Appeal successful

[greenlex]

Huns first red card appeal successful. It just goes to show if enough pressure is applied by your new found media pals you can get what you want. Scunnered.

[Sir David Gray]

Huns first red card appeal successful. It just goes to show if enough pressure is applied by your new found media pals you can get what you want. Scunnered.

It's the correct decision in my opinion.

[Smartie]

It's the correct decision in my opinion.

Mine too, even if I’m not too sure Ryan Porteous would have had the decision overturned if it had been he who had committed an identical offence.

[500miles]

Mine too, even if I’m not too sure Ryan Porteous would have had the decision overturned if it had been he who had committed an identical offence.

He most certainly would not have, and he'd be given an extra game ban for his cheek.

[hibbyfraelibby]

No citing for simulation for Colak then?

SFA have just declared open season on Martin Boyle.

[Mikey_1875]

Good, it will make them even angrier about the result.

Just waiting for JDH to be cited tomorrow :greengrin

[Sir David Gray]

No citing for simulation for Colak then?

SFA have just declared open season on Martin Boyle.

How come? Lundstram's red card has been downgraded to a yellow card so he's not been completely exonerated.

[Stuart93]

Mine too, even if I’m not too sure Ryan Porteous would have had the decision overturned if it had been he who had committed an identical offence.

He never got a red card overturned for a “foul” on aribo where he was nowhere near him

[JohnM1875]

It's cheating and I've honestly no idea why it's it's allowed and called a 'professional foul' hate it when we do it and it should be a red card. Premeditated cheating.

[flash]

No issues with this. We got the benefit of the red card regardless.

[cabbageandribs1875]

correct decision

[007]

No issues with this. We got the benefit of the red card regardless.

They got the benefit of our penalty claim not being given and a penalty for a blatant dive (pseudo sniper attack) so they still got 2 wrong huge decisions in their favour.

[lyonhibs]

The right outcome all round. We benefit on the day from a debatable decision against The Huns (for a change) and then to feed their bitter conspiracy theories it gets downgraded after the event.

Delighted

[hibsfan7]

Crap result what if he had never made the lung at boyle and he went on and scored hibs would have won the game

[Since452]

The rule needs looked at imo. A "tactical" foul should be a red card all day long. Unsporting and player on recieving end not anticipating it is dangerous.

[hibee-boys]

Good to see us being at the right end of a rescinded red card for a change. Couldn’t give 2 hoots if it’s now a yellow, it was in my opinion anyway. The fact that it will wind that mob up even further is fantastic!

[Carheenlea]

So its only a yellow card to go in calf-high from behind and make no attempt to get the ball?

Handy to know though but good news for the industrial element in the league.

[SJNB Hibby]

No issues with this. We got the benefit of the red card regardless.

I suppose

[RyeSloan]

Good to see us being at the right end of a rescinded red card for a change. Couldn’t give 2 hoots if it’s now a yellow, it was in my opinion anyway. The fact that it will wind that mob up even further is fantastic!

Indeed.

Sure Rangers had a number of retro reds applied over the last season or so (3 maybe from memory) during a period where they had not suffered a red card in a game for about 40 odd games. So this is just a tiny bit of balance being applied.

As you say we got the benefit of this one for a change, although as has been discussed at length it’s not like they didn’t get a dodgy decision or two in their favour during g the game as well!

[007]

Rangers have also been successful at deflecting away from how poor they were on Saturday, even with 11 men on the park. Don't recall any pundits mentioning that.

[Eyrie]

Changing Lundstrom to a yellow was the correct decision, although I agree with those who say such a challenge should be red. That would apply to Doyle-Hayes in the first half as well.


He never got a red card overturned for a “foul” on aribo where he was nowhere near him

And I'm certain Hibs would have cited Lundstrom's unpunished assault on Doig earlier in that game as part of Porteous' appeal.

[Rumble de Thump]

Changing Lundstrom to a yellow was the correct decision, although I agree with those who say such a challenge should be red. That would apply to Doyle-Hayes in the first half as well.



And I'm certain Hibs would have cited Lundstrom's unpunished assault on Doig earlier in that game as part of Porteous' appeal.

The Doyle-Hayes challenge and Lundstram assault were very different for obvious reasons e.g. Lundstram lunge from behind, studs up, knee high with no hope or attempt to win the ball, and Doyle-Hayes none of these things.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Crap result what if he had never made the lung at boyle and he went on and scored hibs would have won the game

If he had never thrown a lung at Boyle he'd be able to breathe quite easily.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Good to see us being at the right end of a rescinded red card for a change.

It's been a while as far as I can remember.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

So its only a yellow card to go in calf-high from behind and make no attempt to get the ball?

Handy to know though but good news for the industrial element in the league.

Hearts have been doing it in the opponents half for years.

[munchar]

It's cheating and I've honestly no idea why it's it's allowed and called a 'professional foul' hate it when we do it and it should be a red card. Premeditated cheating.

100%
It’s a red card all day long!! He’s went in from behind. Dangerous. Absolutely NO attempt & NO chance of winning the ball. He’s basically trying to kick a player. If Boyle had done his ankle ligaments or broke his ankle falling awkwardly, would all of you saying it’s a yellow card think the same.?
Cheating & deliberately trying to foul someone dangerously!!!

[FRes Hibbie]

The Doyle-Hayes challenge and Lundstram assault were very different for obvious reasons e.g. Lundstram lunge from behind, studs up, knee high with no hope or attempt to win the ball, and Doyle-Hayes none of these things.

It wasn’t studs up, it wasn’t dangerous. It was cynical, it was a deliberate foul but you see them every week and they’re usually yellow cards. Even our own manager said so in his post-match Sky interview.

[phoenixfire]

100%
It’s a red card all day long!! He’s went in from behind. Dangerous. Absolutely NO attempt & NO chance of winning the ball. He’s basically trying to kick a player. If Boyle had done his ankle ligaments or broke his ankle falling awkwardly, would all of you saying it’s a yellow card think the same.?
Cheating & deliberately trying to foul someone dangerously!!!

Agree with this total lunge from the back with studs showing too ,very lucky Boyle wasn't seriously hurt! Amazing what they get away with , awful decision again!!!

[Booked4Being-Ugly]

It was a red card all day long. I take it if he done Boyle a bit of damage then people would still be happy with the yellow?

[loanheadhibby]

Huns first red card appeal successful. It just goes to show if enough pressure is applied by your new found media pals you can get what you want. Scunnered.

Correct decision. It was a yellow.

[Scouse Hibee]

Correct decision, it was never a red card.

[phoenixfire]

Correct decision, it was never a red card.

Red card all day long for me .watched it many times still think it's a red card though really curious why you think it was never a red?We all see things in football in different ways mate just curious to hear your opinion ?

[Scouse Hibee]

Red card all day long for me .watched it many times still think it's a red card though really curious why you think it was never a red?We all see things in football in different ways mate just curious to hear your opinion ?

Really down to seeing the same thing many many times during my lifetime watching football. Player commits foul to prevent an opponent breaking away on a counter attack and receives a yellow. Call it a tactical foul, a professional foul or taking one for the team, it’s a yellow card offence. Despite the numerous freeze framed images trying to show it a high and dangerous it really wasn’t that bad. It happened in front of me in the West and I was stunned to see the red card shown.

[phoenixfire]

Really down to seeing the same thing many many times during my lifetime watching football. Player commits foul to prevent an opponent breaking away on a counter attack and receives a yellow. Call it a tactical foul, a professional foul or taking one for the team, it’s a yellow card offence. Despite the numerous freeze framed images trying to show it a high and dangerous it really wasn’t that bad. It happened in front of me in the West and I was stunned to see the red card shown.
Totally different to what I think about it btw though thanks for your opinion on it always interesting to hear a different opinion:aok:

[SChibs]

The folk saying it wasn't a red obviously never watched the Newcastle game on Sunday where the exact same challenge was changed from a red to yellow during the game. That's with a team of refs in the VAR room looking at it then the actual ref reviewing and changing his decision.

[cameronw-hfc]

The folk saying it wasn't a red obviously never watched the Newcastle game on Sunday where the exact same challenge was changed from a red to yellow during the game. That's with a team of refs in the VAR room looking at it then the actual ref reviewing and changing his decision.


Surely the fact it was overturned shows it's not a red? If there was VAR, the one vs us would have been overturned as well. I love getting it up them, but that one was a yellow all day long.

[Sir David Gray]

It was a red card all day long. I take it if he done Boyle a bit of damage then people would still be happy with the yellow?

I think the whole point is that his tackle didn't do Boyle any damage and therefore it was a yellow card as opposed to a red.

That's the difference between reckless play (yellow card) and using excessive force that endagers the safety of the opponent (red card).

[hibsbollah]

I think the whole point is that his tackle didn't do Boyle any damage and therefore it was a yellow card as opposed to a red.

That's the difference between reckless play (yellow card) and using excessive force that endagers the safety of the opponent (red card).

Whether it ‘did Boyle any damage’ is irrelevant to whether a red or yellow should be shown.

[scoopyboy]

I think the whole point is that his tackle didn't do Boyle any damage and therefore it was a yellow card as opposed to a red.

That's the difference between reckless play (yellow card) and using excessive force that endagers the safety of the opponent (red card).

So players should only get a red if the player is damaged!!!!!

Similarly should players who make a token gesture of a head butt not be sent off either, lets face it despite the recipient rolling about on the deck they're not really damaged.

[Onceinawhile]

If you want a good laugh go and see how many rangers fans are greeting about a tackle in last night's game and want a red card for it. Then compare it to their take on this tackle.

[Callum_62]

I think the whole point is that his tackle didn't do Boyle any damage and therefore it was a yellow card as opposed to a red.

That's the difference between reckless play (yellow card) and using excessive force that endagers the safety of the opponent (red card).I don't think the Killies boys had much damage either but both County players have quite rightly been cited

I don't think lundstrams is a red either BUT the outrage is way OTT

His foot was high, his studs were up, he didn't just 'clip Boyles heels' in the type of tactical foul we see alog of - it was a much worse tackle than that

Ofcourse we we slow it down and see exactly where his studs went etc there can always be a case for claiming its not that bad

Collum, seen from his angle probbaly thought the same as me, that his studs went right into Martins calf

On replay, they didn't but I don't like the whole media campaign to equate it with a simple trip

Its a yellow, probably verging to an orange card



Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

I don't think the Killies boys had much damage either but both County players have quite rightly been cited

I don't think lundstrams is a red either BUT the outrage is way OTT

His foot was high, his studs were up, he didn't just 'clip Boyles heels' in the type of tactical foul we see alog of - it was a much worse tackle than that

Ofcourse we we slow it down and see exactly where his studs went etc there can always be a case for claiming its not that bad

Collum, seen from his angle probbaly thought the same as me, that his studs went right into Martins calf

On replay, they didn't but I don't like the whole media campaign to equate it with a simple trip

Its a yellow, probably verging to an orange card



Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

This is exactly where I am with it too. It could go either way, red or yellow, down to refs discretion.

[Hibernia&Alba]

This is exactly where I am with it too. It could go either way, red or yellow, down to refs discretion.

Yes, a debateable one. I'm not shocked it has been downgraded, but it was borderline, IMHO. It was the sort of foul that causes serious injury.

[BoomtownHibees]

It happened in front of me in the West and I was stunned to see the red card shown.

It was nowhere near the west stand 🤷🏻

[hibsbollah]

It was nowhere near the west stand 🤷🏻

I think he means ‘in line’.

I had a good view of it too from the West, I was thinking ‘that’s a bad one, he’ll give a yellow for this but it is a proper professional foul from the back so it should be red really’ and was surprised, not because it was a mad decision but because it went our way.

[PeeJay]

I thought at the time it was a red card and I still do - the reason I did was that I understood it to be the job of the referee (and the rules of the game) to protect the players on the park. There was no attempt whatsoever to play the ball and serious injury may well have occurred (it didn't, but ....) The Rangers player took that into account, he wasn't after the ball, he was after Boyle - he didn't care about injuring him.

Not sure what explanation has been give as to why this cynical foul is now only a yellow: what message does that send out, I wonder? :confused:

[Green Man]

I was surprised to see the red at the time, but that’s probably more because it was a Rangers player rather than how bad the challenge was. Collum was very quick to produce the card, maybe if he’d taken a couple of seconds to think about it he would have given a yellow, but it worked in our favour so I’m not complaining.

[gbhibby]

I thought at the time it was a red card and I still do - the reason I did was that I understood it to be the job of the referee (and the rules of the game) to protect the players on the park. There was no attempt whatsoever to play the ball and serious injury may well have occurred (it didn't, but ....) The Rangers player took that into account, he wasn't after the ball, he was after Boyle - he didn't care about injuring him.

Not sure what explanation has been give as to why this cynical foul is now only a yellow: what message does that send out, I wonder? :confused:
I am with you on this. If Ryan makes this tackle and gets a red don't think it will be overturned. If in the refs opinion no attempt is made to try and play the ball and merely stop and an opponent by playing the man/women it's a red, need to eradicate this type of tackle

[weecounty hibby]

Red card all day long for me, and not just as it was a hun and against us. I think in almost every league in Europe outside Scotland that would be red. And ignore Dermot Gallacher, he is an erse. Only one(maybe two) clubs in Scotland would have had that overturned and the lobbying by the media helped that big time. Surprised they didn't appeal fat Freddos as well and ask for Walker and Boyd to come as witnesses for the defence.

[KWJ]

It's a yellow. There's an argument to be made that these tackles shouldn't be a yellow but for now, they are, everyone knows it.

It's only a red if it's studs up and reckless like Calum Patterson's was on Boyle(?) a few years ago when he broke away towards the end of the derby.

Even the Harry Cochrane one on John McGinn was probably right to only be a yellow despite the way he lunged.

We'd all be the same if it went the other way.

[Scouse Hibee]

The folk saying it wasn't a red obviously never watched the Newcastle game on Sunday where the exact same challenge was changed from a red to yellow during the game. That's with a team of refs in the VAR room looking at it then the actual ref reviewing and changing his decision.

That proves to me the ref got it wrong and had VAR been in place it would have been over turned at the time rather than on appeal.

[Scouse Hibee]

It was nowhere near the west stand 🤷🏻

I was in the West and the view I had was in front of me. It was closer to the West than the East👍

[SlickShoes]

I think the whole point is that his tackle didn't do Boyle any damage and therefore it was a yellow card as opposed to a red.

That's the difference between reckless play (yellow card) and using excessive force that endagers the safety of the opponent (red card).

How do you tell if a tackle like this has done damage, what if it did but the damage didn't show up until later and the player is then out for 3 weeks?

I understand that this is currently a yellow, but even as a defender when I played I still find it hard to believe that a deliberate foul with no intention to get the ball and only harm the player is a yellow card. It is basically a free hit for the defender and a rule that to me makes no sense.

[Tricla]

I always thought a professional foul was a red card. Got this from Google -

'Fouls which are committed with excessive force, however, or which are deliberately committed to deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity for the player fouled (i.e. a professional foul), are punishable by a red card'.

Red card all day long AFAIC

[McD]

Red card all day long for me, and not just as it was a hun and against us. I think in almost every league in Europe outside Scotland that would be red. And ignore Dermot Gallacher, he is an erse. Only one(maybe two) clubs in Scotland would have had that overturned and the lobbying by the media helped that big time. Surprised they didn't appeal fat Freddos as well and ask for Walker and Boyd to come as witnesses for the defence.


Boyd said it was a red, didn’t contest it at all

[Scouse Hibee]

How do you tell if a tackle like this has done damage, what if it did but the damage didn't show up until later and the player is then out for 3 weeks?

I understand that this is currently a yellow, but even as a defender when I played I still find it hard to believe that a deliberate foul with no intention to get the ball and only harm the player is a yellow card. It is basically a free hit for the defender and a rule that to me makes no sense.

How do you know he was trying to harm the player? He was just trying to stop the counter attack, it was no worse than a trip.

[SickBoy32]

Red card all day for me, it was high out of control and no attempt whatsoever to play the ball.

Reminded me at the time of the Paterson assault on Malonga a few years ago in a derby at ER.

As the OP alluded to, no surprise to see this rescinded however - corrupt to the core and the media absolutely play their part in this.

Can't actually believe folk on here are defending this - when Porto (who won the ball and never even touched the man at ibrox last year) was unsuccessful on appeal :hilarious

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

The folk saying it wasn't a red obviously never watched the Newcastle game on Sunday where the exact same challenge was changed from a red to yellow during the game. That's with a team of refs in the VAR room looking at it then the actual ref reviewing and changing his decision.

Struggling to understand the point you're trying to make here.

[BoomtownHibees]

I was in the West and the view I had was in front of me. It was closer to the West than the East👍

Are we both talking about the Lundstram challenge?

[HibsGW]

It's cheating and I've honestly no idea why it's it's allowed and called a 'professional foul' hate it when we do it and it should be a red card. Premeditated cheating.

Absolutely. Exploiting the rules is cheating. Should just be a red card, simple. Making no attempt to play the ball isn’t part of football.

Allowing these things to happen encourages dull eye bleeding football.

[SlickShoes]

How do you know he was trying to harm the player? He was just trying to stop the counter attack, it was no worse than a trip.

That's true no one has ever been harmed by a trip...

If he's not going for the ball, then the intent is to connect with the player which is going to cause harm, yes he is stopping a counter attack but to do that you have to harm the player by making physical contact.

[Callum_62]

How do you know he was trying to harm the player? He was just trying to stop the counter attack, it was no worse than a trip.

A trip is maybe what we attempted but a trip at knee high is not the same as a trip at ground level

[Greenbeard]

Regrettably red down to yellow seems to be the correct decision based on the letter of the law, although there is a strong argument for saying the law needs changed to make such challenges more than a yellow card offence.
Looking forward to the reception Collum gets next time he takes charge at Ipox. Will be interestingg too to then assess if (or how?) he redresses the balance as an apology. I wouldn't normally tune in or even watch highlights of any match from Zombieland but that one will be worth a watch just for his performance. Chances are though, he'll not be allocated another Hun match until next season.

[Smartie]

There’s a danger with some of the arguments being put forward to justify it being a red card that we talk JDH’s tackle into being a red card.

There was no attempt to win the ball. It was a cynical challenge to stop a counter attack miles from goal. It was a wee bit more from the side and a tad lower but I’m led to believe that these aren’t really considerations when assessing the punishment for a foul.

JDH’s challenge was never a red card. Neither was Lundstram’s imo.

[Callum_62]

Regrettably red down to yellow seems to be the correct decision based on the letter of the law, although there is a strong argument for saying the law needs changed to make such challenges more than a yellow card offence.
Looking forward to the reception Collum gets next time he takes charge at Ipox. Will be interestingg too to then assess if (or how?) he redresses the balance as an apology. I wouldn't normally tune in or even watch highlights of any match from Zombieland but that one will be worth a watch just for his performance. Chances are though, he'll not be allocated another Hun match until next season.If that was us, we would have Collum for our next fixture

Let's see the next time hes in charge against Rangers

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[phoenixfire]

Yellow or red we all have different opinions on it for me it's a red all day sad thing about it is if it was porto thats done the exact same tackle say on Kent and hibs appeal you just know appeal would fail and player gets maybe a extra game ban on top of it ! Sad but I think that's the state of our game now!

[Billy Whizz]

Yellow or red we all have different opinions on it for me it's a red all day sad thing about it is if it was porto thats done the exact same tackle say on Kent and hibs appeal you just know appeal would fail and player gets maybe a extra game ban on top of it ! Sad but I think that's the state of our game now!

Red all day long for me. Means you can just chop down players when you want It was fully intended and he caught Boyle on his knee

[Spike Mandela]

It was a lunge, from behind, a deliberate kick to the knee not a clipping of heels, no attempt to play the ball.

It can easily be justified as a red card.

Collum has bottled it under pressure from Rangers and the complicit SFA.

[macca70]

Red all day long for me. Means you can just chop down players when you want It was fully intended and he caught Boyle on his knee

Fully agree, you cant just be tripping players who are in full sprint away from the ball. If that doesn't fall under 'using excessive force endangering another player' then what does fall under this category resulting in a red card.

Its a cynical deliberate trip/kick to a player that is sprinting away putting that player at risk of injury, with no chance of winning the ball as the ball is at least 2 yards away.

I get folks argument for it being a yellow but is a grey area for me and they should be backing the refs on field decision. As has been said, if this is Porteous, he gets hammered for it.

[Brooster]

I was in the West and the view I had was in front of me. It was closer to the West than the East👍

Are you saying the Lundstrum tackle was closer to the West than the East?

[percy veer]

If that was us, we would have Collum for our next fixture

Let's see the next time hes in charge against Rangers

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

He will not ref a game involving rangers again this season , unlike us who seem to get beaton every second game

[Scouse Hibee]

Are you saying the Lundstrum tackle was closer to the West than the East?

No it wasn’t, it was the East side of the pitch than the West I just had a great view in line with it.

[gbhibby]

The incidents in one game should have no bearing on the appointment of refs for other games. Apart from not giving us a penalty he got other decisions spot on.

[Rumble de Thump]

Are you saying the Lundstrum tackle was closer to the West than the East?

It wasn't a tackle.

[Sir David Gray]

So players should only get a red if the player is damaged!!!!!

Similarly should players who make a token gesture of a head butt not be sent off either, lets face it despite the recipient rolling about on the deck they're not really damaged.

No and no.

Headbutts (both feigned and actual) fall under a completely different law of violent conduct so it's not comparable to a bad tackle which can either be deemed reckless (yellow card) or serious foul play (red card) depending on who the referee is/who you play for (delete as appropriate).

Headbutts are headbutts and not part of challenging for the ball and therefore a small movement which only involves a small amount of contact being made is deemed just as worthy of a red card as a Duncan Ferguson style headbutt.

Obviously a red card can be issued if a player isn't injured but what I meant (perhaps not successfully given the number of replies my post has generated!) was that a reckless (yellow card) tackle is less likely to result in an opponent being injured due to the force of the tackle being used in comparison with a serious foul play (red card) offence.

[wookie70]

If Boyle is running down the wing without the ball and is tackled like this is it a red. If so then that was a red as the ball was no consideration to the tackler. JDH was within a reasonable distance of the ball, could win it without going through the man and was therefore an attempt at a tackle poorly timed. Lundstrum made no attempt at a tackle so any force was excessive. As another poster said it is now open season on Boyle and players who like to run with the ball, as it has been in Scotland for decades. Any part of football that is entertaining is usually destroyed by the way the authorities interpret the rules

[patlowe]

It's interesting that much of the coverage has suggested fouls like Lundstram's are just "part of the game". If that's the case then it needs looked at - why should players be able to cynically disrupt an attack a team has had to work bloody hard for with no intention of doing so fairly? Folk talk about the "spirit of the game", well to me football is poorer for tackles like that, whether it's Lundstram or anyone else. Not sure whether it's a red under the current rules or not but outlawing them would put a stop to it very quickly.

[blackpoolhibs]

Having a free kick out at an opponent is now not a red card. :confused:

[GRA]

When it first happened I thought cynical trip & clear yellow within the laws of the game. Was surprised when Collum got out the red. Can see why he did from the angle he saw the foul, but doesn't constitute serious foul play in my opinion, just a cynical challenge to stop a breakaway. I'd have been raging if one of our players got a red for that so correct decision to overturn the red card, VAR would have overturned it if it was in operation.

[Mcbizz1998]

Good. Will probably make them even angrier, everything else seems to.

Up them!

[Scouse Hibee]

It's interesting that much of the coverage has suggested fouls like Lundstram's are just "part of the game". If that's the case then it needs looked at - why should players be able to cynically disrupt an attack a team has had to work bloody hard for with no intention of doing so fairly? Folk talk about the "spirit of the game", well to me football is poorer for tackles like that, whether it's Lundstram or anyone else. Not sure whether it's a red under the current rules or not but outlawing them would put a stop to it very quickly.

It hasn’t been looked at since the game started so why change it now, it’s hardly a new thing.

[Scouse Hibee]

When it first happened I thought cynical trip & clear yellow within the laws of the game. Was surprised when Collum got out the red. Can see why he did from the angle he saw the foul, but doesn't constitute serious foul play in my opinion, just a cynical challenge to stop a breakaway. I'd have been raging if one of our players got a red for that so correct decision to overturn the red card, VAR would have overturned it if it was in operation.

This.

[Willis1875]

Red card for me aswell,Dangerous tackle.
If he wanted to commit a professional foul he simply could have pulled Boyles jersey

[Key West]

It's a red card every time it's not a tackle and trying to get the ball it is a dangerous lunge, we might as well play with an oval shaped ball.

[Since90+2]

Red card for me aswell,Dangerous tackle.
If he wanted to commit a professional foul he simply could have pulled Boyles jersey

Maybe if his arms were 7 foot long.

[Willis1875]

Maybe if his arms were 7 foot long.

Slight exaggeration

[Bridge hibs]

Slight exaggerationAye but Boyle is 0-70 in 3.2 seconds 🤣

[B.H.F.C]

When it first happened I thought cynical trip & clear yellow within the laws of the game. Was surprised when Collum got out the red. Can see why he did from the angle he saw the foul, but doesn't constitute serious foul play in my opinion, just a cynical challenge to stop a breakaway. I'd have been raging if one of our players got a red for that so correct decision to overturn the red card, VAR would have overturned it if it was in operation.

At the game, I shouted for a red card. When I saw it happen at full speed in real time, I thought it looked a lot worse than it was. Just with how far behind him he was, and seeing the boot being quite high with a total lack of intention to go for the ball.

Seeing it back it wasn’t as bad as I thought at the time but (and I’m not one to stick up for Willie Collum) if he’s seen similar then giving the red at the time was understandable IMO. I don’t think, without seeing the benefit of replays which he obviously didn’t have, the decision was as ridiculous as made out.

[Zambernardi1875]

It’s a yellow if he tries to play the ball, but he doesn’t, just swipes Boyle down, would be a different story on here if Boyle got injured by it. Plus he was 1 v 1 on the last defender with the run on him from the halfway line. Cynical foul, dangerous and a goal scoring opportunity of course it’s a red all day long.

[Since90+2]

Slight exaggeration

Absolutely no danger he could have grabbed Boyle's jersey 🤣 he'd need to be Usain Bolt.

[The_Sauz]

No it wasn’t, it was the East side of the pitch than the West I just had a great view in line with it.
That's not what you said :confused: "I was in the West and the view I had was in front of me. It was closer to the West than the East"

[Scouse Hibee]

That's not what you said :confused: "I was in the West and the view I had was in front of me. It was closer to the West than the East"

I must have been confused when I typed that, my sincere apologies, I will appeal any reprimand I may receive.

[JimBHibees]

I must have been confused when I typed that, my sincere apologies, I will appeal any reprimand I may receive.

:greengrin

[Billy Whizz]

I must have been confused when I typed that, my sincere apologies, I will appeal any reprimand I may receive.

If I can butt in, was nearer the South than the North

[Scouse Hibee]

If I can butt in, was nearer the South than the North

I sit nearer the South than theNorth in the West 😀

[Billy Whizz]

I sit nearer the South than theNorth in the West 😀

Comprende

[cabbageandribs1875]

Ross co players Jack Baldwin and Ross Callachan both accepted 2-game suspensions after having their yellow cards upgraded to red and both will miss the games v Sellick/Sevco

[mjhibby]

So its only a yellow card to go in calf-high from behind and make no attempt to get the ball?

Handy to know though but good news for the industrial element in the league.

Exactly. Watch boyler getting at least one of these every game. Im all for strong challenges but if thats a yellow then the game is going down a dangerous path.

[Conj]

Ross co players Jack Baldwin and Ross Callachan both accepted 2-game suspensions after having their yellow cards upgraded to red and both will miss the games v Sellick/Sevco

Aberdeen and Rangers, not Celtic

[heretoday]

Exactly. Watch boyler getting at least one of these every game. Im all for strong challenges but if thats a yellow then the game is going down a dangerous path.

Correct. My worry is that kids in schools are getting instructions to commit these sort of fouls. it's condoning dirty play pure and simple. Red card for me and I'd feel the same if a Hibs guy did it.

[JimBHibees]

Ross co players Jack Baldwin and Ross Callachan both accepted 2-game suspensions after having their yellow cards upgraded to red and both will miss the games v Sellick/Sevco

Can't argue two horrible challenges McInnes has every right to be hugely annoyed with that where his team should have been playing with 9 players but ended up losing. Pure incompetence from the ref. Actually think Mackay intimidates refs especially up there can remember they should have had a player sent off when we lost up there. Over the ball challenge in front of the dug outs similar to the Baldwin one.

[green day]

Ross co players Jack Baldwin and Ross Callachan both accepted 2-game suspensions after having their yellow cards upgraded to red and both will miss the games v Sellick/Sevco

I had to laugh at Malky M post match comments that "Kilmarnock are a very physical team, we knew they would be and we stood up to that very well".

McInnes must be raging.

[patlowe]

It hasn’t been looked at since the game started so why change it now, it’s hardly a new thing.

The rules are changed all the time with a view to making the game better, regardless of whether something is old or new. And I do think these challenges (not overly dangerous ones but trips deliberately designed to stop breakaways) have become more commonplace as the pace of the game has quickened - some managers at the top level clearly coach it. I find it strange that people are happy to accept something as "just part of the game" when it's a deliberate attempt to spoil it, but I guess we all enjoy different things about the sport. I'm not saying it's the biggest issue in the game so I can handle it if I'm in the minority :greengrin

[Key West]

The rules are changed all the time with a view to making the game better, regardless of whether something is old or new. And I do think these challenges (not overly dangerous ones but trips deliberately designed to stop breakaways) have become more commonplace as the pace of the game has quickened - some managers at the top level clearly coach it. I find it strange that people are happy to accept something as "just part of the game" when it's a deliberate attempt to spoil it, but I guess we all enjoy different things about the sport. I'm not saying it's the biggest issue in the game so I can handle it if I'm in the minority :greengrin

Don't think you are in the minority you could end a players career just to stop a potential goal.

[hibsbollah]

I had to laugh at Malky M post match comments that "Kilmarnock are a very physical team, we knew they would be and we stood up to that very well".

McInnes must be raging.

I really cant stand Mackay. The Staggies are fast becoming my 3rd most dislikeable team in Scotland.

[McD]

It’s a yellow if he tries to play the ball, but he doesn’t, just swipes Boyle down, would be a different story on here if Boyle got injured by it. Plus he was 1 v 1 on the last defender with the run on him from the halfway line. Cynical foul, dangerous and a goal scoring opportunity of course it’s a red all day long.


it’s not considered a goal scoring opportunity if there’s another defender between the attacker and the goal

[MWHIBBIES]

There is no way whatsoever he was sent off for anything to do with it being a goalscoring opportunity.

[FilipinoHibs]

There is no way whatsoever he was sent off for anything to do with it being a goalscoring opportunity.

You know what's going on in Collum's head!

[MWHIBBIES]

You know what's going on in Collum's head!

No, I just understand football.

[hibbyfraelibby]

I must have been confused when I typed that, my sincere apologies, I will appeal any reprimand I may receive.

Orange Card!

[Since90+2]

You know what's going on in Collum's head!

I can't believe you're still saying it's a goalscoring opportunity. Are you at the windup?

[FRes Hibbie]

I don’t know a single non-hibs fan that still thought it was a red after seeing the replay. In fact, the only Hibs fans I’ve seen that still think it’s a red are the ones on this thread.

It’s not a red by current standards, even our own manager agreed. Perhaps that’ll change in the future like Carragher predicted (discussing the similar Trippier one) but at the moment it’s not.

Sometimes this place can be so blinkered and biased it makes it difficult to have a conversation.

[greenlex]

I don’t know a single non-hibs fan that still thought it was a red after seeing the replay. In fact, the only Hibs fans I’ve seen that still think it’s a red are the ones on this thread.

It’s not a red by current standards, even our own manager agreed. Perhaps that’ll change in the future like Carragher predicted (discussing the similar Trippier one) but at the moment it’s not.

Sometimes this place can be so blinkered and biased it makes it difficult to have a conversation.
It was a red.

[FRes Hibbie]

It was a red.

Not according to our manager, any major TV or newspaper pundit (hun-affiliated or not), the appeals panel and half the hibs fans on this thread. The other half? So biased it affects the eyes.

[Billy Whizz]

I don’t know a single non-hibs fan that still thought it was a red after seeing the replay. In fact, the only Hibs fans I’ve seen that still think it’s a red are the ones on this thread.

It’s not a red by current standards, even our own manager agreed. Perhaps that’ll change in the future like Carragher predicted (discussing the similar Trippier one) but at the moment it’s not.

Sometimes this place can be so blinkered and biased it makes it difficult to have a conversation.

It was a shocker full of intent, dreadful challenge

[FRes Hibbie]

It was a shocker full of intent, dreadful challenge

Intent is easy to imagine but impossible to prove. Personally I think his only intent was to stop a counter-attack.

Don’t you find it strange that the only people who still think it’s a red are on a Hibs fans’ board? And even on that fans’ board it’s pretty split.

[where'stheslope]

Listen, Collum is a religious teacher at a catholic school, so if he gets the chance to show red to der hun, he takes it and lets us back in the game!!!!
No problem here!!!!

[Bridge hibs]

It was a shocker full of intent, dreadful challengeYeah, I would have given him another red for taking his time to get off the ****ing pitch followed by another red just for being a dirty ugly rangers ****

[Rumble de Thump]

Intent is easy to imagine but impossible to prove. Personally I think his only intent was to stop a counter-attack.

Don’t you find it strange that the only people who still think it’s a red are on a Hibs fans’ board? And even on that fans’ board it’s pretty split.

The idea that it's only some Hibs fans acknowledging it was a red card offence is just your imagination.

[FRes Hibbie]

The idea that it's only some Hibs fans acknowledging it was a red card offence is just your imagination.

Who else does?

[killie-hibby]

Who else does?

Mr W. Collum does!

[FRes Hibbie]

Mr W. Collum does!

You’ve heard from him since he’s had a chance to watch the replays?

[Key West]

The ref saw it as a lunge not a tackle one of the few things he has got right over the years. The media have now managed to brainwash most into thinking it was harmless, that’s what they do.

[jacomo]

The ref saw it as a lunge not a tackle one of the few things he has got right over the years. The media have now managed to brainwash most into thinking it was harmless, that’s what they do.


I thought it was a soft red card but don’t understand how it was overturned on appeal. Even if we had VAR, surely the ref is allowed to back his own judgement on this?

[Ralphy C]

I thought it was a soft red card but don’t understand how it was overturned on appeal. Even if we had VAR, surely the ref is allowed to back his own judgement on this?
This:top marks

[Key West]

I thought it was a soft red card but don’t understand how it was overturned on appeal. Even if we had VAR, surely the ref is allowed to back his own judgement on this?

Agree, I’m all for tackling an opponent but that was not the case, I’m afraid VAR will be manipulated to suit certain teams, it’s only good for offside decisions in my opinion.

[mjhibby]

Agree, I’m all for tackling an opponent but that was not the case, I’m afraid VAR will be manipulated to suit certain teams, it’s only good for offside decisions in my opinion.

Exactly. Every decision is open to interpretation. If the hack at boyle is now a yellow teams now know they are safe to stop him by any means. The games is finished if we go back to 70s and allow thuggery as thats what it is. To think ryan got sent off when not even making contact. Var will be used to the bigot bros benefit and we can look forward to just as many bewildering decisions in their favour.

[Key West]

Exactly. Every decision is open to interpretation. If the hack at boyle is now a yellow teams now know they are safe to stop him by any means. The games is finished if we go back to 70s and allow thuggery as thats what it is. To think ryan got sent off when not even making contact. Var will be used to the bigot bros benefit and we can look forward to just as many bewildering decisions in their favour.

They only came to that conclusion ( yellow) because mo damage was done, they'll always find a different angle.