Scottish Premiership Motherwell V Heart Of Midlothian Sat 4 Feb 12:15

[superward]

Yellow every day of the week for me. Didn't think it was out of control or reckless, solid connection with the ball, won it and momentum connected with man.

 

Anyway it's Saturday night and we're still 6th which is nice. We move on.

[Pepper]

Yellow every day of the week for me. Didn't think it was out of control or reckless, solid connection with the ball, won it and momentum connected with man. Yella

Fair enough, although is the scenario you have described not the exact reason that the rules were changed?

[Jay]

tapatalk_1486221649687.jpeg

Ouch.

 

I'm really not a fan of using still images of a slide tackle to justify a decision one way or another (not saying you're doing so by the way, but it's something I've seen on Twitter and Facebook).

 

We are now in the age of "trial by Sportscene" where a good challenge, that involved a follow through due to momentum, can be made to look far, far worse than it ever was by photographs and slow motion replays. I reckon if you looked through the photographs of fair slide tackles from most matches, you could devise an alternative match report in which there were numerous sending offs.

 

Consider a player winning a header and then falling onto the opponent, or when a player kicks the opponent's studs because they were later in the challenge. Those kinds of events during a game pass without anyone taking much notice, yet photograph them and you could claim it was malicious or dangerous.

 

For me, it's not a red card. Football often involves momentum, and momentum often involves someone getting a sore one accidentally. It is simply not possible for McHugh to have made the challenge - a challenge he won and was entitled to go for - without being in the position shown in that image. Yes, Cowie is unfortunate to have bore the brunt of the follow through, but that doesn't mean it has to be a foul, yellow card, or red card. I don't think McHugh was out of control or reckless at all, which seems to be why it could be interpreted as a red card.

 

If folk disagree because of the challenge itself, then that's fine - it's all about opinions. But when photographs like the above are used as genuine justification for a sending off, I think it starts to become a problem because it paints a picture that is plainly untrue.

 

As for the game, I wasn't really a fan of the line-up pre-match but I don't think McGhee can be blamed for the overall outcome of the match. The line-up itself may have worked had McHugh stayed on the field so I think any criticism of McGhee in terms of his approach - which I did pre-match - is based purely on speculation. When you factor in that the first goal was a wicked deflection, today's defeat was more to do with factors outwith McGhee's control than anything else.

[gilmour]

Apparently Hearts last away win was v......us!

 

Not sure of the point I'm making.

 

EDIT. I suppose the point I'm making is Hearts have dropped points all over the place to every single team in the league, including EVERY bottom half team but are now 9 points to the good and 9-1 up on aggregate v us this season!

 

Yes we can moan about the red card but in 3 games v them we should've taken at least a point considering all our peers have.

They had a big confidence boosting win against rangers. Previous performance goes out the window after that

[gilmour]

 

I'm really not a fan of using still images of a slide tackle to justify a decision one way or another (not saying you're doing so by the way, but it's something I've seen on Twitter and Facebook).

 

We are now in the age of "trial by Sportscene" where a good challenge, that involved a follow through due to momentum, can be made to look far, far worse than it ever was by photographs and slow motion replays. I reckon if you looked through the photographs of fair slide tackles from most matches, you could devise an alternative match report in which there were numerous sending offs.

 

Consider a player winning a header and then falling onto the opponent, or when a player kicks the opponent's studs because they were later in the challenge. Those kinds of events during a game pass without anyone taking much notice, yet photograph them and you could claim it was malicious or dangerous.

 

For me, it's not a red card. Football often involves momentum, and momentum often involves someone getting a sore one accidentally. It is simply not possible for McHugh to have made the challenge - a challenge he won and was entitled to go for - without being in the position shown in that image. Yes, Cowie is unfortunate to have bore the brunt of the follow through, but that doesn't mean it has to be a foul, yellow card, or red card. I don't think McHugh was out of control or reckless at all, which seems to be why it could be interpreted as a red card.

 

If folk disagree because of the challenge itself, then that's fine - it's all about opinions. But when photographs like the above are used as genuine justification for a sending off, I think it starts to become a problem because it paints a picture that is plainly untrue.

 

As for the game, I wasn't really a fan of the line-up pre-match but I don't think McGhee can be blamed for the overall outcome of the match. The line-up itself may have worked had McHugh stayed on the field so I think any criticism of McGhee in terms of his approach - which I did pre-match - is based purely on speculation. When you factor in that the first goal was a wicked deflection, today's defeat was more to do with factors outwith McGhee's control than anything else.

What line up did you want ????

 

Harts midfields very strong. Pearson not match fit and McDonald suspended. So no 2 up front with a strong midfield. Went for Ainsworths pace but he was a missing man again. No Johnson down the wing either as he's gone. So a one sided attack. After sending off went for a more central attack that was working and we were getting very close. Cadence and lasley the villains. But tired legs and players pushin too far (no fault) made the score line flatter them. All in all not too down as we weren't far away. Just bad luck and being a man down for so long it was inevitable. With that spirit and better discipline we will be fine. Btw I'm far from a happy clapper just basing on what I saw today

[Jay]

What line up did you want ????

 

Harts midfields very strong. Pearson not match fit and McDonald suspended. So no 2 up front with a strong midfield. Went for Ainsworths pace but he was a missing man again. No Johnson down the wing either as he's gone. So a one sided attack. After sending off went for a more central attack that was working and we were getting very close. Cadence and lasley the villains. But tired legs and players pushin too far (no fault) made the score line flatter them. All in all not too down as we weren't far away. Just bad luck and being a man down for so long it was inevitable. With that spirit and better discipline we will be fine. Btw I'm far from a happy clapper just basing on what I saw today

 

Well pre-match I was thinking about two main points - firstly, that Dingwall midweek saw a good, solid team performance that resulted in a victory. Secondly, I personally think that our blatant inconsistency this season - both in terms of performances and results - is, at least in some small way, related to the complete inconsistency in team selection, where our line-up often changes every match and we don't seem to have anything close to a settled side. Therefore, I quite liked the idea of going into today's game trying to keep as close a line-up to that of Dingwall - obviously with a slight reshuffle to tackle McDonald's suspension, and obviously taking a few measures to counter specific threats.

 

However, as I've said above, McGhee's line-up could very well have ended up working had there not been any sending off.

[Spiderpig]

The only error Mcghee made today was starting Ainsworth he never looks interested and contributes feck all to the team he can GTF any time for me. The rest of the team looked ok but all i would say is that when Lucas and Pearson came on we looked a different team the midfield actually started to compete so heres hoping they will start every week.

[weeyin]

They say that the bad decisions even themselves out over a season, well we must be due some belters in the last quarter of the season

They do say that, but from a purely statistical basis it's not even close to true. Partly because there is a human element, but even if there wasn't, statistical probabilities converge as you reach infinity - not half a football season.

 

Now I need to get back to washing my anorak. The dandruff leaves a terrible mess in the hood.

[weeyin]

I also take no satisfaction in pointing out I was 100% correct about Ainsworth not being the answer in the position he was played today.

 

I like him, but the one thing he does well is play wide right and attack the left back. Watching the game on telly today I don't think his name was even mentioned in the first half.

[milo]

Still haven't seen McHugh's red card challenge yet but for the 1st goal, what an absolutely half arsed attempt that was to close down the shot by any player in the vicinity before Lasley obviously thought "s'ppose" and went remotely near the scorer. Pathetic.

 

2nd one was a good counter attack I suppose but nobody was staying with the runners. Basic stuff.

 

3rd goal was a catalogue of errors, first with the new boy making an arse of it in the corner and gifting possession, before nobody marking the scorer then Samson getting beat with a trundler along the deck straight down the middle of the goal.

 

Same players, same mistakes, no lessons learned. 22 games later......

[swami]

Here's my 10 cents:

 

I thought the starting 11 was dreadful, but it actually seemed to work.

 

The most annoying thing about the first goal wasn't that Lasley was slow to close the ball down, it's that the spot that the shot was hit from is pretty much exactly where McHugh would have been.

 

As petty an argument as it is, if Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen or even Hearts had seen the amount of dodgy red cards that we have over the past month there would be an outcry in the media. There's absolutely no point in us appealing because it won't be overturned, but Rangers defenders can punch the opposition and get away with it. I'm still not sure that Lucas should have gone against Accies, let alone the last couple.

 

I said after the game that I genuinely can't gauge how we are playing at the moment, mainly due to the fact that we are losing men to shite decisions nearly every week.

 

This is definitely a rant. I am pure raging with the world at the minute.

[Onthefringes]

Not disagreeing with your main point, but, not sure Lucas should have gone? Behave yourself.

 

The rules are you have to be controlled in the tackle. Winning the ball is irrelevant - which is a poor rule to be fair & the problem is further compounded by poor interpretation of the rules by those paid handsomely to handle these situations.

 

Nobody else feel the second today was offside? I was directly in line & Heneghan took the high line perfectly for me & Goncalves was offside when the ball was played through. No claim by hand in the air & no protest after the goal may suggest different.

[Kmcalpin]

I very much agree with Sieb and Jay's comments on another thread. Pre match I thought Mark McGhee would set us up to try to stop Hearts and so he did. Thats acceptable to a certain extent but not to the extent we did. Our formation was what a 3-5-1-1 or a 5-4-1? Whatever it was, the players were not comfortable and it showed. Despite having 5 at the back we still played very narrowly. We didn't compete in the midfield and Hearts' work rate was far higher than ours. We simply didn't get in their faces. Frequently, Cadden and Ainsworth were closed down by 2/3 or even 4 opponents on occasions. Ainsworth and Moult did not link up well at all, playing far too far apart and on occasion Moult playing wide left with Ainsworth in the middle. Our lone striker was far too isolated - no surprise there then. All too often in the first half we resorted to long high balls to whoever was up front with the inevitable results. That was because we picked the wrong midfield. No Lucas or Pearson to provide some offensive support. It was noticeable that after they came on we enjoyed our best spell. Up until the red card did our plan work? I'd argue no. We were very rarely seen as an attacking force and seemed content to hold on for 0-0 draw. It was only a matter of time before Hearts scored. However the first goal came that was our plan scuppered.

 

However the main talking point was the referee. Andrew Dallas had a shocking and inconsistent game. As early as the 3rd minute the Hearts no 77 (whatever his name was) took to diving and that continued for 90+ minutes as Ian Cathro will know. Lasley was rightly booked for hauling him down but when he returned the favour he got off scot free with no foul even given. It was very annoying to see him plead with the referee later to book Lasley for a second time for guess what - diving! You can imagine my disgust when he scored 2 goals - in my book he didn't deserve them. The Martin booking was downright bizarre as others have said. However in my view it should have been a red card (albeit in error) as Moult was tearing into the box with a clear sight of goal. A goalscoring opportunity if ever there was. I thought Heneghan's yellow card was very harsh and McHugh's red downright absurd.

 

A disappointing and frustrating day all round.

[Waldo]

Not disagreeing with your main point, but, not sure Lucas should have gone? Behave yourself.

 

The rules are you have to be controlled in the tackle. Winning the ball is irrelevant - which is a poor rule to be fair & the problem is further compounded by poor interpretation of the rules by those paid handsomely to handle these situations.

 

Nobody else feel the second today was offside? I was directly in line & Heneghan took the high line perfectly for me & Goncalves was offside when the ball was played through. No claim by hand in the air & no protest after the goal may suggest different.

But he was 'in control' of his challenge. Both feet off the ground? Yes, but both feet are off the ground when you run.

How many Hearts players were demanding a red? Not important until you suggest he wasn't offside because we never claimed for it.

And, IMO, there is no way Lucas should have been off. In your oppinion, what did he do ?

[Kmcalpin]

Nobody else feel the second today was offside? I was directly in line & Heneghan took the high line perfectly for me & Goncalves was offside when the ball was played through. No claim by hand in the air & no protest after the goal may suggest different.

Having just watched the TV highlights I would say he was indeed offside when the ball was played, albeit very slightly. Another bad officiating decision.

[Haggischomper]

Never a red. Never, ever, ever.

[Shire Greats]

Here's my 10 cents:

 

I thought the starting 11 was dreadful, but it actually seemed to work.

 

The most annoying thing about the first goal wasn't that Lasley was slow to close the ball down, it's that the spot that the shot was hit from is pretty much exactly where McHugh would have been.

 

As petty an argument as it is, if Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen or even Hearts had seen the amount of dodgy red cards that we have over the past month there would be an outcry in the media. There's absolutely no point in us appealing because it won't be overturned, but Rangers defenders can punch the opposition and get away with it. I'm still not sure that Lucas should have gone against Accies, let alone the last couple.

 

I said after the game that I genuinely can't gauge how we are playing at the moment, mainly due to the fact that we are losing men to shite decisions nearly every week.

 

This is definitely a rant. I am pure raging with the world at the minute.

Lucas was definitely a red ....but don't think McHugh's was even a booking

[GazzyB]

Just watched the highlights, quality tackle and never a red. Also no desire to step up and press the ball from Moult, McManus or Lucas for their first. 3 Hearts players knocking it around Lasley, absolutely not his fault.

[Onthefringes]

But he was 'in control' of his challenge. Both feet off the ground? Yes, but both feet are off the ground when you run.

How many Hearts players were demanding a red? Not important until you suggest he wasn't offside because we never claimed for it.

And, IMO, there is no way Lucas should have been off. In your oppinion, what did he do ?

Eh? I was offering how referees & media hacks alike interpret such tackles.

 

I agree our man was in control of his challenge, still don't think it even merited a foul.

 

As for Lucas, the original point was regarding his sending off in the Hamilton game

[fat_tony]

Having just watched the highlights, I'm even more annoyed about yesterday. McHugh's tackle was textbook, and shouldn't have even been a foul, never mind a red card. It's the momentum which carried him into Cowie, but it was never out of control or dangerous. Studs down, winning the ball, perfect.

[milo]

That's never a red card in a million years, it's not even a foul! Wins the ball clean as a whistle!

 

No wonder McGhee was raging!

 

That's a total joke!

[sbcmfc]

I think it looks bad with the still images or from the right (or wrong) angle.

 

Extremely harsh in my eyes, but we'll never get it overturned.

 

[stuwell]

Didn't think it was a red yesterday but looking at that I'm not sure

[Richie]

Not closing down and/or getting tight enough is absolutely killing us.

Sure, well jockey or make a token move to get near a player, but always leave too much space to allow a shot/cross etc.

I said similar earlier in the season.

You need to stop the cross/shot. Its basic stuff.

 

Red yesterday clearly changed the game and Tait's injury probably didn't help either.

We were pretty comfortable before that.

[CoF]

 

Still haven't seen McHugh's red card challenge yet but for the 1st goal, what an absolutely half arsed attempt that was to close down the shot by any player in the vicinity before Lasley obviously thought "s'ppose" and went remotely near the scorer. Pathetic.

 

2nd one was a good counter attack I suppose but nobody was staying with the runners. Basic stuff.

 

3rd goal was a catalogue of errors, first with the new boy making an arse of it in the corner and gifting possession, before nobody marking the scorer then Samson getting beat with a trundler along the deck straight down the middle of the goal.

 

Same players, same mistakes, no lessons learned. 22 games later......

 

 

 

 

Harsh in a few of ways in my opinion.

1st - Las has a decision to make - press on and leave their man on his right free, or sit off to see what he's going to do. Not sure he anticipated a shot from a fair distance and moved pretty quickly when he shaped to shoot.

2nd. Again, players with a decision to make on who to press. The midfield have pushed on to try get an equaliser and are busting their arse to get back, however that's left Mcmanus and Heneghan in 3 v 2 situation. Jules looks burst by that point.

3. See above. Jules looked burst and that's a mistake from a tired player. As McGhee had pointed out - if McHugh hadn't been sent off and Tait went off injured he would have had the option of bringing on McMillan for a tiring Jules. As things transpired, we had to ask for far more from the team than expected.