kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 15 minutes ago, Left Back said: Therein lies the problem and the reason why referees are hated and football fans argue a lot. Some laws are applied, some aren’t and referees are answerable to no-one. the six second rule hasn’t been applied for years. I’m sure there will be the odd instance (Liverpools keeper was done for it a few years ago) but if you don’t want to enforce it remove it from the laws. Problem is if you removed it a team leading 1-0 would get the ball to their keeper and have him hold it until the end of the game. You therefore need a limit that has to be enforced. Firstly it isn’t a rule it is a law. None of the laws of the game are optional, so you’re saying that it’s ok for John Beaton to use his common sense in not applying one law, but it’s not ok for him to use his common sense in the application of another. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, AJF said: How can you seriously take issue with a referee for applying the laws correctly in this instance? Because he should have used his common sense, which is what he does when a goalkeeper holds on to the ball for over 6 seconds. No laws are optional. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moomintroll Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 Just now, kingjoey said: Because he should have used his common sense, which is what he does when a goalkeeper holds on to the ball for over 6 seconds. No laws are optional. See also throw, foul. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 37 minutes ago, kingjoey said: If he is insistent in applying the rules so rigorously, why does Beaton never penalise any goalkeeper for holding on to the ball for more than 6 seconds? That is an actual law, and the easiest one to apply. 3 minutes ago, kingjoey said: Firstly it isn’t a rule it is a law. None of the laws of the game are optional, so you’re saying that it’s ok for John Beaton to use his common sense in not applying one law, but it’s not ok for him to use his common sense in the application of another. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, kingjoey said: You’re disputing that that is one of the laws of the game? No, it's a law of the game. Although it's generally accepted by everyone that it's pretty much there to stop keepers taking the piss. However, I am a little surprised that Aberdeen fans are so keen to try and push the responsibility for this loss on to the referee. Especially when you probably got the better outcomes from the debatable decisions (not sending Main off had a much larger impact on the game than not giving you an extra minute of added time). Aberdeen lost the match for some fairly straightforward reasons, none of which had anything to do with the referee. They started off well, but Rangers made one small adjustment to their tactics (pulling an extra man in to the middle when building from the back) and it caused Aberdeen to completely lose shape (because of their forward lines man-marking responsibilities) and Rangers dominated from there on out. After the penalty, red card and goal Aberdeen lost their discipline until half-time, when McInnes calmed them down. They got a goal back when Aribo forgot he had some defensive responsibilities and Kennedy got a free run on a counter, but that was pretty much it in terms of Aberdeen chances. They got exactly what they deserved from the game, so it's difficult to understand the focus on the referee as if Aberdeen were somehow hard done by. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, kingjoey said: Because he should have used his common sense, which is what he does when a goalkeeper holds on to the ball for over 6 seconds. No laws are optional. He should’ve used his common sense and decided NOT to send Hedges off even though the laws explicitly state he should have? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepundit Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) Not the first time Stewart has disagreed with a refereeing decision that went in favour of Rangers that is clearly explained in the rules. He was arguing Rangers shouldn’t have had a penalty against Motherwell recently for a handball in the box which we all know according to the new rules is a penalty. And yet, Stewart still thinks he knows better. He talks sense sometimes on Sportsound to be fair to him and tries to remain impartial but the mask slips on occasion. Edit: Fair play to McInnes. He was initially enraged by the decision but accepted his explanation and didn’t use it as an excuse for the defeat. Different story after the OF game last week... Edited January 10, 2021 by thepundit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Left Back Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, kingjoey said: Firstly it isn’t a rule it is a law. None of the laws of the game are optional, so you’re saying that it’s ok for John Beaton to use his common sense in not applying one law, but it’s not ok for him to use his common sense in the application of another. If you could point me to anywhere I’ve said applying the laws should be optional or discretionary I’d appreciate it. i believe I’ve stated the opposite. At no point did I say I supported referees not applying the law (emphasised for the pedants) related to the keeper holding onto the ball for longer than six seconds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightswoodBear Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 I do enjoy these threads after a routine victory. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 3 minutes ago, KnightswoodBear said: I do enjoy these threads after a routine victory. I don’t often like to gloat but I’m getting very close to the point where I’ll make an exception. Edited January 10, 2021 by AJF 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, AJF said: I love Tom & Jerry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kent_don Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 1 hour ago, KnightswoodBear said: The failed trialist wants the rules changed because Sevco. 1 hour ago, G51 said: Michael Stewart's been working for Celtic TV all season. No wonder he's disagreeing with the referee. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, G51 said: No, it's a law of the game. Although it's generally accepted by everyone that it's pretty much there to stop keepers taking the piss. However, I am a little surprised that Aberdeen fans are so keen to try and push the responsibility for this loss on to the referee. Especially when you probably got the better outcomes from the debatable decisions (not sending Main off had a much larger impact on the game than not giving you an extra minute of added time). Aberdeen lost the match for some fairly straightforward reasons, none of which had anything to do with the referee. They started off well, but Rangers made one small adjustment to their tactics (pulling an extra man in to the middle when building from the back) and it caused Aberdeen to completely lose shape (because of their forward lines man-marking responsibilities) and Rangers dominated from there on out. After the penalty, red card and goal Aberdeen lost their discipline until half-time, when McInnes calmed them down. They got a goal back when Aribo forgot he had some defensive responsibilities and Kennedy got a free run on a counter, but that was pretty much it in terms of Aberdeen chances. They got exactly what they deserved from the game, so it's difficult to understand the focus on the referee as if Aberdeen were somehow hard done by. most people accept the decision, but you’re a bit of an idiot if you think the 25th minute red card didn’t impact the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said: most people accept the decision, but you’re a bit of an idiot if you think the 25th minute red card didn’t impact the game. I explicitly said that the red card did affect the game. What I said is that Rangers were pretty much in charge of the game before that because Aberdeen were unable to adjust. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 15 minutes ago, G51 said: No, it's a law of the game. Although it's generally accepted by everyone that it's pretty much there to stop keepers taking the piss. However, I am a little surprised that Aberdeen fans are so keen to try and push the responsibility for this loss on to the referee. Especially when you probably got the better outcomes from the debatable decisions (not sending Main off had a much larger impact on the game than not giving you an extra minute of added time). Aberdeen lost the match for some fairly straightforward reasons, none of which had anything to do with the referee. They started off well, but Rangers made one small adjustment to their tactics (pulling an extra man in to the middle when building from the back) and it caused Aberdeen to completely lose shape (because of their forward lines man-marking responsibilities) and Rangers dominated from there on out. After the penalty, red card and goal Aberdeen lost their discipline until half-time, when McInnes calmed them down. They got a goal back when Aribo forgot he had some defensive responsibilities and Kennedy got a free run on a counter, but that was pretty much it in terms of Aberdeen chances. They got exactly what they deserved from the game, so it's difficult to understand the focus on the referee as if Aberdeen were somehow hard done by. Where have I blamed the referee for the result? I have pointed out a couple of major decisions that he could have dealt with differently. I love folk on here saying that one of the laws of the game isn’t really a law, just a reference point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 16 minutes ago, AJF said: He should’ve used his common sense and decided NOT to send Hedges off even though the laws explicitly state he should have? Think you’re kind of missing the point here, AJF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, kingjoey said: Where have I blamed the referee for the result? I have pointed out a couple of major decisions that he could have dealt with differently. I love folk on here saying that one of the laws of the game isn’t really a law, just a reference point. The only one of the major decisions that Beaton got wrong is the Main red card, which is a decision that Aberdeen benefited from. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 16 minutes ago, Left Back said: If you could point me to anywhere I’ve said applying the laws should be optional or discretionary I’d appreciate it. i believe I’ve stated the opposite. At no point did I say I supported referees not applying the law (emphasised for the pedants) related to the keeper holding onto the ball for longer than six seconds. Not saying that you have said that applying the laws should be optional. What I’m asking is why Rangers fans are saying that the referee had no option but to send Hedges off, whereas referees seem to think that they have options to another law of the game. What’s the difference? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted January 10, 2021 Author Share Posted January 10, 2021 8 minutes ago, kingjoey said: Think you’re kind of missing the point here, AJF. It wouldn’t be the first time 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, G51 said: The only one of the major decisions that Beaton got wrong is the Main red card, which is a decision that Aberdeen benefited from. If Hedges hadn’t been red carded, the Main incident doesn’t happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.