Stellaboz Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Hands to face, by the rules, is a red. Either ask to change the rules or stop complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy85 Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Eyes gouges tend to be red cards tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 50 minutes ago, Stellaboz said: Hands to face, by the rules, is a red. Either ask to change the rules or stop complaining. I doubt that's actually the wording of the rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stellaboz Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stellaboz Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 If raising your hand to hit an opponents face isn't violent conduct, well.I hope you don't, with your super strength and all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smpar Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Still arguing it's not a red. What a fucking lunatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coventry Saint Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 20 minutes ago, Bobby_F said: I can only assume this red card was under "violent conduct"? And I still, from the video at least, think that's far from violent conduct. Bear in mind that refs are given directives and told to apply the law in certain ways. The 'hands to the face' thing is a fairly long-standing interpretation of the violent conduct law. I really don't think Adam can have any complaints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallumPar Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 If you want an example of a referee applying the 'violent conduct' rule, to the letter of the law, please look up Kaka's recent red card, which used VAR. This was bizarre. There was a bit of a melee and Kaka jokingly grabbed an ex-teammates face from behind. Both players laughed about this. Referee went to the VAR, who decided that was a hand to the face, which is a red card. Now, in that context, that was definitely the wrong decision. In Saturday's context, it was correct. That wasn't a playful push to the face. That was a frustrated attempt to pull a player out of the way, by grabbing his face. Red card every day of the week.It genuinely baffles me, that some football fans refuse to accept things like this. Don't get me wrong, our fans are just as bad at times. A fair proportion of football fans, when they're team is involved, choose to see incidents differently and make out they're being victimised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shandon Par Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 TBF to St Mirren, the money spunked on the appeal is probably just the equivalent to Jack Ross' daily knitwear budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 42 minutes ago, CallumPar said: If you want an example of a referee applying the 'violent conduct' rule, to the letter of the law, please look up Kaka's recent red card, which used VAR. This was bizarre. There was a bit of a melee and Kaka jokingly grabbed an ex-teammates face from behind. Both players laughed about this. Referee went to the VAR, who decided that was a hand to the face, which is a red card. Now, in that context, that was definitely the wrong decision. In Saturday's context, it was correct. That wasn't a playful push to the face. That was a frustrated attempt to pull a player out of the way, by grabbing his face. Red card every day of the week. It genuinely baffles me, that some football fans refuse to accept things like this. Don't get me wrong, our fans are just as bad at times. A fair proportion of football fans, when they're team is involved, choose to see incidents differently and make out they're being victimised. I'm not saying for a second that I've not seen red cards given for something like this, but it just doesn't strike me as violent conduct. Pulling < Punching < Elbowing < Head butting. The last of these is another, IMO, ridiculous definition of violent conduct as most football 'head buts' would get you laughed at if that was your best shot outside the pub on a Saturday night. I guess if this had been Goodwin, who we know has a bit of a nasty streak, then I'd have thought this was intentional - and maybe even bought in to the eye gouge theory. Eckersley has show absolutely nothing that would suggest he'd try to maim a player over the usual 'ma baw' hand bags. Anyway, it's all over now. He misses Saturday, and if this has really been deemed violent conduct, he'll miss a couple more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallumPar Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 I'm not saying for a second that I've not seen red cards given for something like this, but it just doesn't strike me as violent conduct. Pulling The last of these is another, IMO, ridiculous definition of violent conduct as most football 'head buts' would get you laughed at if that was your best shot outside the pub on a Saturday night. I guess if this had been Goodwin, who we know has a bit of a nasty streak, then I'd have thought this was intentional - and maybe even bought in to the eye gouge theory. Eckersley has show absolutely nothing that would suggest he'd try to maim a player over the usual 'ma baw' hand bags. Anyway, it's all over now. He misses Saturday, and if this has really been deemed violent conduct, he'll miss a couple more. You're suggesting this shouldn't have been a red card, based on your opinion that the rules should be changed, rather than based on the rules.In the modern game, grabbing someone's face from behind, in an attempt to force them out of the way is deemed to be violent conduct. That's the rules, regardless of whether you agree with them or not.It may not have looked overly aggressive and, having watched it back a few times, I seriously doubt he intended to hurt anyone. However, his frustration got the better of him, and he tried to grab an opponents head, to pull him out the way. By the laws of the game, it's a red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demented Zebra Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Bobby_F said: Yip. If Jack Ross had to serve a suspension a few weeks previously for pointing out the same ref had forgotten the rules about what happened after a player had received treatment, then this was never going to get overturned. It's well known Thomson is/was a Saints fan, and so I think he goes out of his way to show that he doesn't favour us during games. He's reffed two of our 6 league games so far and sent off three players and our manager. I just with the people who appoint refs would realise it's not easy for him and not put him in a such a difficult position - at least not so often! The man lives in Paisley could not see him going along to watch the old firm he would be recognised. So go along watching a small local club to keep tabs on his profession makes sense. I dont buy into this he is a St Mirren fan bloody hell look at his history when taking charge of our games. Why in the name of the wee man would you appeal the red card you would have to be blind not to say it was a red card. The only injustice here is the fact the Dunfermline player elbowed Adam first yet he walked scott free. We have huge problems for our defence on Sunday i see us droppings three points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 It's well known that many football fans don't really have a clue about the rules of the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salvo Montalbano Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Guy near me used to shout for offside all the times, particularly at goal kicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Folk still talk about 'intent' and use phrases like 'he was going for the ball'. Mental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Tbf, Bobby F throwing fits about refereeing decisions isn't a big surprise. It's his pet subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 1 hour ago, Randy Giles said: Tbf, Bobby F throwing fits about refereeing decisions isn't a big surprise. It's his pet subject. I've been much better this season honest - it's just that 5 red cards and two penalties in 6 games (4 of them reffed by Collum and Thomson) would try the patience of a Saint ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smpar Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Folk still talk about 'intent' and use phrases like 'he was going for the ball'. Mental. 'Last man' is one of my personal favourites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 Or 'he given the benefit of the doubt' for anyone less than 2 yards offside. Shearer loves it becouse it shows he has read the rules, pity it also shows he has also completely misunderstood them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted September 21, 2017 Share Posted September 21, 2017 21 minutes ago, smpar said: 'Last man' is one of my personal favourites. 7 minutes ago, parsforlife said: Or 'he given the benefit of the doubt' for anyone less than 2 yards offside. Shearer loves it becouse it shows he has read the rules, pity it also shows he has also completely misunderstood them The new offside rule, where the kick is taken from where the player is deemed to be interfering with play, still gets people raging. Especially if the kick is taken from inside their own half ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.