downendcity Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 hour ago, formerly known as ivan said: I lost interest at the point I read...Tunnock’s Caramel Wafer Cup Semi-Final In view of the tribunal's decision, it sounds more like the Cadbury's Fudge Cup! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spud55 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 That is a shocker, bad enough that the ref gave it as a dive, I can just about see an argument for not giving the foul, (not much) but to give it as a dive is not only piss poor from the ref but to then to not just not overturn the decision but to actually agree with it is an absolute disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 13 hours ago, Natchfever said: Wow. What the **** was the panel looking at ? He dives. Contact isn’t a foul. Stay on your feet and play the game, don’t throw yourself to the ground looking for the penalty! If that incident happens in his own half he probably carries on. its a contact game, if you choose to thrown yourself to the floor, you’ve chosen to dive and ultimately seek to deceive the official. Too many ill educated commentators and pundits often pull out the ‘there was contact’ card. Contact isn’t a foul, it isn’t netball....yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 14 hours ago, Denbury Red said: I think that’s the real point they are making - from the clip - there was clear contact and the player went down because of it - the issue would be whether or not it would be deemed a foul or not. We have seen this in English football where there has been a clear error by officials, and where, as in this case, it prevents a player from playing in a potentially ‘once in a lifetime’ match re-enforces the fact that there should be the ability to appeal ‘any yellow card (whether or not this is a second or first yellow) where undoubted evidence shows the referees reason for the card can be proved ‘totally wrong’. This is where football needs to move with the times ..... I’m sure he would have thrown himself to the floor had he been just outside his own half Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarcusX Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 25 minutes ago, 054123 said: He dives. Contact isn’t a foul. its a contact game, if you choose to thrown yourself to the floor, you’ve chosen to dive and ultimately seek to deceive the official. Too many I’ll educated commentators and pundits often pull out the ‘there was contact’ card. Contact isn’t a foul, it isn’t netball....yet. That is not a dive. You could maybe argue it's not a foul it's just a coming together but clearly the contact/momentum took him off his feet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 20 minutes ago, MarcusX said: That is not a dive. You could maybe argue it's not a foul it's just a coming together but clearly the contact/momentum took him off his feet Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderCraig Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leveller Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 hour ago, 054123 said: He dives. Contact isn’t a foul. Stay on your feet and play the game, don’t throw yourself to the ground looking for the penalty! If that incident happens in his own half he probably carries on. its a contact game, if you choose to thrown yourself to the floor, you’ve chosen to dive and ultimately seek to deceive the official. Too many ill educated commentators and pundits often pull out the ‘there was contact’ card. Contact isn’t a foul, it isn’t netball....yet. As a general comment I completely agree that far too many fouls are given when two players simply collide. I know intent isn’t necessary for a foul, but, for example, when two players both stretch for the ball and miss, but they have a clash of feet/legs, how do you decide that one is to blame and which? There is far too much assumption that if two players bump into each other, that the one who hits the deck has been fouled. However, in this case the player that went down clearly didn’t dive. The impact knocked him off balance and he wasn’t anticipating it at all IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nbafc Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 The speed at which the ref blows up for a dive too - he was "triggered" to use a cricket term. As others have said, having presented a thorough appeal the decision to uphold makes you wonder what the expert panel have seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 2 minutes ago, Leveller said: As a general comment I completely agree that far too many fouls are given when two players simply collide. I know intent isn’t necessary for a foul, but, for example, when two players both stretch for the ball and miss, but they have a clash of feet/legs, how do you decide that one is to blame and which? There is far too much assumption that if two players bump into each other, that the one who hits the deck has been fouled. However, in this case the player that went down clearly didn’t dive. The impact knocked him off balance and he wasn’t anticipating it at all IMHO. It’s a fair point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 2 hours ago, 054123 said: He dives. Contact isn’t a foul. Stay on your feet and play the game, don’t throw yourself to the ground looking for the penalty! If that incident happens in his own half he probably carries on. its a contact game, if you choose to thrown yourself to the floor, you’ve chosen to dive and ultimately seek to deceive the official. Too many ill educated commentators and pundits often pull out the ‘there was contact’ card. Contact isn’t a foul, it isn’t netball....yet. Never in a million years was that a dive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 minute ago, Natchfever said: Never in a million years was that a dive. That’s certainly an opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOTBLUE Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 14 hours ago, Major Isewater said: You ain’t seen me ... right ? Roight......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsince1994 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 3 hours ago, 054123 said: He dives. Contact isn’t a foul. Stay on your feet and play the game, don’t throw yourself to the ground looking for the penalty! If that incident happens in his own half he probably carries on. its a contact game, if you choose to thrown yourself to the floor, you’ve chosen to dive and ultimately seek to deceive the official. Too many ill educated commentators and pundits often pull out the ‘there was contact’ card. Contact isn’t a foul, it isn’t netball....yet. So what? Every tackle isn't either a dive or a foul. He went down because there was significant contact as he was at full tilt, therefore he didn't dive. Doesn't matter if it was a foul really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 25 minutes ago, redsince1994 said: So what? Every tackle isn't either a dive or a foul. He went down because there was significant contact as he was at full tilt, therefore he didn't dive. Doesn't matter if it was a foul really. Is your opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsince1994 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 1 hour ago, 054123 said: Is your opinion Nope. Stating that contact doesn't have to be either a foul or a dive is a fact. If two players go shoulder to shoulder and one ends up on the deck (for example) and a foul isn't given they haven't dived have they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banjo Island Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 3 hours ago, 054123 said: That’s certainly an opinion Looking at the footage i would say its a fact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsquirrel Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 i think the panel used the appeal fund for lunch while they discussed it ,when they realised the card was wrong,no one would give the money back so they had to uphold it. this is Scotland after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 3 hours ago, 054123 said: That’s certainly an opinion Quite. Not saying that was a nailed down foul either, although to me, it was more a foul than a dive, but more likely a coming together which wasn't blown up in years gone by but is now in the vast majority of cases. Feel a bit sorry for the bloke. Authorities closing ranks . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 18 minutes ago, Banjo Island said: Looking at the footage i would say its a fact Quite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
054123 Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 46 minutes ago, redsince1994 said: Nope. Stating that contact doesn't have to be either a foul or a dive is a fact. If two players go shoulder to shoulder and one ends up on the deck (for example) and a foul isn't given they haven't dived have they. Great point in general. In this specific instance I think he dived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 Anyone who might think there's any integrity within footballing authorities is naive in the extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 6 hours ago, MarcusX said: That is not a dive. You could maybe argue it's not a foul it's just a coming together but clearly the contact/momentum took him off his feet Is not one of the problems that these days almost every 'contact' is deemed a foul. Perhaps the tribunal have viewed the footage but rightly determined it not to be a foul but their blinkered thinking doesn't enable them to conceive that non foul physical contact could cause a player to fall over. As a result they would have to conclude that he dived! It's mad, but entirely possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pheasant plucker Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 Gotta be honest here. I don't think it was either a foul or a dive. The guy shouldn't have got a yellow (and therefore the red) as it was a definite coming together. BUT...its a man's game, and you are entitle to use your body strength to out-muscle and put an opposing player off balance, and I think that's what's happened here. He was moving quickly and was knocked off balance for sure, but a professional footballer knows what's probably coming in that situation. Also, anyone who has ever played can see he 'made the most of it'. But to reiterate: For me, NO foul and NO Card, and therefore no issue if this was the case! Just a coming together IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 On 20/02/2020 at 11:15, Coxy27 said: Are the rules different in Scotland then? - I didn't think you could appeal a second yellow? On 20/02/2020 at 12:01, bcfc01 said: How the hell could they call that simulation ? Are they stupid ? I am confused. If you can not review a second yellow under the rules then the decision is correct as they had no latitude to review the incident. HOWEVER. If they were able to review the decision of the ref then they have drawn a strange conclusion in view of one of the angles in particular. Can someone clarify for me. Were the commission able to review the incident or not under SFA/Eufa rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E.G.Red Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 12 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said: I lost interest at the point I read...Tunnock’s Caramel Wafer Cup Semi-Final I like Tunnock’s wafers (and their tea cakes) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sglosbcfc Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 No player should ever be ruled out of a final unless he is stupid enough to chin somebody in the semi. I cannot believe the great players that have missed massive finals because of this stupid rule. All players play unless it is violent conduct in the semi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerly known as ivan Posted February 21, 2020 Report Share Posted February 21, 2020 3 hours ago, E.G.Red said: I like Tunnock’s wafers (and their tea cakes) They are great tea cakes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fodbarmyarmy Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 15 hours ago, 054123 said: In this specific instance I think he dived. Sorry to swim upstream here but I tend to agree....i see a player trying to make a challenge outside of the box look like it was inside and therefore con the officials into a pen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjak Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 On 21/02/2020 at 10:22, NOTBLUE said: Roight......... "This week I have been mostly ignoring the Bleedin Obvious".............and what a Knut that number 8 was for applauding the sending off, after he committed the foul?........The Caramel Wafer Cup Final Will never be the same again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.