The Super v Stranraer FC

[Sludden123]

13 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

Absolutely nailed on red card. Looks at him then hits him with the elbow.

 

Bit of a dive for the penalty too. Excellent.

First of all, he looked at the ball in the air, not the player. That was never a sending off in my book, the Stranraer player that got hit came in from the back of another Stranraer player when they were jumping for the ball.  I certainly don't think Shankland meant that to happen,  I also think the appeal will bring it down to a yellow card.

[tuckersloan]

If am being 100% honest not sure thats a red card either. Not the best camera angle though.

[Somerset 2010]

No way is that a red card. No force and not even a mark on the "poor wee" players face. If you get a deliberate elbow in the face, you know about it! I doubt he would even have hit the deck if thee hadn't been other player around.

 

[thomas 62]

1 minute ago, Somerset 2010 said:

No way is that a red card. No force and not even a mark on the "poor wee" players face. If you get a deliberate elbow in the face, you know about it! I doubt he would even have hit the deck if thee hadn't been other player around.

 

His name is not Adams.

[Raith25]

Gtf that is never a red, no violent conduct in that whatsoever, if that doesn't get recinded to a yellow then everytime a striker jumps up with a defender for a ball and makes contact with the defenders head then they should be off.
Look at Adams goal for example, got his elbow around the defenders head because that's what you naturally have to do when you jump.
But since competancy and the SFA don't go it probably won't be recinded.

Wipe yer face ya foaming mess [emoji23]

[D'Jaffo]

Wipe yer face ya foaming mess [emoji23]

It’s a perfectly good point tbh so don’t know what you’re on about.

Hope you’re not still upset about big bad Shankland hurting one of your players.

[Sludden123]

6 minutes ago, tuckersloan said:

If am being 100% honest not sure thats a red card either. Not the best camera angle though.

I think it was more a case of the Ref having it in for Shankland yesterday, he was very quick to bring the card out.  

[D'Jaffo]

I think it was more a case of the Ref having it in for Shankland yesterday, he was very quick to bring the card out.  

I’m not for one minute saying he’s got it in for us but that’s the second time this season that ref has made a huge call against us that’s cost us the game. The other being the penalty against Adams vs Alloa.

Also can’t find any record of Shankland previously being sent off unless it was also rescinded?

[thomas 62]

20 minutes ago, rb123! said:

Gtf that is never a red, no violent conduct in that whatsoever, if that doesn't get recinded to a yellow then everytime a striker jumps up with a defender for a ball and makes contact with the defenders head then they should be off.

Look at Adams goal for example, got his elbow around the defenders head because that's what you naturally have to do when you jump.

But since competancy and the SFA don't go it probably won't be recinded.

So Adams goal should not have stood?

[rb123!]

So Adams goal should not have stood?

I'm obviously going to say yes to that and I think that because Neill is putting his head into where Adams elbow was to try and get to the ball.

[Moonball]

As obvious a red as you'll see. Caught him with clear intent.

If you watch him in the lead-up to the contact, he looks for Neill.

Exhibit B for the jury:

[Sludden123]

Am I right in saying the Linesman (Assistant Referee) will put his flag up and wave it if he sees a foul?  Well, yesterdays linesman did absolutely nothing going by the cameras, so I would think that he either didn't think it was that bad or he just thought the Ref had a better view than him.  I still think the Ref should have spoken to the linesman first before pulling out a red card as he had a clear view from a different angle.

[ThePoohBear]

Shankland 100% red. If thats other way round yous would be phoning police for assault. Stupid from shankland  tbh. Why put yourself to let your team down at this stage of the season. A would be livid with him. 

Stonewall pen as well. Why would turner dive when he has a chance to shoot after sending jamie adams for the papers. 

Well done faz and the team. Looked like we played decent yesterday. 4 wins in a row for us now.  

[Sludden123]

8 minutes ago, Moonball said:

As obvious a red as you'll see. Caught him with clear intent.

If you watch him in the lead-up to the contact, he looks for Neill.

Exhibit B for the jury:

No way was he looking for him, he was looking where the ball was, your player came in from behind Shankland and your other player,  Yellow card Yes, but it was never a  straight red.

[Moonball]

 

6 minutes ago, Sludden123 said:

No way was he looking for him, he was looking where the ball was, your player came in from behind Shankland and your other player,  Yellow card Yes, but it was never a  straight red.

Watch the slow motion replay and tell me he doesn't look for Neill before he makes contact.

[Sludden123]

3 minutes ago, Moonball said:

 

Watch the slow motion replay and tell me he doesn't look for Neill before he makes contact.

So what are you saying,  because you say he was looking at him it makes the foul violent conduct and a straight red?  It was a reckless challenge and probably deserved a yellow card for being a bit reckless, but It never violent conduct.  Challenges like that happen in every single game and you know it does.

[dusty bin]

 Bunch of Moaners.

SIMPLE.

Red card / Yellow card deal with it.

Its yours to lose now and with your full time squad ( even with injuries) you have only yourselves to blame if you don’t win the league.

KEEP THE FAITH

CMON THE BLUES.

 

 

 

[Shibuya]

Stonewall red card for me, Shankland and Ayr would need to come up with  bloody good explanation for that to be downgraded to a yellow. 

Moore and Moffat are a good partnership in their own right (although not quite as good as M&S) so we shall see what the weekend brings.

[Moonball]

6 minutes ago, Sludden123 said:

So what are you saying,  because you say he was looking at him it makes the foul violent conduct and a straight red?  It was a reckless challenge and probably deserved a yellow card for being a bit reckless, but It never violent conduct.  Challenges like that happen in every single game and you know it does.

Have to see what the SFA decide but the video evidence is pretty conclusive. Shame as he's had a great season.

[Sludden123]

2 minutes ago, Shibuya said:

Stonewall red card for me, Shankland and Ayr would need to come up with  bloody good explanation for that to be downgraded to a yellow. 

Moore and Moffat are a good partnership in their own right (although not quite as good as M&S) so we shall see what the weekend brings.

Well everybody will see things different,  but for me, they all go for the ball and Shankland catches him no doubt about that, but the question is was it really violent conduct?  I don't think Shankland meant it and I honestly mean that.  I will accept whatever they say at the appeal, but in my opinion, you see challenges like that in every game.