GrahamH Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 McDonald cleared it up quite nicely and actually said following his appearance at the appeal committee (is that the name?), he can understand why he was red carded. He said a new 'technicality' was introduced this summer which places an emphasis on whether the tackle has endangered the opponent. This makes winning the ball an irrelevance and would also give clear grounds for sending McHugh off. McDonald was saying he would now question going into any slide tackle now. As far as I'm aware, that's always been a part of the rules however it seems they are now placing far greater weight on that over winning the ball. I think two issues are (as was also discussed on the programme), communicating that the players - which McDonald suggested is the responsibility of the clubs - and applying that rule consistently, which is the responsibility of the refs. It appears neither have happened particularly well. As for my own thoughts - I'd like to understand the rationale for this decision making. Yes, players need protection and there is always the horrible risk of career enders in the game, however is it happening so frequently that it needed an re-evaluation of the rules? A proper study of injuries and how they happen is the only way to consider whether this is good for the game - whether the SFA did this or not is another question. I'm sure we'll all be looking intently at how refs handle any heavy challenges over the next few weeks. The 3 questions I have from that are why is the rule only being implemented in Scotland, why are we the only team who seem to be suffering when there are similar tackles against us and also, if McDonld and Burrows received and accepted an explanation was this info passed on to McGhee, McHugh and the rest of the players? From the reaction to the red card on Saturday it didn't look like it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 It's easy to start getting precious about it and indulge in whataboutery or lame conspiracy theories but ultimately it just comes down to inconsistencies from referees and that will continue regardless such is the nature of the game. Lucas could easily have been sent off against Killie when he flew into a tackle, but he only received a yellow card so it's not as if Motherwell haven't benefitted from lenient refereeing this season while Lasley's made a career from making tackles like that. What McDonald's explanation illustrates is why there's no chance of winning an appeal on that sort of challenge as "winning the ball" is, putting it bluntly, irrelevant when it comes to the disciplinary panel. How the referee interprets the challenge is a completely different matter. We had gone 28 fixtures without a straight red being shown in any of our games, yet that's now 3 in 4 league games. Something that Charlie Richmond highlighted on the radio was that the certain selected referees had been away on their annual winter "training camp" in La Manga recently http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1962&newsCategoryID=2&newsID=16731 it looks to me that this is an area they've been instructed on and have come back and are enthusiastically implementing and enforcing what they've learned. Equally it's surely not a coincidence that 2 of the 3 reds have come in higher profile, live TV games post-winter break. As McDonald said, you could go through every game over the weekend and find tackles and challenges that would tick every box in terms of "excessive force" and "endangering the opponent" that wouldn't even have had a foul given for them. A player will, more than likely, instinctively go to win the ball McDonald highlighted himself that he had to change his thought process in-game against County following his experience with the panel. I pointed to Gary Harkins discussion on Twitter with Michael Stewart and Steven Thompson yesterday https://twitter.com/garyharkins1985/status/828308039119810560 and he's adamant that McHugh's challenge was never a red card, I'm sure many other pros feel exactly the same so it's not just MFC players who aren't aware of a change of emphasis. In that respect there's a complete disconnect between how players are expecting the games to be refereed and how refs are actually handling the fixtures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 That is fucking mental. We'd be as well just stopping football all together. I've played 7s with you twice. Scrapping going to ground when tackling takes about 70% of your game away... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 There's also another dimension to this issue, a very important one and that is fan awareness. To many, fans are an important part of the game and to the best of my knowledge the SFA did not issue a press release about this. You would think that a change as important as this would be broadcast, in advance, to all and sundry connected to the Scottish game. We are really only discussing this after the change came into force as a result of recent happenings on the pitch. I don't doubt for a minute that there are clubs, both professional and amateur, that don't know about the change and also many players. There could also be referees who don't know about it. The great issue now will be one of refereeing consistency...........I won't hold my breath. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn_Broomfield Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 I've played 7s with you twice. Scrapping going to ground when tackling takes about 70% of your game away... It's an art form mate... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 No slideys and ball below head height from 2018-19 season onwards 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 There's also another dimension to this issue, a very important one and that is fan awareness. To many, fans are an important part of the game and to the best of my knowledge the SFA did not issue a press release about this. You would think that a change as important as this would be broadcast, in advance, to all and sundry connected to the Scottish game. We are really only discussing this after the change came into force as a result of recent happenings on the pitch. I don't doubt for a minute that there are clubs, both professional and amateur, that don't know about the change and also many players. There could also be referees who don't know about it. The great issue now will be one of refereeing consistency...........I won't hold my breath. A key point here is that the rule itself hasn't actually changed, there's been no amendment. It's still worded in exactly the same way as it was before. What does appear to have altered is how referees are being asked to interpret the rule. As such you have a scenario now where a contentious challenge that in December may have got away with a yellow card (for arguments sake Lucas against Killie or ICT's Cole on Lucas) is now apparently being strictly punished. I'm speculating here but when you hear that the SFA have had referees away on a sojourn in January then all of a sudden they come back and there's a spate of "controversial" incidents that are quite similar then it becomes difficult not to start to join the dots. There are echoes of the summer where refs were issued with guidance on shirt tugs and "grappling" and Bobby Madden races straight out the blocks and gives St Johnstone 2 of 3 pens inside 40 minutes in their league cup group game against Falkirk for that specific infringement. While I'd acknowledge that McDonald's clearly going to give a personally biased account, what was telling from his bit on the radio last night was the implication that both he and Alan Burrows only found that there had been a shift in emphasis in terms of referees interpretation of the rule when they were actually in front of the appeal panel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 While I'd acknowledge that McDonald's clearly going to give a personally biased account, what was telling from his bit on the radio last night was the implication that both he and Alan Burrows only found that there had been a shift in emphasis in terms of referees interpretation of the rule when they were actually in front of the appeal panel. Yes, thats very worrying. On a separate but related note I've noticed for some time that referees are totally unconcerned about tackles from behind. I recall a few yeas ago that referees were told to clamp down on this practice. Presumably thats a passing fad thats come and gone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjy Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 If the thrower fails to deliver the ball per the required procedure, or delivers it from a point other than where the ball left the field of play, the throw-in is awarded to the opposing team. This is commonly known as a "foul throw",[6] though such throws are not considered fouls. It is a minor point but shows further the incompetence of Dallas on Saturday. Above is an extract from the Laws of the game. Just in front of us on Saturday the Hearts left back took a throw from the wrong place. Dallas blew up sent him back to take the shy again. Pretty worrying when the referee does not know the basic rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 Shocked more that he got pulled up at all. Throw-ins and claiming for deadballs that are not yours are two of the ways that players continue to cheat and FIFA refuse to sort. Much more widespread than diving 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 If the thrower fails to deliver the ball per the required procedure, or delivers it from a point other than where the ball left the field of play, the throw-in is awarded to the opposing team. This is commonly known as a "foul throw",[6] though such throws are not considered fouls. It is a minor point but shows further the incompetence of Dallas on Saturday. Above is an extract from the Laws of the game. Just in front of us on Saturday the Hearts left back took a throw from the wrong place. Dallas blew up sent him back to take the shy again. Pretty worrying when the referee does not know the basic rules. Excluding distance cheating, which I detest, you will on average see about 3-4 foul throws per game. Very occasionally a referee will take a rush of blood to the head and penalise a player randomly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 Excluding distance cheating, which I detest, you will on average see about 3-4 foul throws per game. Very occasionally a referee will take a rush of blood to the head and penalise a player randomly. It's not a quality issue either, champions league games are littered with foul throws! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 Daniele De Rossi just absolutely halved a boy, won the ball but was completely out of control and caught the player on the follow through. Yellow card. Still raging. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazs66 Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/548670/motherwell-legend-colin-oneill-reckons-hed-be-in-prison-if-he-was-playing-under-current-referees/ Saw this today. Made me chuckle about his elbow slipping. Football is too soft these days :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweed Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 If the force of the tackle is important then Pearson could have gone for one that was not even penalised on Saturday as there was one we heard from the back row of the East when it happened south of the away dugout on the other wing. Scott McDonald's tackle has been a red card for years, the moment you go in with a straight leg, over the height of the ball referees always show a red card. In my view Kiernan's was correctly given a yellow card as although it was hard it didn't look excessively hard to me and it was more or less on the ground. I thought McHugh's tackle was more like Kiernan's than McDonald's. Of course what we don't know is what any panel would have decided on Kiernan's tackle as we only have Willie Collum's verdict. However I assume the club have taken some counsel before deciding not to appeal and if they have I hope there has been a very clear message been sent to the players about how they are going to tackle going forward. There is of course an issue about referee interpretation as well. Jay McEveley's tackle at Kilmarnock a week past Saturday is the most dangerous tackle I've seen all season and it was only punished by a yellow card. However in a way every tackle is different, they look better/worse from different angles and a referee's opinion is subjective - no matter how good the referees are you are never going to get 100% consistency but it does feel we got the right shitey end of the stick on Saturday. But hopefully lessons have been learned. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoF Posted February 7, 2017 Report Share Posted February 7, 2017 If the force of the tackle is important then Pearson could have gone for one that was not even penalised on Saturday as there was one we heard from the back row of the East when it happened south of the away dugout on the other wing. I think the ref will (should) take into consideration what has actually made contact with the opposition player. In that case, if I can recall correctly I'm sure it was shinny to shinny (hence the noise) which is far less dangerous than studs at ankle height. I suppose you could argue that any tackle with force which makes contact with the player is at risk of causing injury. Maybe we'll see anything with force gradually being phased out in Scotland while the rest of the world continues to play actual football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellowell Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 Very good reply from club and doing right thing by not appealing but asking for more clarification on what is and what is not a red card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 Ainsworth up front?? yer all aff yer heeds Mr McGhee musta been reading these forums. Awful choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 Mr McGhee musta been reading these forums. Awful choice. Well if he reads them again hopefully he reads this. Lionel can be a great player, but only as a right winger. Anywhere else on the park is a total waste of a jersey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 Well if he reads them again hopefully he reads this. Lionel can be a great player, but only as a right winger. Anywhere else on the park is a total waste of a jersey. I'll add to that, and only useful when the ball is played in front of him and he's running into space. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 I'll add to that, and only useful when the ball is played in front of him and he's running into space. Well if he reads them again hopefully he reads this. Lionel can be a great player, but only as a right winger. Anywhere else on the park is a total waste of a jersey. So he can be a great player for us only going forward into space on the right wing and nothing else....aye hes a real asset to the team, and you wonder why he hardly gets a game, sums him up to a tee. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlmostFrazzled Posted February 8, 2017 Report Share Posted February 8, 2017 So he can be a great player for us only going forward into space on the right wing and nothing else....aye hes a real asset to the team, and you wonder why he hardly gets a game, sums him up to a tee. It's almost like...players have positions?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yassin Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 This Moult guy is an absolute wage thief-no use anywhere but upfront. Bring back Hateley and Josh Law imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 If the force of the tackle is important then Pearson could have gone for one that was not even penalised on Saturday as there was one we heard from the back row of the East when it happened south of the away dugout on the other wing. Yep, that was in my head as well. Pearson near killed the boy, but wasn't even talked to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeboy Posted February 9, 2017 Report Share Posted February 9, 2017 I've already said the basis of this about Ainsworth in the "McGhee out" thread but here goes....It really disappoints me that we are not getting the best of a guy who has got obvious talent that we have all seen over the years. However, the Ross County home game in October aside, I really can't think of any recent evidence as to people are clamouring for his inclusion. For me, a prime example of a player people make better in their head when they aren't featuring. He has been left out for periods when fully-fit by each manager in his time here. I remember even in his loan season, being up at Inverness with Fra Kerr right wing and Ainsworth on the bench. Even Kenny Black got round to leaving him out when he was caretaker. Couple this with looking at his long list of clubs prior to here, I don't think that many managers can be the problem, you might think that it's him. People act like he has been frozen out as well, he hasn't. He's featured in 25 of our 29 games this season, 13 of which he has started, giving him plenty of opportunity to make an impact. Whilst I've disagreed with many of McGhee's tactical selections this season (Chalmers/McMillan at left mid for example) and whilst I don't think he was in any way suited to head a 3-4-3 formation like he did on Saturday, Ainsworth becoming more of a peripheral figure is one I think he has largely got right. He'll always be the guy who gave me great moments in the play-offs, but the last four months at Fir Park for him is destined to peter out with ten minutes here, ten minutes there and unfortunately, I believe that's the way it should be, unless something changes. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.