Queens v Hearts

[Gorgie greatness]

12 minutes ago, Otis Blue said:

^^^^^^ Should have added that Crystal Palace (as a "place") also boasts its own railway station in South London.  Although the football club's home at Selhurst Park is further south towards Croydon and between Thornton Heath and Selhurst Park railway stations ............... does anyone think I'm bored this afternoon? 

Your that bored you haven’t noticed it’s evening

[Otis Blue]

1 minute ago, Gorgie greatness said:

Your that bored you haven’t noticed it’s evening

Shit, so it is GG ........... how time flies when you're having fun! 

[embow]

1 hour ago, Otis Blue said:

^^^^^^ Should have added that Crystal Palace (as a "place") also boasts its own railway station in South London.  Although the football club's home at Selhurst Park is further south towards Croydon and between Thornton Heath and Selhurst Park railway stations ............... does anyone think I'm bored this afternoon? 

Ok Otis Blue. Thanks for your replies. I think I was on the mark with my original two, namely, QPR and Port Vale. Everton is an area of Liverpool. Aston is part of "Brummieland". Crystal Palace and Charlton are places in London.

It's been a slow day. You at least had a  game to watch last night featuring your team just about getting a really good result .

[die hard doonhamer]

5 minutes ago, embow said:

Ok Otis Blue. Thanks for your replies. I think I was on the mark with my original two, namely, QPR and Port Vale. Everton is an area of Liverpool. Aston is part of "Brummieland". Crystal Palace and Charlton are places in London.

It's been a slow day. You at least had a  game to watch last night featuring your team just about getting a really good result .

QPR originally played in the Queen's Park area of London, so you can knock them off your list as well.

[Skyline Drifter]

13 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

It's never a red

 

13 hours ago, die hard doonhamer said:

Folk arguing the Halkett one is a red are at it. The referee had to consider a few different things when deciding if it's denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The most important here are position of other defenders, position on the pitch and direction of travel. Mebude was headed more towards the corner than goal when the challenge was made, and there was another defender in the area (whether he'd have got there is debatable, but it clearly wasn't out of the question). There are plenty factors there to say that it wasn't DOGSO, and yellow was clearly the correct call.

 

13 hours ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said:

The criteria isn't getting a shot off.  It's denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity, which that quite clearly isn't.  He's down 25 yards out at an angle with a covering CH.

Clear yellow

Anyone claiming it was a ckear yellow and not debatable want to compare and contrast the Jack Fitzwater sending off for Livi today? 

 

[die hard doonhamer]

5 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

 

 

Anyone claiming it was a ckear yellow and not debatable want to compare and contrast the Jack Fitzwater sending off for Livi today? 

 

Just gone and watched that. It's a woeful decision. 2 main differences make it closer to a red than Halkett though. The first is direction of travel. Mebude was headed towards the goal line, whereas Shankland was headed directly in the direction of goal. The second is the distance to a covering player. Popescu was much closer than the covering Livingston player was.

I fully expect that Fitzwater's will be overturned on appeal, and there's more to argue for that one than there is for Halkett.

[lennyzer0]

20 hours ago, die hard doonhamer said:

The challenge was a textbook yellow. The dissent was also a clear yellow. Rare to see the ref give both of them though.

Ah ok - in which case, I completely withdraw my objection, because I thought he was skirting a second yellow for that too.

For the actual tackle, your striker would have got a shot away if he'd gone past Halkett, but you can shoot from anywhere. It wouldn't have been even close to a clear goal scoring opportunity from that angle and with Popescu closing in.

But yeah, a yellow for the tackle and another for dissent wouldn't have been a mad outcome.

[lennyzer0]

Again, I have to say the standard of reasonable chat after games on here is so much better than the Premiership boards, and does make it hard to continue to believe you're all c***s who just wanted Hearts demoted cos you love Celtic and are jealous if our glorious maroon strips and beautiful stadium.

I mean, I'll keep trying to hate you because I don't want to let down Kickback, but shit...it's a challenge.

[Skyline Drifter]

3 hours ago, die hard doonhamer said:

Just gone and watched that. It's a woeful decision. 2 main differences make it closer to a red than Halkett though. The first is direction of travel. Mebude was headed towards the goal line, whereas Shankland was headed directly in the direction of goal. The second is the distance to a covering player. Popescu was much closer than the covering Livingston player was.

I fully expect that Fitzwater's will be overturned on appeal, and there's more to argue for that one than there is for Halkett.

I dont accept the direction of travel point. Mabude was past Halkett and angling towards goal when he was brought down. 

And Popescu was obviously closer but as lenny says below he wasnt going to get there to stop a shot from inside the box. 

Fitzwater's might get overturned. Interesting to see. I wouldnt. I think they are both red. I also think Nick Walsh is one of the best younger refs around. Not that it precludes him making an error of course but I think he was right.

Either way, the idea that its a clear yellow and not debatable is nonsense.

3 hours ago, lennyzer0 said:

Ah ok - in which case, I completely withdraw my objection, because I thought he was skirting a second yellow for that too.

For the actual tackle, your striker would have got a shot away if he'd gone past Halkett, but you can shoot from anywhere. It wouldn't have been even close to a clear goal scoring opportunity from that angle and with Popescu closing in.

But yeah, a yellow for the tackle and another for dissent wouldn't have been a mad outcome.

Popescu wasnt closing in though. He is like a bus towing a caravan compared to Mabude who was already at full pace. It looks pretty clear to me. Indeed two of our last three goals were scored from an angle like that.

Edited February 14, 2021 by Skyline Drifter

[Otis Blue]

3 hours ago, lennyzer0 said:

Again, I have to say the standard of reasonable chat after games on here is so much better than the Premiership boards, and does make it hard to continue to believe you're all c***s who just wanted Hearts demoted cos you love Celtic and are jealous if our glorious maroon strips and beautiful stadium.

I mean, I'll keep trying to hate you because I don't want to let down Kickback, but shit...it's a challenge.

I know you're just having a wee joke here but I think you'll find very few of the true followers of the "Diddy" clubs who inhabit life below the Premiership that have any positive views or thoughts relating to either half of the Old Firm - don't know what gave you that impression.

Personally, I never wanted Hearts or Thistle or Stranraer relegated but I fail to see what else the League could have done given that they were hit by the consequences of a global pandemic which was killing thousands.  Leagues are decided each season on a statistical basis and so a statistical way to decide key positions was pretty well the only sensible way forward.  I get that it was tough if your club was on the wrong end of the statistics but Hearts were statistically the poorest team in the Premiership last season.  I sympathise with Thistle fans particularly because the statistics were much closer in the Championship and Queens were arguably the poorer of the two teams.  I also get that with a few games left to play it could be argued that Hearts and Thistle could have dug themselves out of trouble - but then again I could win the Lottery next weekend, but we both know that's extremely unlikely and you can't make key decisions on a "what if" basis.  For your information, as I mentioned somewhere else on this thread, I don't hold a grudge against Hearts, anything but - I'm Gorgie born and bred, my old man was a Jambo and my youngest son is a Jambo and I've been to Tynie many times over the years.  I just think that the League were faced with a tough call and using statistics was about the only sensible solution - it was a unique situation and no one's fault.  Apologies in advance for raising the whole thing again!

[Otis Blue]

13 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I dont accept the direction of travel point. Mabude was past Halkett and angling towards goal when he was brought down. 

And Popescu was obviously closer but as lenny says below he wasnt going to get there to stop a shot from inside the box. 

Fitzwater's might get overturned. Interesting to see. I wouldnt. I think they are both red. I also think Nick Walsh is one of the best younger refs around. Not that it precludes him making an error of course but I think he was right.

Either way, the idea that its a clear yellow and not debatable is nonsense.

Popescu wasnt closing in though. He is like a bus towing a caravan compared to Mabude who was already at full pace. It looks pretty clear to me. Indeed two of our last three goals were scored from an angle like that.

For me it was a clear yellow.  When Halkett gave the ref a mouthful that's when I thought he's gonna get a red here - ie a second yellow for the abuse.

[Fae_the_'briggs]

Craig Gordon bellyaching in today's papers about that QoS "penalty" denying him a fourth clean sheet in a row, and of course commenting on the playing surface and also his booking for dissent. He is obviously justified in questioning the penalty decision but he rather blows his own point out of the water in his final sentence where he says that they, (Hearts) have to try and win games by any means. He obviously doesn't appreciate that the opposition are also trying to win games in the same fashion.  I can't wait for the next time Hearts get a awarded a non-penalty or score from an offside position, I expect to see Gordon and Neilson being just as vociferous in their criticism of the officials otherwise they will be shown to be true hypocrites.

[lennyzer0]

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Popescu wasnt closing in though. He is like a bus towing a caravan compared to Mabude who was already at full pace. It looks pretty clear to me. Indeed two of our last three goals were scored from an angle like that.

Ah well, if we all agreed on everything, what would be the point of having discussion boards at all?

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

On 14/02/2021 at 11:32, Skyline Drifter said:

I dont accept the direction of travel point. Mabude was past Halkett and angling towards goal when he was brought down. 

And Popescu was obviously closer but as lenny says below he wasnt going to get there to stop a shot from inside the box. 

Fitzwater's might get overturned. Interesting to see. I wouldnt. I think they are both red. I also think Nick Walsh is one of the best younger refs around. Not that it precludes him making an error of course but I think he was right.

Either way, the idea that its a clear yellow and not debatable is nonsense.

Popescu wasnt closing in though. He is like a bus towing a caravan compared to Mabude who was already at full pace. It looks pretty clear to me. Indeed two of our last three goals were scored from an angle like that.

On that last point, Popescu comprehensively outpaced Mebude in the first half when he tried to outrun him down the line

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

I've just seen that Fitzwater red card, which is an absolute joke decision tbh.  No way that stands up to an appeal

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Craig Gordon bellyaching in today's papers about that QoS "penalty" denying him a fourth clean sheet in a row, and of course commenting on the playing surface and also his booking for dissent. He is obviously justified in questioning the penalty decision but he rather blows his own point out of the water in his final sentence where he says that they, (Hearts) have to try and win games by any means. He obviously doesn't appreciate that the opposition are also trying to win games in the same fashion.  I can't wait for the next time Hearts get a awarded a non-penalty or score from an offside position, I expect to see Gordon and Neilson being just as vociferous in their criticism of the officials otherwise they will be shown to be true hypocrites.

I’ve not read that interview but is it possible that “any means” might have been figurative as opposed to literal.

Or would it cover kidnapping the children of the opposing manager and holding them at gunpoint.

[Skyline Drifter]

On 14/02/2021 at 07:59, die hard doonhamer said:

I fully expect that Fitzwater's will be overturned on appeal, and there's more to argue for that one than there is for Halkett.

** Cough **

[die hard doonhamer]

6 hours ago, Skyline Drifter said:

** Cough **

I'm genuinely baffled by that. But having sat in so many training sessions discussing decisions with a room full of referees and then looking at the guidance from the SFA, I really shouldn't be surprised.

[Skyline Drifter]

1 hour ago, die hard doonhamer said:

I'm genuinely baffled by that. But having sat in so many training sessions discussing decisions with a room full of referees and then looking at the guidance from the SFA, I really shouldn't be surprised.

You shouldn't be baffled because it ticks every criteria for a denial of a goalscoring opportunity red card. As Mebude's did.

They both fall into the category where if the referee wants to he'll find an excuse not to red card by looking at another defender who might vaguely be in the approximate area but in reality both would have seen the forward get a clear opportunity for a shot on goal inside the penalty area with no challenge from anyone else.