Naismith booking

[on&up2017]

Seeing as there's all this media attention to Scott Brown and now Alfredo Morelos with his booking for diving, so I thought i'd start one  for Steven Naismith. 

 

The attached photo (I think, hope) is from the incident yesterday where Naismith and only he was booked!?!? At the time I thought both of them went in with studs up or at least high, either a booking for both or nothing but a word in their ears. BUT, Beaton yellow carded only the Hearts player, quelle surprise. 

 

Discuss... this and/or the other aforementioned incidents.

 

[jambo19]

For me it was a 50/50 and there to be won. Clearly Beaton has never played the game before and doesn't understand the rule and why Naismith went in. 

 

He was quick to pull the card out as well. Really it looks like Naismith pulled out the challenge to avoid going studs up. Shame you can't appeal these as it gives us a bad discipline record but break down each yellow and we aren't a dirty team

[Beast Boy]

Scottish referees are utterly dreadful.

[Alex Kintner]

Given how argumentative Naismith can be with referees and the fact he didn’t complain at all suggests it was a deserved booking. Was opposite side of pitch from me so couldn’t see challenge clearly

[JAMBONI]

He had the yellow card out of his pocket within seconds of the incident. 

[savage]

Got booked cause the sheep player threw himself on the deck.  If naisy went down as well don't think he would have got the yellow

[Allowayjambo1874]

Naismith had been moaning at the referee all game, if you keep that up it usually ends one way. Tin hat on he didn’t argue with the ref suggesting he did catch him though at the time I felt it was harsh.

 

Beaton is just inept, before the conspiracy theorists start up Don Cowie got away with a stone cold yellow card for the one on the main stand touch line as did an Aberdeen player on the other side of the pitch. 

 

More worrying is that Lafferty is getting nothing from refs and is punished for players going down when he’s not touched them (early on yesterday there was another one from a sheep defender). 

[Beast Boy]

Referees are only supposed to react to incidents that THEY SEE. Scottish referees do not do this. They assume based on crowd reaction and reputation. Is brutal to watch.

[HMFC 86]

Thought it was a poor decision by the ref, really looked a 50/50 with both players going for the ball

[Bazzas right boot]

Aberdeen player got him booked.

 

He went for the ball, he missed it.

ref thought foot was high, so booked him.

 

Aberdeen guy won the ball, but made the most of the " contact "

 

move on, I say.

 

Naismith deserved a booking he had two or three borderline fouls, probably booked for the wrong one tho!

[Bazzas right boot]

8 minutes ago, HMFC 86 said:

Thought it was a poor decision by the ref, really looked a 50/50 with both players going for the ball

 

Aberdeen lad won the ball tho, naismith didn't. 

[Prof]

The yellow card almost came out as the two players challenged. A 50:50 situation that didn't merit a yellow for one player.

[Bazzas right boot]

16 minutes ago, Bez said:

Referees are only supposed to react to incidents that THEY SEE. Scottish referees do not do this. They assume based on crowd reaction and reputation. Is brutal to watch.

 

 

Aberdeen players make the most of everything as well. then bounce up if no free-ick given. Beaton handled it not too badly overall yesterday 

[Dr Lager]

Beaton is inept. Typical bitter incompetent Scottish fifa list nobody.

[wavydavy]

3 minutes ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

Aberdeen player got him booked.

 

He went for the ball, he missed it.

ref thought foot was high, so booked him.

 

Aberdeen guy won the ball, but made the most of the " contact "

 

move on, I say.

 

Naismith deserved a booking he had two or three borderline fouls, probably booked for the wrong one tho!

 

You are probably correct but on the same principal Christie should have seen red as he should have been booked at least twice before he was hooked.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 minute ago, Prof said:

The yellow card almost came out as the two players challenged. A 50:50 situation that didn't merit a yellow for one player.

 

I'd agree but Aberdeen guy won the ball, naismith didn't. 

The juventus guy in midweek coped it for a similar thing, going for ball, never won it. second booking.

 

happens all the time, the high foot thing is vague.

[Unknown user]

42 minutes ago, Frank1874 said:

Given how argumentative Naismith can be with referees and the fact he didn’t complain at all suggests it was a deserved booking. Was opposite side of pitch from me so couldn’t see challenge clearly

I seem to remember he was clearly unhappy and let the ref know as much but I'd need to see it again

[Bazzas right boot]

2 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

You are probably correct but on the same principal Christie should have seen red as he should have been booked at least twice before he was hooked.

 

I never noticed Christie until he was subbed yesterday.

 

The game imo never merited any red cards and was refereed well.

[Alex Kintner]

I was more annoyed at the ref for having a word with Naismith after the incident where he booted the Aberdeen player in the face with the ball

[fabienleclerq]

It wasn't a yellow, I think a combination of the red being too close to the incident and the aberdeen player going down like a tart got him booked.

[TheBigO]

9 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

You are probably correct but on the same principal Christie should have seen red as he should have been booked at least twice before he was hooked.

This was the problem. The inconsistency of what is and isnt a yellow. Or even a foul.

 

Christie had probably 4 challenges which the ref deemed yellows when other players - both Hearts and Abdn - committed similar offences. And as mentioned, Don should’ve been booked too. Same every week. Its like the ref is making it up.

 

Last week Calkachan got booked for a totally nothing run of the mill foul but others were allowed similar or worse.

 

Fact is you have to say compared to most weeks the ref wasn’t terrible yesterday, but if thats considered a good enough performance in our top flight it shows how low expectations are.

[Beast Boy]

5 minutes ago, Frank1874 said:

I was more annoyed at the ref for having a word with Naismith after the incident where he booted the Aberdeen player in the face with the ball

 

Enjoyed that.

[HMFC 86]

22 minutes ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

 

Aberdeen lad won the ball tho, naismith didn't. 

 

He did, but it was never a booking

[Fandango]

Beaton  couldn’t get the card out his pocket quick enough.... under a second I rekon 

A new commonwealth record!

The prick ✊️???

[3fingersreid]

30 minutes ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

 

Aberdeen lad won the ball tho, naismith didn't. 

That in itself doesn’t merit a booking tho , he didn’t book Cowie for a clear kick out in the first half .

referees react too quickly for my liking , taking a breath before making a decision would help . 

 

The ball in considines face face was funny tho ?

[Captain Sausage]

Beaton had a good game yesterday. Reffed it well. 

 

Shouldve booked Cowie and a couple of the Aberdeen guys were lucky but overall I don’t think he was very noticeable. 

 

Only decision that had me seething was was the free kick he gave when Logan was under pressure at Section G and he just fell over with Lafferty nearby. 

[Justin Z]

1 hour ago, jambo19 said:

For me it was a 50/50 and there to be won. Clearly Beaton has never played the game before and doesn't understand the rule and why Naismith went in.

 

Which rule are you referring to here?

[Victorian]

He did argue his case,  but not much.

[jamboozy]

13 minutes ago, houstonjambo said:

Beaton had a good game yesterday. Reffed it well. 

 

Shouldve booked Cowie and a couple of the Aberdeen guys were lucky but overall I don’t think he was very noticeable. 

 

Only decision that had me seething was was the free kick he gave when Logan was under pressure at Section G and he just fell over with Lafferty nearby. 

This is where I'm at , Logan went down like a Leith tart, if Lafferty goes down he would have been booked.

A guy in section D a couple of rows in front of me shouted at Logan "watch you don't trip o'er yer haund bag son" even Logan let out a chuckle.

[johnthomas]

27 minutes ago, 3fingersreid said:

That in itself doesn’t merit a booking tho , he didn’t book Cowie for a clear kick out in the first half .

referees react too quickly for my liking , taking a breath before making a decision would help . 

 

The ball in considines face face was funny tho ?

Funny or not surely it was a Hearts throw in ?

 

[...a bit disco]

11 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Which rule are you referring to here?

 

When it comes to not understanding the rules, there's a lot to choose from in Beaton's case, Justin.

 

 

[Justin Z]

1 minute ago, ...a bit disco said:

 

When it comes to not understanding the rules, there's a lot to choose from in Beaton's case, Justin.

 

 

 

Haha, sadly true.

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

 

I never noticed Christie until he was subbed yesterday.

 

The game imo never merited any red cards and was refereed well.

 

I would agree that there was nothing that merited a straight red however two bookings is a sending off and that should have happened to Chrsitie.

 

Christie dived on two occasions and had a bad tackle which the ref totally ignored. Mackay - Steven petulantly kicked the ball away after the ref awarded a free kick to us right in front of the ref and he ignored it that was also a booking. If Lafferty had dived or kicked the ball away then I am pretty sure he would have been booked so to say the game was refereed well is nonsense.

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, TheBigO said:

This was the problem. The inconsistency of what is and isnt a yellow. Or even a foul.

 

Christie had probably 4 challenges which the ref deemed yellows when other players - both Hearts and Abdn - committed similar offences. And as mentioned, Don should’ve been booked too. Same every week. Its like the ref is making it up.

 

Last week Calkachan got booked for a totally nothing run of the mill foul but others were allowed similar or worse.

 

Fact is you have to say compared to most weeks the ref wasn’t terrible yesterday, but if thats considered a good enough performance in our top flight it shows how low expectations are.

 

I suppose by his standards it was one of his better performances however still way below what you would expect in the top league in Scottish football.

 

As is ssaid repeatedly nobody expects refs to get it right every time however ther should be a much better level of consistency than there is.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, 3fingersreid said:

That in itself doesn’t merit a booking tho , he didn’t book Cowie for a clear kick out in the first half .

referees react too quickly for my liking , taking a breath before making a decision would help . 

 

The ball in considines face face was funny tho ?

 

I agree, I started a thread about high feet mid week, Just because you miss the ball, doesn't mean it's a booking, however Naismith deserved a booking first half. He had 2/3  "energetic" tackles.

 

Cowies imo wasn't that bad, I think the fact the Aberdeen guy jumped and slid/ fell  made it look worse and more of a kick when it was a rather aggressive attempt to get the ball- ended up  a rash swipe as he was rather late! could have been a booking- much ado about nothing imo.

 

the ball to face was a cracker.

 

 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

 

I agree, I started a thread about high feet mid week, Just because you miss the ball, doesn't mean it's a booking, however Naismith deserved a booking first half. He had 2/3  "energetic" tackles.

 

Cowies imo wasn't that bad, I think the fact the Aberdeen guy jumped and slid/ fell  made it look worse and more of a kick when it was a rather aggressive attempt to get the ball- ended up  a rash swipe as he was rather late! could have been a booking- much ado about nothing imo.

 

the ball to face was a cracker.

 

 

What I don't understand is that the Aberdeen guy's foot was higher, that's how he win the ball. If Naismith had gone even higher and won the ball, would the other lad have been done for high foot?

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

Then let Cowie off. I reckon Cowie got away with his as Christie was fortunate not to be booked 

[letsalldothebeattie]

50/50 for me and harsh yellow considering some challenges that followed Naismith booking as well

[3fingersreid]

1 hour ago, johnthomas said:

Funny or not surely it was a Hearts throw in ?

 

Absolutely 

 

42 minutes ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

 

I agree, I started a thread about high feet mid week, Just because you miss the ball, doesn't mean it's a booking, however Naismith deserved a booking first half. He had 2/3  "energetic" tackles.

 

Cowies imo wasn't that bad, I think the fact the Aberdeen guy jumped and slid/ fell  made it look worse and more of a kick when it was a rather aggressive attempt to get the ball- ended up  a rash swipe as he was rather late! could have been a booking- much ado about nothing imo.

 

the ball to face was a cracker.

 

 

He had been pulled up for fouling prior to it whether they were fouls or not could be debated as well however that ball in the coupon was funny ?

[1953]

I watched it again on Alba and it looked like Naesmith pulled his boot away at the last minute. At the time from the Wheatfield it just looked like both going for a 50/50 ball and nothing much in it.

[PUMPHY]

Naismith should know by now he should not continue to argue with refs as it just gets there backs up and will take further action if they continue mouthing off

[Deek]

No debate,  it was a booking. It was right below me and was late and high. He had done something similar five minutes before.

[ElGee1973]

I thought it was a harsh booking partially aided by the Aberdeen players "squealing" when challenged most of the time. This challenge was not far from where I sit & felt it was harsh at the time. However, Naismith did keep his protests going with Beaton at a challenge later on in the half. I think it was Hughes that had to calm him down, I thought Beaton was going to show him a second yellow because of his frustration of conceding a soft free kick. Saying that, Shinnie seemed to be trying to influence the referee. 

[Don Dan]

Never a booking and it should be appealed. Said so at the game (in real time it was 50/50) Beaton made some strange calls but nothing that would surprise me. 

[Deevers]

Beaton is probably the most inconsistent referee in Scotland.  He could not wait the get the card out. Never a booking - far worse followed and was ignored by him. The game here is in real trouble with the likes of him and Dallas  being  paraded as our "elite" referees.  Laughable if it wasn't such an indictment of those who run the referees side of things at the SFA.

 

[Mikey1874]

17 minutes ago, Dannie Boy said:

Never a booking and it should be appealed. Said so at the game (in real time it was 50/50) Beaton made some strange calls but nothing that would surprise me. 

 

Can't appeal a regular booking (just simulation/diving and mistaken identity).

[Mikey1874]

Aberdeen player got booked for nothing shortly after then Beaton settled down to a good enough game. 

[ri Alban]

Milinkovic was lucky with slide tackle. Caught the Aberdeen boy.

[Dr Ian Malcolm]

Naismith was late and cleaned him out. Was a booking. Weird decision to get worked up about.

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

Naismith does argue a lot with the refs.  If you do that, your name needs to be Scott Brown.

 

Both my mate and me said at the break we would not be surprised if Naismith was subbed.  He did come out again,  as we all know, so maybe CL got him to cool it.

 

I like SN: for the shock and awe of his style, if nothing else.  It would be great if we could keep him.