Acey Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 I must be missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuthy2k Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 my thoughts also. anyone seen a reply yet of the wallace claim 20seconds later?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleTarts Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 The Hamilton guy made the most of it, most players would of stayed on their feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigieboy Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Push on the back. Stonewaller. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Agreed, i don't think there was any real forward momentum from Wallaces arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Le Clos Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 2 hands in the boys back, stonewall for me. As was the one on Wallace though. If it's not a corner it has to be a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigolo-Aunt Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Thought the Wallace one a couple of mins later was more of a stick on. They brushed that one under the carpet though. Thought the ref was piss poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chat Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Felt Trigger's arm on his back and hit the floor like a sack of spuds. If it was Suso the Hamilton fans would have been giving it the "Cheat, cheat, cheat" crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Push on the back. Stonewaller. . Stonewaller my arse - I've seen them given but it would've been extremely soft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johanes de Silentio Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Woulda been soft, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalMac Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Had the ref seen it clearly a penalty would, most likely, have been given. However, they showed an angle showing the refs view & you could see no foul, not surprised it wasn't given. Wallace's, couldn't really see it properly on TV. Elliott's was soft IMO. He played it well & by that time Hamilton had given it up so never really complained about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beats Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 my thoughts also. anyone seen a reply yet of the wallace claim 20seconds later?? Neither were penaltys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1874robbo Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Push on the back. Stonewaller. . Have to agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Neither were penaltys. That was my feeling at the time. Would need to see them again to be sure but I felt they were both a little on the soft side and had theirs been given against us, I would have been rightly miffed so when we trotted up the other end and didn't get ours I figured it was probably right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge21 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 None were penalties. Craig Burly was nearly greeting because Hearts were winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broomie Hearts Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 what you might call an "Old firm" penalty id say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Who cares? Some fat girnin' faced weegie having a mump about a refereeing decision makes me happy. It wasn't given therefore it wasn't a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 I thought it was a penalty. Not the biggest push ever but it was a push. As was the penalty claim for us just seconds later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N User Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 It would have been hard to complain had it been given - simply because Wallace does push with boths hands. The thing is though, the player felt any sort of contact and threw himself to the ground (like he had been doing all game) I bet the actual contact and force from Wallace was minimal at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol1874 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Thought the Wallace one a couple of mins later was more of a stick on. They brushed that one under the carpet though. Thought the ref was piss poor. I thought the referee did well by us today if I'm honest. No complaints with Ruben being sent off, given the St Johnstone red last week CT can count himself lucky he was only booked, Wallace could easily have conceded a penalty and the one we got was soft to say the least. We'll have worst weeks in terms of refereeing decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoGwash Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 I thought the referee did well by us today if I'm honest. No complaints with Ruben being sent off, given the St Johnstone red last week CT can count himself lucky he was only booked, Wallace could easily have conceded a penalty and the one we got was soft to say the least. We'll have worst weeks in terms of refereeing decisions. A couple of points - Just because a ref gives us a few decisions doesn't make him competent. It's just not us that'll complain this week. Agree Ruben deserved a 2nd yellow but why was the guy who wiped out Zal a couple of minutes later not even spoken to. For what it's worth I buy into the referees are pesh theory rather than the refs are out to get us theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peebles jambo Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 The Hamilton guy made the most of it, most players would of stayed on their feet. the guy went down like he'd been shot,although, had it been for us i'd have been shouting for a spot kick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyJenkins Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Total dive. His hands may have been slightly on his back but I dont think he pushed him at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 the guy went down like he'd been shot,although, had it been for us i'd have been shouting for a spot kick May have been one of the reasons the (poor) ref dodn't give it. That and probably not seeing Lee's hands brush (ever so slightly) the diving runts back. I thought the ref was doing his best to avoid giving is fouls or booking them at certain times today. Clums booking just wasn't. How their captain avoided a card for taking Black out in the first half (admitedly whistle had blown for a foul for us). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol1874 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 A couple of points - Just because a ref gives us a few decisions doesn't make him competent. It's just not us that'll complain this week. I didn't say he was competent, I just thought we got our share of decisions today. Agree Ruben deserved a 2nd yellow but why was the guy who wiped out Zal a couple of minutes later not even spoken to. Probably down to the incompetence of the referee!! For what it's worth I buy into the referees are pesh theory rather than the refs are out to get us theory. That I think is true in most cases. It isn't in one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vintage1874 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 It was a penalty, makes up for the one we did nae get last season or season before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db211833 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 In terms of the rule book, definite penalty. In terms of how games are refereed in the UK, never a pen in a million years, people ask for consistency and they got it with that decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Why is a penalty claim by a side which lost 4-0 being analysed to death, both on ESPN and here? We never saw again the claim at the other end which followed immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number16 Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 There's no force in a "push" there, just Wallace'd hands on the players back, probably to stop the fat lump standing on his feet. There might be a small claim if teh player hadn't had two feet planted firmly on the ground or any part of wallace apart from his arms moved. There's not a chance Wallace is strong enough to do that with his arms alone; barely moving his shoulders or body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossmaroon Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 2 hands in the boys back, stonewall for me. As was the one on Wallace though. If it's not a corner it has to be a penalty. I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linkin- hearts Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 What i don't understand is that those 2 portugese twins spent more time falling over than playing yet nobody called them " dirty diving foreigners". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Currahee! Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 What i don't understand is that those 2 portugese twins spent more time falling over than playing yet nobody called them " dirty diving foreigners". Because they don't play for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavydavy Posted August 21, 2010 Share Posted August 21, 2010 Push on the back. Stonewaller. . McCulloch uses his arms all the time playing for Rnagers so if he gets away with it why should'nt Trigger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 McCulloch uses his arms all the time playing for Rnagers so if he gets away with it why should'nt Trigger? Yeah, 'cause that's how the rule book works and how it should work. Player - Why's that not a penalty ref? Ref - Well, it is against the rules and should be a penalty but my mate McDonald didn't give the same decision against McCulloch yesterday so I aint giving it to you today. Sorry son but, y'know, that's the way it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 This will be the same Burley that only 10 days ago said Scotland aren't cute enough in the box and should be pushing/pulling shirts more to put players off. 2 faced git. PS - I think the main reason it wasn't given because from the refs angle, he couldn't see any push from Wallace, but he did see the Hamilton player over do the flailing of the arms bit. The perfect TV angle showing some contact was from the top of the scaffolding. Maybe wrong but I'm sure there isn't an official up there. As with last week, ref didn't got too much wrong and tried his best to keep the game flowing. Any mistake being identified from a different TV angle in slow motion, or being conned by the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 I didn't think either shouts were penalties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Stinkfinger Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Wasn't a pen in a million years, yellow card for the diving cheat should have been the outcome. Defenders and strikers push and shove in the box and there is nothing you can do about it. Its called holding your ground and is part of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Who cares? Some fat girnin' faced weegie having a mump about a refereeing decision makes me happy. It wasn't given therefore it wasn't a penalty. He's from Ayr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosanostra Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 He's from Ayr. Lanarkshire and everywhere westwards is apparently Glasgow on Kickback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Lanarkshire and everywhere westwards is apparently Glasgow on Kickback. You sure,sometimes it seems everywhere but Gorgie is weegieland on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 There was contact but quite simply the player fell over when he felt contact and went down like a middle aged man ice skating for the first time. The portuguse twins squealed every time anyone touched them and the shouts from the bleating Hamilton fans simply encouraged them more. Players backing up when a cross comes in have little idea what is behind them and the player attacking the ball sees him comimg and automatically puts his hands out to stop contact -- you just cannot stop this -- try it yourself. The penalties should be awarded if there is a push in the back with pressure and intent -- only problem is how do you measure that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted August 22, 2010 Share Posted August 22, 2010 Lanarkshire and everywhere westwards is apparently Glasgow on Kickback. Incorrect, Hermiston Gait westwards, is Glasgow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.