Charlie-Brown Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Stewart all but admitted it was never a pen but that he almost got away with it. There was no contact nevermind minimal. In the dying minutes of a tight match it was 100% the correct thing for Mickey to do but unfortunately it was also the correct decision by the officials however they came to it. The SFA may well be a joke but you my friend are paranoid. So Miko was correct at Hampden v Scotland then by your interpretation? Amazing game in Spain 4-4 now ... was 0-2 then 4-2 now 4-4 5 mins left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malinga the Swinga Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 You aren't me friend and I am not paranoid. Another decision goes against Hearts as for the first time this season, a referee changes his mind after being 100% convinced a penalty had occurred, because an assistant decides he has a better view view although he is further away and has not got a better view. In fact the last time I remember a linesman changing a referees mind was also at Tynecastle when a certain Mr Davis decided he say a foul that no one else, apart from chick Young and Rangers fans, ever saw and convinced the referee that a bye kick for us was in fact a penalty for der hun. Again, did I see the linesman get involved with any other decision yesterday when a fould had been committed. Just the onece when he decided Miko fouled their right back, despite teh fact that nothing happened. Funny that, 90 minutes of play and teh 2 decisions he gave were against us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicTs Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 So Miko was correct at Hampden v Scotland then by your interpretation? Amazing game in Spain 4-4 now ... was 0-2 then 4-2 now 4-4 5 mins left. I think you will find that I have never given Miko any abuse for his decision to dive and gain an advantage for his team. As far as I'm concerned it's part and parcel of football and that professionals will always go down especially in the box when the opportunity arises. The Miko incident has been a negative for Hearts because it was on such a high profile stage and because subsequently he has proven to be pretty rubbish at diving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicTs Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 You aren't me friend and I am not paranoid. Another decision goes against Hearts as for the first time this season, a referee changes his mind after being 100% convinced a penalty had occurred, because an assistant decides he has a better view view although he is further away and has not got a better view. In fact the last time I remember a linesman changing a referees mind was also at Tynecastle when a certain Mr Davis decided he say a foul that no one else, apart from chick Young and Rangers fans, ever saw and convinced the referee that a bye kick for us was in fact a penalty for der hun. Again, did I see the linesman get involved with any other decision yesterday when a fould had been committed. Just the onece when he decided Miko fouled their right back, despite teh fact that nothing happened. Funny that, 90 minutes of play and teh 2 decisions he gave were against us. Paranoia of the highest order. The linesman was correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Nade's header over the bar from 2 yards out was worse than Mole's miss although it isn't shown in the highlights. That doesn't fit folks agenda though.By the way it was closer than 2 yds.The big lump couldn't get his @rse off the ground and somehow headed over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Well we agree on something, Nade is sheite. Unfortunately he remains our best striker. Thanks Romanov. Happy now ? How can he be our best striker.Even Mole has scored more than him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I think you will find that I have never given Miko any abuse for his decision to dive and gain an advantage for his team. As far as I'm concerned it's part and parcel of football and that professionals will always go down especially in the box when the opportunity arises. The Miko incident has been a negative for Hearts because it was on such a high profile stage and because subsequently he has proven to be pretty rubbish at diving. Players have always cheated , well at least since the seventies - diving never used to be a problem until Davie Provan and John MacDonald introduced it in the SPL however downright cynical dirty play or feigning injury often went on and high profile players were as guilty as anyone else...Joe Jordan clearly cheated at Anfield in the WC Play-Off versus Wales when his handball won Scotland a penalty to take them to Argentina 1978 but people forget these things....it is the hypocrisy that I can't stand - Miko was satan according to many and media Pundits are the worst whilst turning a blind eye to just as blatant stuff week after week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 No bye kick was awarded or flag raised though prior to the header going over - you are correct the ball was moving when taken. Not true. I was sitting in line with the linesman and he raised his flag seconds after Aguiar's corner went out. A fair amount of time before Nade got even close to contact. Mole's miss was every bit as bad as Nade's miss last week. Neither player is a "striker". If we are to continue playing with one "striker", then neither can play I am afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hearts_crazy Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Inconclusive I change my mind every time I watch it Mole you can forgive a little with the 2 sheep tryig to block him 1 question (stuck in Leeds so not there) going by those 'highlights' I take it, it was all sheep and Hearts were lucky to get a draw:rolleyes: If you go by those highlights and the BBC match report, (which is utter bull**** BTW) then yes. In truth if we had a goalscorer we would have won that game at a canter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicTs Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Players have always cheated , well at least since the seventies - diving never used to be a problem until Davie Provan and John MacDonald introduced it in the SPL however downright cynical dirty play or feigning injury often went on and high profile players were as guilty as anyone else...Joe Jordan clearly cheated at Anfield in the WC Play-Off versus Wales when his handball won Scotland a penalty to take them to Argentina 1978 but people forget these things....it is the hypocrisy that I can't stand - Miko was satan according to many and media Pundits are the worst whilst turning a blind eye to just as blatant stuff week after week. So are you saying Mickey Stewart should have the book thrown at him then ? Miko was "satan" because he dived in a very high profile game against the country he lives in. The moment he did it the repercussions were obvious to anyone not living on cloud cuckoo land. The fact Hearts had become extremely unpopular due to his surrogate father's behaviour only added to the fact he was going to be an easy target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hearts_crazy Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Nade's header over the bar from 2 yards out was worse than Mole's miss although it isn't shown in the highlights. I forgot about that one, the ball was slightly behind him though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 So are you saying Mickey Stewart should have the book thrown at him then ? Miko was "satan" because he dived in a very high profile game against the country he lives in. The moment he did it the repercussions were obvious to anyone not living on cloud cuckoo land. The fact Hearts had become extremely unpopular due to his surrogate father's behaviour only added to the fact he was going to be an easy target. Any player that "dives" should be punished. The simple fact of the matter is that in Scotland that just does not happen - if you wear green and white hoops or a royal blue jersey you are immune from any sort of punishment for this. PS - I think there was contact between Langfield and Stewart - all be it the contact was minimal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 So are you saying Mickey Stewart should have the book thrown at him then ? Miko was "satan" because he dived in a very high profile game against the country he lives in. The moment he did it the repercussions were obvious to anyone not living on cloud cuckoo land. The fact Hearts had become extremely unpopular due to his surrogate father's behaviour only added to the fact he was going to be an easy target. No what bothers me is the equally blatant cheating that was / is conveniently ignored ie by O'Connor in the same game and on a weekly basis by Nakamura, Boyd, Broadfoot, Clarkson, Darcheville & etc etc. We've had Lithuanians booked for alleged simulation when the exact same thing is carried out by other teams players often in the same games that rarely if ever recieves cards far less criticism....even tangoman on the radio last night was saying Hearts players go down easily but Mikey Stewart isn't one of them...wtf does that mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 No that isn't what he said. he said there was minimal contact. The ref had a clear view and his opinion was a penalty. The linesman is further away and yet his opinion overrides ref's. Why is linesmans opinion more valid than the referee. The SFA are a joke. It honestly amazes me how people view things. Yeah, at the game you call for every decision, yet afterwards you generally say things like "I called for it at the time, but it wasn't a foul". Unfortunately, the ref had his incorrect decision pointed out to him, it would have been a biggie for us. However, I would rather that this was the way that things were to happen on a regular basis, I would rather they thought for a second or two before finalising their decision. The more this happens the better. The referee was bad, bad for both teams. To suggest that he was anti Hearts in any way is infantile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 well stewart has since admitted he went down too easily and that it probably wasn't a penalty. fair play to the guy, at least he's being honest and can probably be forgiven for the split-second decision it takes for a player to go to ground too easily. i wonder if numbskulls like langfield and diamond ever have moments of clarity and realise just how pathetic they look when they indulge in their antics, and not for the first time. of course not, they're too bleedin' stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltonjambo Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I also notice Mole got absolutely clattered after firing over. Well done Fermi ... I was wondering when someone would mention this ... whether or not the Stewart incident was a penalty (and I still happen to believe after seeing it several times that it is inconclusive) one has to wonder how the assistant referee can be so certain up to the point of getting so involved as to change the mind of the referee ... this one after the Mole miss ... was of the stonewall variety ... a late and very mistimed tackle ... strangely unnoticed by the match officials ... I wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilary Briss Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 But it was given - Conroy didn't even hesitate or look to his linesman, he gave it without question.....then he un-awarded it. Exactly, refs are not meant to give pens unless they are 100% sure so he must have had a good view. If he had any doubt he should have consulted the linesman before awarding it. It was a total farce. Never happen in glasgow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 God that's hard to call! I kept watching the replays and could never make out whether Langfield caught Stewart or not: it may be that he didn't, and MS lost his balance going round him and slipped. If that was the case, the linesman was right, and the ref was right to not book MS and award a goal kick. But it's devilishly difficult to tell either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Nade's header over the bar from 2 yards out was worse than Mole's miss although it isn't shown in the highlights. Said that at the time. He was lucky the ball in went out an came back in. Saved his blushes big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Winstone Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 I thought Stewart was unlucky to get the penalty decision given against him! The linseman could not possibly have seen anything significant from his angle, if anything it would have looked more blatant from where he was standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Benoit Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 The fact is there is an argument for the fact that Langfield came for the ball missed and put Stewart off his stride resulting in him slipping, that's still a penalty the same as in the middle of the park someone misses with a slide tackle and the other player in trying to ride the challenge goes over it's a free kick! Undecided by the tv pictures personally but the argument is how can the assistant over-rule when his view was worse than refs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cow Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Just watched it and my opinion hasn't changed from being there yesterday; Langfield catches Stewart's left leg after Stewart cleares the keepers (attempted) initial challenge. It wasn't a dive and there is no way the linesman should have over-ruled it when it was that close. Terrible officiating! Thats what i'm seeing ,i dont know how so many on here are missing this , not wanting to start an argument though , i canny be arsed, its to late:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts of Vladland Posted October 26, 2008 Share Posted October 26, 2008 Wasn't at the game on Saturday but just watched the highlights and Lee's goal was a copy of his goal against Kilmarnock a couple of seasons back exept the run . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboRossi79 Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Thats what i'm seeing ,i dont know how so many on here are missing this , not wanting to start an argument though , i canny be arsed, its to late:) Agreed, Mikey even admitted there was contact albeit minimal. The assistant could not be 100% when telling the ref it was no pen. The ref should have trusted his gut instinct. Also that same assistant missed a blatant offside earlier in the match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRY Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 it pretty much proves it wasn't a penalty. stewart waits on any contact being made and goes down. not a dive as such, pretty much the sort of 'cute' move which the likes of andy wa*ker would describe as clever, unless it's a hearts player natch. the linesman should still have kept his big hooter out of it though because it couldn't have been an easy decision to make with just one look at it in real time. unless he's prepared to make the same call against the OF, he should stick his flag up his erse. the antics of the cheating half-wits langfield and diamond are a disgrace. Completely agree with the bit in bold - it's not the first time either. Remember "Zander's" (sic) overreaction at Pittodrie when he thought Miko had dived...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
51 Shirts -Moments in Time Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 We desperately need to buy a striker in the January window. I don't think Mole will cut the mustard and Nade will not stay fit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keith1964 Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 As has been said, it's difficult to tell if there was contact. However, the only certain thing is that the Scottish linesman could not have seen whether it was a penalty or not and it was therefore an outrageous decision. I also notice Mole got absolutely clattered after firing over. Could easily have been given a pen for that , Mole was pole axed by the defender just after he shot , clear foul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshallschunkychicken Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Looks like a penalty to me, albeit with only a small amount of contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
interista Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 According to the Herald article here (http://www.theherald.co.uk/sport/headlines/display.var.2463462.0.Hearts_1_1_Aberdeen.php) , television replays showed the correct decision was made. Does this man have alternative pictures to those on the BBC site or does he have an agenda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartbeat Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 I dont know how anybody could tell 100%with that. I am in section x right behind the goals and my initial reaction was Mikey went down with no contact, BUT after watching that I am not so sure and simply cannot tell. One thing is for sure very few people in Tynie had a better view than the ref who pointed immediately and must have been 10 meters behind the play. The linesman is three times that distance away and cannot have been sure. Someone told me that the linesman made no attempt to signal the ref and it was purely and simply the Aberdeen players forcing him to go over and speak with linesman. Dont know if thats true. You could say it is another case for cameras and refs taking a wee look but on the other hand it is inconclusive from the BBC footage. I must say Mikey on Setanta highlights didnt make a great case for a pen but if refs who are up with play give a decision and linesman are allowed to overrule them where does that leave us. One thing for cert is at darkheid or hun central it would have been a pen no question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 It is a pity Stewart tried to hurdle over the keeper's arms. If Stewart had been cuter he could have just kept his feet on the ground and let Langfield clatter into him = certain penalty and possible red card. There is no way that the linesman could be 100% sure from where he was, another disgraceful decision goes against Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lambojambo Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Total stonewaller compared to the penalty Celtic were awarded against Motherwell. The weegie media of course deflected any criticsm of Nakamura for diving by focussing on the Well player giving the wee cheat a slap on the head! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Not at all bad considering the conditions, I thought. If you want to see empty, have a look at the highlights from Celtic Park! I was thinking that watching satan tv last night. Just shows you how many oirish do every week. I take it ferries were cancelled due to the weather. Must have been hundreds and hundreds of plastic (seat) paddies there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 When I saw it yesterday I thought it looked marginal but looking at the replay I don't think Mikey dived so there must have been contact. That means it was a penalty and it was disgraceful decision to rescind it. But that miss from Mole was almost as bad and sums up the lack of predatory instinct amongst our current crop of "strikers". Robbo, JC, Rudi, De Vries etc and all of that ilk would have buried it. on't know about Rudi, he never scored into the Gorgie Rd end did he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 I have to say I viewed the highlights and expected to be coming on here saying that however the situation resolved itself it appears the officials got it right But a close look at Stewart going down on the replay and you can see that his ankles were "tapped" together - this is what brought him down. Now what wasnt clear was how they clipped each other but the general motion indicates it was by being touched or by touching the keeper. I remember the pundits defence of the Fyssas sending of re Maloney being along the lines of - well if a defender dives in and a player has to take action to avoid being contacted this is still a foul.... Anyway, that aside, just when is Zaliukas getting dropped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MackaysCentreSpot Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 on't know about Rudi, he never scored into the Gorgie Rd end did he? He did at Robbies Testimonial. His first ever goal at that end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf's Mate Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 Has Mickey come out and said anything. If he came out and said there was contact then that would be end of story for me, as I doubt he would lie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted October 27, 2008 Share Posted October 27, 2008 He did at Robbies Testimonial. His first ever goal at that end. First time I ever saw him play whilst not sitting in that end. Barstard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.