Craigan

[Hexham Hibee]

Was shocked to hear him say that O'Reilly shouldn't ref any more SPL games in the near future. WTF. It was the linesman that got both dubious calls wrong. I thought he had a good game, certainly had Higden sussed with his backing in, use of arms etc.

Craigan, or anybody else for that matter, did not mention that O'Reilly missed Henrik Pyjamma's fore arm smash on Hanlon. Pyjamma is a wee turd and has previous for off the ball stuff like that.

The BBC needs to have a look at who it uses and what the say. If Preston, Robbo and now Craigan can't be impartial then get rid of them. Pat Nevin, Tony Higgins, Craig Patterson all show how it should be done.

[Tricla]

Craigan is a bellend

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

His obvious bias against us on Friday was embarrassing but it's the norm for people like him to line up and slag us off all the time, managers, commentators and so called experts have been disrespecting us for an age now, some of it particularly last season I suppose was merited but FFS give us a break!

[SkintHibby]

To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

The two contentious calls were the goal that wasnt and the Spoony pen. The other two pens were IMO both soft and that in many cases neither would be given however I think it is important to clarify we did win 4-0 not 1 or 2-0.

[easty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The two contentious calls were the goal that wasnt and the Spoony pen. The other two pens were IMO both soft and that in many cases neither would be given however I think it is important to clarify we did win 4-0 not 1 or 2-0.

I dont think our first pen was soft at all.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I dont think our first pen was soft at all.

Agree to an extent though was personally surprised it was given however I think it was on a par with the Well pen which to me wasnt one.

[Pretty Boy]

The Griffiths penalty was a stonewaller imo. Went past the keeper who gave him a wee push and bundled him over.

The 'goal' was over the line but the ref did the right thing in checking with his linesman who should have been in a better position. Watch the replay, the ref looks straight over to the linesman and then makes the decision. It was a bad call but the pace at which it all happened made it a tough decision.

The motherwell penalty was also a stonewaller imo. McPake has to be smarter than that. Higdon is clever and just stands his ground and McPake climbs all over him.

Spoony penalty was a bad call. Was outside the box and possibly a good tackle too.

So the ref made one very bad call, 2 correct calls and got another wrong but understandbly so imo. Not great but about what you'd expect from the standard of referee in Scotland. About time we got a couple of dodgy decsions in our favour anyway.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Motherwell could still be playing now and not scored yet. Faced with an empty net, they would probably put it out for a goal kick. The ref and the officials had a real stinker. Just get over it. It happened in the " best league in the world " at the weekend as well.

[Treadstone]

We caught the breaks on Friday no doubt . The thing that irks me is Craigan and Houston talking about 'Wells first half performance and how they shouldn't be behind at the break . No mention of Spoonys back heel that just went wide and Sparkys shot that went even closer . If they go in the game is finished after half an hour.

[The_Sauz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be frank, the match officials had a nightmare.

If Hibs had been beaten 4-0 in that way I'd be absolutely fuming.

What makes you come to this conclusion

"The header" The linesman had 2 choices to make! Did the whole ball cross the line or did it not!
In real time there was no chance he could tell as Williams body had covered his line off sight off the whole ball, so he decided it did not cross the line. It was not until you see it in slow motion that you you could tell that the ball had crossed the line.....JUST!

Hibs 1st Pen was called correctly as the Keeper pushed then blocked Sparky with his arm.

Hibs 2nd pen was also called correctly! Everybody says that initial contact was outside the box! Well if you look at it again, then you will see that it was in fact DW who made stood on the defenders foot outside the box! It was not until the defender lifted his knee that contact was made (inside the box) and the Ref had a clear view of this!

Well pen was soft, but called correct (higgdon played for it, but James should know not to put his hands on a players shoulders in the box)

Officials will have good & bad games through out a season, just like players.......it's called being Human! (plus it gives us something to moan about on .Net )

So the use of the word NIGHTMARE was a bit harsh and should only be used for one official........... Craig "The Official Nightmare" Thompson

[Alfred E Newman]

If these decisions had went the way of the OF they would have been written off by now as "these things even themselves out over the season"

[mikethehibee69]

Although he is also known as a cheating git and any other expletives you care to useI hate that CT with a passion

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What makes you come to this conclusion

"The header" The linesman had 2 choices to make! Did the whole ball cross the line or did it not!
In real time there was no chance he could tell as Williams body had covered his line off sight off the whole ball, so he decided it did not cross the line. It was not until you see it in slow motion that you you could tell that the ball had crossed the line.....JUST!

Hibs 1st Pen was called correctly as the Keeper pushed then blocked Sparky with his arm.

Hibs 2nd pen was also called correctly! Everybody says that initial contact was outside the box! Well if you look at it again, then you will see that it was in fact DW who made stood on the defenders foot outside the box! It was not until the defender lifted his knee that contact was made (inside the box) and the Ref had a clear view of this!

Well pen was soft, but called correct (higgdon played for it, but James should know not to put his hands on a players shoulders in the box)

Officials will have good & bad games through out a season, just like players.......it's called being Human! (plus it gives us something to moan about on .Net )

So the use of the word NIGHTMARE was a bit harsh and should only be used for one official........... Craig "The Official Nightmare" Thompson

[LeighLoyal]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If these decisions had went the way of the OF they would have been written off by now as "these things even themselves out over the season"

Yep, via Chic Dung, Traynor, Keevins etc.... The only team that got any regular favours was Rangers (RIP). So no longer an issue. Craigan is just sore his team didn't get the rub, then he'd be silent as a church mouse.

[Baldy]

I actually like Craigan .. he is the best of the summerisers ... says what he thinks and although it was Motherwell he was sticking up for, he is usually impartial.

Lets also be honest if the decisions we got on Friday went against us we would all be saying the same thing ...

I am just worried we may now get absolutely no decisions in our favour for months

[truehibernian]

For me I think he is well out of order singling out one ref in particular, and I would say Stevie O'Reilly is definitely not the worst ref - in fact he is one of the most consistent in my opinion.

Regards Friday night - without a shadow of a doubt we got lucky with the Ben Williams 'save' - however in Stevie's defence he is relying on his farside linesman to assist, which clearly he didn't (to our advantage).

First penalty - very soft, but how many times do we see defenders in particular shield the ball out of play, often in my opinion fouling the attacking player by obstructing him. Randolph really could and should have ushered Leigh out of play, but he chose to grab and use physcial force to force Leigh off and away from the ball. Soft but a penalty.

Second penalty - again, maybe green tinted specs but I think Stevie saw the second movement of Hammell's leg and body, not the initial infringement - if he was obscured then he may have seen what he thought was a cute attempt by the defender to reposition his body (in this case watch Hammell's thigh movement closely as he consciously in my opinion raises it) - this looks to be marginally inside the box. Again the linesman could have helped.

I think he got 'Well's penalty right as James McPake falls for Higdon's cleverness and dives over at an angle.

As Pat Nevin said today on 5Live - bring in technology and these decisions then won't be major talking points nor will they hopefully mean the difference between 3 points, relegation, a Euro spot, etc. Every single other sport has it - I simply don't see what makes top flight football any different (although I would hazard a guess that it is cost - if it is cost then the SFA or SPL should be bearing it, not the clubs). In saying that even technology wouldn't stop Craig Thomson being inept - he follows the 'Charlie Richmond laws of refereeing manual'

[SaulGoodman]

Okay then Craigan, let's give Motherwell the goal and get rid of that bad penalty decision by the ref.. Oh look at that, we still won 3-1!

[3pm]

What did he say when the lights went out last year? How did he get on with his win bonus in the rearranged game?!

Hibs deserved to win that game, no doubt. We got a bit of luck but there wasn't too much sympathy when we never got any last year.

Up Motherwell, Up Stephen Craigan. Move on.

NEXT.

[Future17]

Couldn't really give a toss about Craigan and I'm delighted we won 4-0, but the actual issue, which is totally separate to those things, is whether O'Reilly is of the requisite standard to ref in the SPL.

I think he made major mistakes in awarding the penalty for the foul on Spoony and for not even booking Higdon for his challenge on Taiwo which could easily have been a red card.

If he refereed Hibs next week and made major mistakes which resulted in us losing the game, I'd be angry that he'd been allowed to continue on unchecked from his previous errors.

[Golden Bear]

I wonder how long it will be before someone of a Hibs persuasion appears as a guest on Sportscenes Sunday night program? Maybe it's just me, but the studio guest more often than not is someone who has a connection with the team that Hibs were playing against.

Craigan is normally quite fair but last night he overstepped his remit when he said that it should be a long time before Steve O'Reilly is awarded another SPL match. I don't suppose anything can be done by the Authorities to reprimand him either.

[patlowe]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I actually like Craigan .. he is the best of the summerisers ... says what he thinks and although it was Motherwell he was sticking up for, he is usually impartial.

Lets also be honest if the decisions we got on Friday went against us we would all be saying the same thing ...

I am just worried we may now get absolutely no decisions in our favour for months

Personally I'm not that fussed about his criticism of the decisions, it's the unbelievable bias he displayed pretty much until it was clear that we'd handed Well a pumping. He repeatedly went on about how Motherwell were so on top in the first half and completely ignored the good things Hibs were doing. Hibs created 3 decent chances and attacked well generally in the first half, while Motherwell also had their chances, including the one over the line. We weren't amazing by any means but you would think Motherwell had battered Hibs. That was simply not the case. Having said all that, the longer we go being underestimated the better I suppose.

[ALF TUPPER]

I thought spoony's penalty was a pen. He was riding the challenge until the Well defender brough his knee up and the Spoonmesieter went down ( in the box) . Soft but a pen nevertheless.

The disallowed goal was a goal - defo.

We still won 4-0. So any amount of posturing from Greetin Craigen wont make any difference. Last season we had no luck at all, a poor team, poor results and a dejected support.


Look at us now. We've a good solid team, great results and a support looking forward to games. Glorry Glory - get it up ye Craigen.
:fenlon


...................... Now where have i put my Hibby tinted glasses

[allezsauzee]

Craigan is a walloper. End of.

[--------]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I thought spoony's penalty was a pen. He was riding the challenge until the Well defender brough his knee up and the Spoonmesieter went down ( in the box) . Soft but a pen nevertheless.

The disallowed goal was a goal - defo.

We still won 4-0. So any amount of posturing from Greetin Craigen wont make any difference. Last season we had no luck at all, a poor team, poor results and a dejected support.


Look at us now. We've a good solid team, great results and a support looking forward to games. Glorry Glory - get it up ye Craigen.
:fenlon


...................... Now where have i put my Hibby tinted glasses

I really don't know why some of us are so apologetic about this match. The only thing Motherwell have a real beef about IMO is the 'goal' that wasn't awarded. An equaliser at that point in the game could have roused Motherwell; the game could have had a different result had the goal been allowed.

However, in the assistant referee's defence, he was down in the corner where he was supposed to be, but not only did Ben Williams' body obscure his view of the ball, there were a number of players (4 or 5, IIRC) between him and Williams. The camera that showed the ball over the line so clearly was set about 12 feet above the ground down in the corner - the assistant, on the other hand, was normal size - about 5'9", or a wee bit more, I'd judge. He didn't have the very clear view that the camera had, and unless he's absolutely certain that the ball was all the way over the goal-line, he could not advise the referee to award the goal. Mr O'Reilly was also in his correct position - but from where he was, facing the goal, he had no way of knowing whether the ball had crossed the line or not.

Neither official, IMO should be blamed for the incident - it was one of those things that happen in football. When it benefits us, we grin and take it. When we lose, we rage about it for as long as folks are prepared to listen. That's what being a football fan means. Commentators and summarisers, on the other hand, should be a lot cooler and more careful in what they say.

The first Hibs penalty was a stonewaller - Randolph clearly pushed Griffiths away from the ball, then as Leigh gets ahead of him Randolph clips his heels. There is - or should be - no argument about this. It was a penalty, clearly and unequivocally.

The Motherwell penalty was also clear and unequivocal. McPake rose to challenge for a ball when he really didn't need to - he was leaning into Higdon and he really can have no complaints that the referee penalised him. Tough on them that Higdon missed the penalty, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.

Our second penalty was for an illegal challenge on Wotherspoon by Hamill. The BBC website's blow-by-blow commentary said it happened 'well outside the penalty area' - well, it didn't. When contact was made Hamill was ON THE 18-YARD LINE, as was Wotherspoon. The 18-yard line is part of the penalty area.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...ame_2012_e.pdf

"The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries." (top of page 6)

If you're on the line, you're in the area. End of. Hamill, straddling the 18-yard line, brought down Wotherspoon, who was also on the 18-yard line and came down inside the 18-yard box. The line is part of the box. It was a foul. It was a penalty. The referee was right.

The problem has been exacerbated by two things - the incompetence of your average BBC Scotland football presenter, and the fact that one of the 'commentators' at the game was Craigan, who clearly is a committed Motherwell fan and reacts to what he sees as a fan rather than as a professional commentator or summariser. His comments on Sunday night were way out of order - I can understand him lbeing upset on the Friday night, but by the Sunday he should have sat down, looked at the videotapes, and arrived at a balanced and reasonable opinion. It doesn't seem to me that he's either willing or capable of doing so, and he should not be allowed anywhere near a microphone until he learns what the word 'impartiality' means.

For the record, Hibs played well. Maybe not quite deserving 4-0, but 3-0 or 4-1 would have been a fair reflection of the game - and that would still have been an emphatic margin of victory away from home. There are still rough edges, and it's a worry how many of our better players are likely to leave in January. But on the night we played well, and while no one can reasonably expect the morons at BBC Scotland to be happy, I can't see why the Hibs fans should be so ready to join in the criticism of a referee who for once gave us what we deserved.

[iwasthere1972]

Haven't looked at previous posts because I'm in a hurry to go out but there was the occasion in the second half when one of their players bundled Paul Cairney off the ball and his shot went wide of the Hibs goal. The ref blew for a foul for us and yet Craigan said that we got let off. Their player missed anyway and it was definitely a foul on Cairney.

[truehibernian]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I really don't know why some of us are so apologetic about this match. The only thing Motherwell have a real beef about IMO is the 'goal' that wasn't awarded. An equaliser at that point in the game could have roused Motherwell; the game could have had a different result had the goal been allowed.

However, in the assistant referee's defence, he was down in the corner where he was supposed to be, but not only did Ben Williams' body obscure his view of the ball, there were a number of players (4 or 5, IIRC) between him and Williams. The camera that showed the ball over the line so clearly was set about 12 feet above the ground down in the corner - the assistant, on the other hand, was normal size - about 5'9", or a wee bit more, I'd judge. He didn't have the very clear view that the camera had, and unless he's absolutely certain that the ball was all the way over the goal-line, he could not advise the referee to award the goal. Mr O'Reilly was also in his correct position - but from where he was, facing the goal, he had no way of knowing whether the ball had crossed the line or not.

Neither official, IMO should be blamed for the incident - it was one of those things that happen in football. When it benefits us, we grin and take it. When we lose, we rage about it for as long as folks are prepared to listen. That's what being a football fan means. Commentators and summarisers, on the other hand, should be a lot cooler and more careful in what they say.

The first Hibs penalty was a stonewaller - Randolph clearly pushed Griffiths away from the ball, then as Leigh gets ahead of him Randolph clips his heels. There is - or should be - no argument about this. It was a penalty, clearly and unequivocally.

The Motherwell penalty was also clear and unequivocal. McPake rose to challenge for a ball when he really didn't need to - he was leaning into Higdon and he really can have no complaints that the referee penalised him. Tough on them that Higdon missed the penalty, but that's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes.

Our second penalty was for an illegal challenge on Wotherspoon by Hamill. The BBC website's blow-by-blow commentary said it happened 'well outside the penalty area' - well, it didn't. When contact was made Hamill was ON THE 18-YARD LINE, as was Wotherspoon. The 18-yard line is part of the penalty area.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affe...ame_2012_e.pdf

"The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries." (top of page 6)

If you're on the line, you're in the area. End of. Hamill, straddling the 18-yard line, brought down Wotherspoon, who was also on the 18-yard line and came down inside the 18-yard box. The line is part of the box. It was a foul. It was a penalty. The referee was right.

The problem has been exacerbated by two things - the incompetence of your average BBC Scotland football presenter, and the fact that one of the 'commentators' at the game was Craigan, who clearly is a committed Motherwell fan and reacts to what he sees as a fan rather than as a professional commentator or summariser. His comments on Sunday night were way out of order - I can understand him lbeing upset on the Friday night, but by the Sunday he should have sat down, looked at the videotapes, and arrived at a balanced and reasonable opinion. It doesn't seem to me that he's either willing or capable of doing so, and he should not be allowed anywhere near a microphone until he learns what the word 'impartiality' means.

For the record, Hibs played well. Maybe not quite deserving 4-0, but 3-0 or 4-1 would have been a fair reflection of the game - and that would still have been an emphatic margin of victory away from home. There are still rough edges, and it's a worry how many of our better players are likely to leave in January. But on the night we played well, and while no one can reasonably expect the morons at BBC Scotland to be happy, I can't see why the Hibs fans should be so ready to join in the criticism of a referee who for once gave us what we deserved.

Good post Doddie, however if you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the box starts I'm pretty sure his answer would be Mount Florida

[--------]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Haven't looked at previous posts because I'm in a hurry to go out but there was the occasion in the second half when one of their players bundled Paul Cairney off the ball and his shot went wide of the Hibs goal. The ref blew for a foul for us and yet Craigan said that we got let off. Their player missed anyway and it was definitely a foul on Cairney.

Their own stats on their own website state that Hibs had 58% of the possession on Friday evening. That would be just about exactly right, IMO.

That's a lot of possession, and a team that can keep the ball away from the opposition for that proportion of a game (and score four times while doing so) are probably playing not too badly.

[--------]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Good post Doddie, however if you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the box starts I'm pretty sure his answer would be Mount Florida

If you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the penalty area is, I suspect he'd say, "Wherever I want it to be."

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you ask Craig Thomson where the edge of the penalty area is, I suspect he'd say, "Wherever Hearts want it to be."

Fixed that for you.

[brog]

There's no doubt we got the rub of the green on Friday but I honestly can't remember another occasion in recent memory where that was the case. Last year, we got a pen against St J. GOC was then handed a 2 match ban ( wrongly ) Although we won the appeal GOC never got a decision in his favour after that. At Pittodrie last season Craig Thomson got 2 major decisions wrong, one a pen cost us the game & Pawlett won his appeal against a sending off then got banned for diving for the pen, you couldn't make it up!! CT's punishment for these catastrophic errors ( in a live TV game ) was to be awarded the cup final!! Where was the indignation from TV commentators then??
Sheer hypocrisy & we're an easy target!