a penalty being awarded.

Being a defender isn’t a case of if you can’t get the ball then just wipe out the man anymore. It’s not the 60s.

If it was we wouldn’t have suffered pages and pages of this *****.

[I'm Spartacus]

There’s millions of goals where defenders haven’t made a challenge where they can’t win the ball but could have wiped out the player, handballed it, pulled them back and and taken a red etc :confused:

Cadden probably could have thrown his arms at the ball for the 3rd goal and blocked it. He didn’t though cause that would have lead to him being sent off and a penalty being awarded.

Being a defender isn’t a case of if you can’t get the ball then just wipe out the man anymore. It’s not the 60s.

I have no issue with him stopping the goal and taking the chance the penalty will be missed, my issue lies with the outrage at the red card and us pursuing an appeal, the "He tried to win the ball" patter is brutal!

Anyway, it's all done now.

[ahibby]

Defenders instinct makes Ryan make that challenge. He has a split second to make that decision and if he doesn't make an attempt to make the challenge he gets slaughtered. Similar to when defenders deliberately take out the last man or handball on the line. They know it will be a red card and down to 10 men but sometimes comes off (e.g. Suarez v Ghana in 2010).

It's subjective whether it's a red card offence, could be viewed both ways, but don't think he can be criticised for attempting to make the challenge in those circumstances. Unlike some of his previous stupid red cards.

Agree

[Skol]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

Wayne foster scoring to put us out the cup

[Since90+2]

I have no issue with him stopping the goal and taking the chance the penalty will be missed, my issue lies with the outrage at the red card and us pursuing an appeal, the "He tried to win the ball" patter is brutal!

Anyway, it's all done now.

It's not brutal at all. The rules are now if you make an attemp to win the ball then it's a yellow and not a red.

[JimBHibees]

If it was we wouldn’t have suffered pages and pages of this *****.

:greengrin

[Skol]

It's not brutal at all. The rules are now if you make an attemp to win the ball then it's a yellow and not a red.

This rule makes no sense to me as most red cards from a tackle are genuine attempts to win the ball

Porteous did try to win the ball I agree. But it was a ball he could never win without fouling the opponent and preventing a goal

It was for me a clear red card

I have no issue with porteous making the tackle though as that’s his job and first instinct.

[MWHIBBIES]

This rule makes no sense to me as most red cards from a tackle are genuine attempts to win the ball

Porteous did try to win the ball I agree. But it was a ball he could never win without fouling the opponent and preventing a goal

It was for me a clear red card

I have no issue with porteous making the tackle though as that’s his job and first instinct.

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.

[Skol]

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.
The Motherwell boy the other week made an attempt to win the ball and got a deserved red card

[Orchard_Hibs]

I think so much of the outrage on here is that Ryan gets the harshest treatment from refs regardless while we have witnessed so many poor refereeing decisions against us
Roberts - should have been off
St Johnstone boys tackle on JDH - should have been off
Carter vickers and starfelt- constant fouling unpunished
St mirren boy launching the ball 60 yards in front of the ref - not even booked
The rangers tackle that was worse than Ryan’s - unpunished
I could go on

[flash]

The Motherwell boy the other week made an attempt to win the ball and got a deserved red card

That wasn't a penalty.

It's really not that complicated.

[Since90+2]

The Motherwell boy the other week made an attempt to win the ball and got a deserved red card

Is that not because he was deemed to be out of control whilst making the tackle? The force used in that tackle was nothing like Porteous'.

[Paulie Walnuts]

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.

The Darren McGregor one is nothing like Porteous.

He was inches away from getting the ball. When he went to ground him and Goncalves are pretty much side by side with the ball a yard or two infront. He had a chance of getting the ball, was inches away from it at one point and rightly gave away a penalty and got a booking.

Porteous was never getting the ball.

I can’t think of any occasion in a Hibs game over the last 6 years where someone has made a tackle in the box when someone was about to score that had 0 chance of success and got away with a booking.

There’ll be plenty penalties and bookings, but they’ll have been genuine attempts to win a ball that was there to be won with the challenge possibly being slightly mistimed or misjudged. That was never the case here though.

[silverhibee]

Quite simply, yes. There was no chance he was winning any challenge there and as a good defender he should have known it. Then we were one down but 11 players on the park and have one of our most important players available for the most crucial part of the league season. Instead we lost anyway and he's out for more than half the league remaining.

I chatted with a ex player about the tackle, he said you would make the tackle 100 times out of a 100, yes he may give away a penalty but his thought process would be that there is the chance that the goalkeeper will save it or player may miss it so you make the tackle every time, I don’t think players think like us punters who just watch the game.

[silverhibee]

It’s a tough one cos his instinct tells him to throw himself at the ball rather than let him have a free shot at goal. Problem is the consequence.

At that precise time is he thinking about the consequences though, the only thing on his mind would be to prevent the player from scoring.

It’s a tough one for sure.

[danhibees1875]

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.

Is there not a caveat about dangerous play though?

He may have been going for the ball, but with no possible way to get the ball without cleaning the man out it then becomes dangerous play which allows for a red and a penalty.

[Sir David Gray]

Is there not a caveat about dangerous play though?

He may have been going for the ball, but with no possible way to get the ball without cleaning the man out it then becomes dangerous play which allows for a red and a penalty.

He was sent off for denying the opposing team or an opponent a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

[MWHIBBIES]

The Motherwell boy the other week made an attempt to win the ball and got a deserved red card

Ffs, there is no way you are finding it this hard to understand.

That wasn't in the penalty box denying a clear goalscoring oppertunity. Not anything like the same situation.

[mcohibs]

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.

Exactly. This is the bottom line exactly as you've outlined it.

It should never have been a red card, according to the rules of the game. When a penalty is given at the same time, if the player makes a genuine attempt to win the ball (which RP clearly did) then a red card cannot be given also.

People criticising the club for appealing this or criticising fans for 'brutal patter' about him attempting to win the ball frankly don't understand the rules of football. We were well within our rights to appeal and the red should have been overturned.

[danhibees1875]

He was sent off for denying the opposing team or an opponent a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Does that automatically rule it out as also being dangerous though?

The rules say you get sent off if there's no possibility to play the ball. I guess it's a bit ambiguous as to how to interpret that. I think it could be argued that Ryan had "no possibility to play the ball" if it's assumed that you're meant to be able do so without committing a foul.

[Sir David Gray]

Does that automatically rule it out as also being dangerous though?

The rules say you get sent off if there's no possibility to play the ball. I guess it's a bit ambiguous as to how to interpret that. I think it could be argued that Ryan had "no possibility to play the ball" if it's assumed that you're meant to be able do so without committing a foul.

I think he's been deemed to have denied an opponent an obvious goalscoring opportunity without genuinely attempting to win the ball.

[Hibernian Verse]

Can you show me any goals from the past where a defender has just let a player score without making a challenge?

Does Simon Brown at Tynecastle count?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Exactly. This is the bottom line exactly as you've outlined it.

It should never have been a red card, according to the rules of the game. When a penalty is given at the same time, if the player makes a genuine attempt to win the ball (which RP clearly did) then a red card cannot be given also.

People criticising the club for appealing this or criticising fans for 'brutal patter' about him attempting to win the ball frankly don't understand the rules of football. We were well within our rights to appeal and the red should have been overturned.

It couldn’t be further from the bottom line.

Other than a section of Hibs fans and some within the club, absolutely nobody thinks it was anything but a red to the point that ex pros and pundits were actually laughing on the television at the idea of us appealing it.

As for making a genuine attempt to win the ball, he had absolutely no chance of winning it with the tackle he put in. None whatsoever. That’s not a genuine attempt to win the ball. The only possible outcome from his tackle was that he wiped out McRorie. That’s exactly how it unfolded and he was rightfully sent off.

Those who think it’s not a red card are in a tiny minority. A minority that conveniently also have a bias towards the sent off player.

It’s as clear a red as you’ll see. Appealing it was a ridiculous decision and has cost us.

[I'm Spartacus]

He was sent off for denying the opposing team or an opponent a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

I'm sure I have said this to you quote often on here:

THANK YOU, ffs, THANK YOU!

[I'm Spartacus]

It couldn’t be further from the bottom line.

Other than a section of Hibs fans and some within the club, absolutely nobody thinks it was anything but a red to the point that ex pros and pundits were actually laughing on the television at the idea of us appealing it.

As for making a genuine attempt to win the ball, he had absolutely no chance of winning it with the tackle he put in. None whatsoever. That’s not a genuine attempt to win the ball. The only possible outcome from his tackle was that he wiped out McRorie. That’s exactly how it unfolded and he was rightfully sent off.

Those who think it’s not a red card are in a tiny minority. A minority that conveniently also have a bias towards the sent off player.

It’s as clear a red as you’ll see. Appealing it was a ridiculous decision and has cost us.

and THANK YOU to you too. It's cost us financially and cost us losing Ryan for another game, which will cost us financially.

[JimBHibees]

[/B]and THANK YOU to you too. It's cost us financially and cost us losing Ryan for another game, which will cost us financially.

But the decision to add a game was a total nonsense.

[Hibs90]

It couldn’t be further from the bottom line.

Other than a section of Hibs fans and some within the club, absolutely nobody thinks it was anything but a red to the point that ex pros and pundits were actually laughing on the television at the idea of us appealing it.

As for making a genuine attempt to win the ball, he had absolutely no chance of winning it with the tackle he put in. None whatsoever. That’s not a genuine attempt to win the ball. The only possible outcome from his tackle was that he wiped out McRorie. That’s exactly how it unfolded and he was rightfully sent off.

Those who think it’s not a red card are in a tiny minority. A minority that conveniently also have a bias towards the sent off player.

It’s as clear a red as you’ll see. Appealing it was a ridiculous decision and has cost us.

Just following up to my previous question. Are you actually a Hibs fan?

[marinello59]

Just following up to my previous question. Are you actually a Hibs fan?

You had better ask me as well. It was a stick on red card. The appeal should not have been made. I love Ryan but that was a wee bit silly from him.

[loanheadhibby]

It couldn’t be further from the bottom line.

Other than a section of Hibs fans and some within the club, absolutely nobody thinks it was anything but a red to the point that ex pros and pundits were actually laughing on the television at the idea of us appealing it.

As for making a genuine attempt to win the ball, he had absolutely no chance of winning it with the tackle he put in. None whatsoever. That’s not a genuine attempt to win the ball. The only possible outcome from his tackle was that he wiped out McRorie. That’s exactly how it unfolded and he was rightfully sent off.

Those who think it’s not a red card are in a tiny minority. A minority that conveniently also have a bias towards the sent off player.

It’s as clear a red as you’ll see. Appealing it was a ridiculous decision and has cost us.
At last a sensible and honest post on this thread.
I like most Hibbies rate Ryan but he's no use to us sitting in the stand and he's got to clean up his act on and off the park.

[mcohibs]

It couldn’t be further from the bottom line.

Other than a section of Hibs fans and some within the club, absolutely nobody thinks it was anything but a red to the point that ex pros and pundits were actually laughing on the television at the idea of us appealing it.

As for making a genuine attempt to win the ball, he had absolutely no chance of winning it with the tackle he put in. None whatsoever. That’s not a genuine attempt to win the ball. The only possible outcome from his tackle was that he wiped out McRorie. That’s exactly how it unfolded and he was rightfully sent off.

Those who think it’s not a red card are in a tiny minority. A minority that conveniently also have a bias towards the sent off player.

It’s as clear a red as you’ll see. Appealing it was a ridiculous decision and has cost us.

Do you always base your opinions on what ex pros and the so called majority think or make up your own mind?

You're saying that Porteous' immediate reaction and intention was to completely wipe out the player and get himself sent off rather than try and win the ball? Really? That's what we're talking about here. The likelihood of the outcome is irrelevant - it's about the player making an attempt to win the ball. Porteous tries to get to that ball to stop Aberdeen scoring. Eyes completely on the ball.

https://i.ibb.co/jMqpfbt/Screenshot-20220325-191325.jpg (https://ibb.co/3NVJd4K)

Mental to suggest that's as clear a red card as you'll see. That is pure hyperbole. The laws of the game suggest it is at the very least ambiguous as to whether it's a red or not.

As for the 'bias' towards Porteous, I have absolutely slated Ryan on here this season for poor defending, wrecklessness, silly errors etc. Certainly not bias towards him in any way, just reading the laws of the game as they are outlined. A genuine attempt to win the ball when a penalty is given, regardless of last man or not, is a yellow card offence.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Just following up to my previous question. Are you actually a Hibs fan?

Na mate, I’m not a Hibs fan. I go to all the games for no real reason really. I just come on here to laugh at the paranoia surround Ryan Porteous and his ongoing battle with the Freemasons and the Glaswegian Cosa Nostra.

How did you manage to work it all out?

I must practice my ‘Ryan Porteous is being run out Scottish football by the Nazis at the SFA’ speech. That should help me get back under the radar.

[Skol]

It's because of it being a penalty as well.

This rule changed 6 years ago. It has been seen dozens of times in our games. Mcgregor vs hearts in our 3-1 Cup win for example.

Things like this Porteous one have been yellow cards plenty of times.

You can't think a genuine attempt was made and its also a red. That's not the rule.

To me, it wasn’t possible for Porto to win the ball fairly and so it could never be a genuine attempt to win the ball.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Do you always base your opinions on what ex pros and the so called majority think or make up your own mind?

You're saying that Porteous' immediate reaction and intention was to completely wipe out the player and get himself sent off rather than try and win the ball? Really? That's what we're talking about here. The likelihood of the outcome is irrelevant - it's about the player making an attempt to win the ball. Porteous tries to get to that ball to stop Aberdeen scoring. Eyes completely on the ball.

https://i.ibb.co/jMqpfbt/Screenshot-20220325-191325.jpg (https://ibb.co/3NVJd4K)

Mental to suggest that's as clear a red card as you'll see. That is pure hyperbole. The laws of the game suggest it is at the very least ambiguous as to whether it's a red or not.

As for the 'bias' towards Porteous, I have absolutely slated Ryan on here this season for poor defending, wrecklessness, silly errors etc. Certainly not bias towards him in any way, just reading the laws of the game as they are outlined. A genuine attempt to win the ball when a penalty is given, regardless of last man or not, is a yellow card offence.

I make up my own opinion, hence why I’ve had this opinion from the second he made the tackle, long before pundits etc were talking about it.

There’s no point in discussing this further really if you think the likelihood of whether someone is going to win the ball or not isn’t important. Everyone would just start wiping each other out and as long as you’re looking somewhere roughly in the same direction of the ball then you’d be safe from a red. It matters a huge amount the likelihood of winning the ball.

Absolutely everybody in football thinks it was a red and a laughable appeal other than some Hibs fans and staff. That really tells its own story.

[A Hi-Bee]

I make up my own opinion, hence why I’ve had this opinion from the second he made the tackle, long before pundits etc were talking about it.

There’s no point in discussing this further really if you think the likelihood of whether someone is going to win the ball or not isn’t important. Everyone would just start wiping each other out and as long as you’re looking somewhere roughly in the same direction of the ball then you’d be safe from a red. It matters a huge amount the likelihood of winning the ball.

Absolutely everybody in football thinks it was a red and a laughable appeal other than some Hibs fans and staff. That really tells its own story.

FFS, you still at it, this is history now, gie us awe a break will you, take half a dozen chill pills.
:greengrin

[Paulie Walnuts]

FFS, you still at it, this is history now, gie us awe a break will you, take half a dozen chill pills.
:greengrin

I don’t know how you’ve not noticed yet but I don’t really care about your thoughts on me posting.

[JimBHibees]

I make up my own opinion, hence why I’ve had this opinion from the second he made the tackle, long before pundits etc were talking about it.

There’s no point in discussing this further really if you think the likelihood of whether someone is going to win the ball or not isn’t important. Everyone would just start wiping each other out and as long as you’re looking somewhere roughly in the same direction of the ball then you’d be safe from a red. It matters a huge amount the likelihood of winning the ball.

Absolutely everybody in football thinks it was a red and a laughable appeal other than some Hibs fans and staff. That really tells its own story.

Absolutely everyone in football doesn't think it was a red as they won't care about the decision. A couple of pros said they agreed with a red however just looking at the photo which they won't have seen which Porto published there is definitely a case for appeal.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Absolutely everyone in football doesn't think it was a red as they won't care about the decision. A couple of pros said they agreed with a red however just looking at the photo which they won't have seen which Porto published there is definitely a case for appeal.

Ok, absolutely everyone in football that has expressed an opinion. I didn’t think I’d have to make it clear that the opinions of literally every person in football had not been sought out but here we are.

[JimBHibees]

Ok, absolutely everyone in football that has expressed an opinion. I didn’t think I’d have to make it clear that the opinions of literally every person in football had not been sought out but here we are.

So two or three people rather than everyone. :greengrin

[A Hi-Bee]

Ok, absolutely everyone in football that has expressed an opinion. I didn’t think I’d have to make it clear that the opinions of literally every person in football had not been sought out but here we are.

Hi, :faf::faf::faf::violin::bye:

[Paulie Walnuts]

So two or three people rather than everyone. :greengrin

There’s been hundreds of replies to tweets etc about the incident. Near enough everybody thought it was a clear red. The ones that didn’t are Hibs fans.

[superfurryhibby]

There’s been hundreds of replies to tweets etc about the incident. Near enough everybody thought it was a clear red. The ones that didn’t are Hibs fans.

I agreed with you early doors that it was a red card. I too thought the appeal was futile and so it turned out.

What I notice is your need to reply so prolifically. You’re a bit dug wi a bone. Your posting style is very familiar, so well done for getting back on here after previous bans, lol. I don’t think you care for advice, but here it is anyway. Repetition of the same point is wearing and usually counter productive. You can overdo it and it ends up just alienating people. Worth considering?

[ahibby]

There’s been hundreds of replies to tweets etc about the incident. Near enough everybody thought it was a clear red. The ones that didn’t are Hibs fans.

Genius stifled by simpletons, so whats new. If this is an appreciation thread I would hate to see a kick in the ba@#$ thread

[Libby Hibby]

At last a sensible and honest post on this thread.
I like most Hibbies rate Ryan but he's no use to us sitting in the stand and he's got to clean up his act on and off the park.

Hibees or Hibbys but hibbies? 😂😂

[Libby Hibby]

Na mate, I’m not a Hibs fan. I go to all the games for no real reason really. I just come on here to laugh at the paranoia surround Ryan Porteous and his ongoing battle with the Freemasons and the Glaswegian Cosa Nostra.

How did you manage to work it all out?

I must practice my ‘Ryan Porteous is being run out Scottish football by the Nazis at the SFA’ speech. That should help me get back under the radar.

It’s a yes or no question….

[Danderhall Hibs]

I agreed with you early doors that it was a red card. I too thought the appeal was futile and so it turned out.

What I notice is your need to reply so prolifically. You’re a bit dug wi a bone. Your posting style is very familiar, so well done for getting back on here after previous bans, lol. I don’t think you care for advice, but here it is anyway. Repetition of the same point is wearing and usually counter productive. You can overdo it and it ends up just alienating people. Worth considering?

I’ve been in his position before and it can be tough when what you think is nonsense is being thrown at you to just ignore it.