saintnextlifetime Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 What you watching, everyone makes a point, the offside, was offside, now you're saying Harkins tackle was a great tackle.........just coz you're a mod dosent mean you're right Having met David a couple of times , I'd say he was more of a rocker , tbf. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbyreid Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Having watched the highlights, Harkins tackle a shocker straight leg studs into the ankle of Tessellar right in front of McLean and Arquin challenge was never a booking. The difference was Tessellar didn't wreath about on the deck . Arquin was caught by McPakes foot in the box but the dive not upto scratch. Refereeing shocking and totally inconsistent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Anybody at all surprised that the BBC chose not to show the Harkins tackle or any of the two 'fouls' in the run up to their second goal or what should have been the corner to us before their first goal? No? Me neither. Anybody at all surprised that they chose not to show what even the Dundee fans said was a stonewall penalty when Arquin was brought down? No? Me neither. Anybody at all surprised that Sutherland mentioned, yet again, the supposed handball goal last week? No? Me neither. I AM surprised that Thommo didn't stand up for us better. Even a simple "Mallan says it wasn't handball, and despite your attempts to show it was, it doesn't prove anything" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 Wow! Surprised they showed that. Hope it makes it in to the highlights on the Beeb tonight. And of course it didn't. Anybody see the outrageous dive an Accies player did, followed by a huge claim to the ref? No card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Sanchez Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 A prime example being when Gary Irvine saw his team were in a dangerous situation, as Naismith gathered the ball in the Dundee box(1st half), so Irvine completely faked a head knock, and the conned ref wrongly stopped play and gave a drop ball. The result being, after the drop ball, a frustrated Naismith needlessly challenges Kevin Thomson(odious cheat) as we have them pegged in. Thomson throws himself to the deck, clutching his back??? and writhing in agony, after next to no contact. End result - from Saints having the ball in their box in a really great position, Dundee have a free kick, Thomson jogs away with a miraculous recovery and grinning and Naismith is needlessly booked. Cheating or clever gamesmanship by Irvine and the total knob Thomson? The answer is both and hopefully Naismith learned from it. Indeed. I posted about that during the game. Most people in the ground wouldn't have had the view to be able to see how bad it was. Thomson squeeling and clutching his back(!), of all things, was f*cking priceless. What an absolute dickhead. He's as horrible a wee scrote that's ever kicked a ball. Right up there with the worst of them. He's lucky it was Naismith that challenged him, and not me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted January 25, 2015 Report Share Posted January 25, 2015 And of course it didn't. Anybody see the outrageous dive an Accies player did, followed by a huge claim to the ref? No card. And actually, worth pointing out no mention of it in the after highlights discussion. You'd have thought with a player being red carded for a 'dive' earlier, they'd compare and contrast with the much clearer dive in that game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
class of 76-77 Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Dundee have more than a few odious pricks who know how to con incompetent referee's. It's no more than you would expect from a team managed by an odious wee rat like Hartley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 "Well Davidson got nowhere near the ball and had a hold of Arquin too" . It looked like a stick on penalty to me as well. or as the BBC highlights of the same incident say, "There's nothing much in that challenge. Not a penalty" (Paul Mitchell on commentary) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibbles old paperboy Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Aye, early tackle from Harkins at half-way line was naughty, but, as David says, his ball winning challenge later on down at the corner flag area was spot-on. Edited January 26, 2015 by Dibbles old paperboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmer john Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'm surprised Thommo didn't stick up for us better too. Even their equaliser goal. The scorers knee! could have been offiside..yes yes, we have seen goals/disallowed goals discussed in that forensic detail! most linesmen seeing the almost offside attacker first would have flagged for offside. We cant criticise him for getting it right, probably, but Thommo could have alluded to that fact that 9 times out of 10 he would have been ruled offside. Can still hardly believe Arquin was sent off for so little. Anybody at all surprised that the BBC chose not to show the Harkins tackle or any of the two 'fouls' in the run up to their second goal or what should have been the corner to us before their first goal? No? Me neither. Anybody at all surprised that they chose not to show what even the Dundee fans said was a stonewall penalty when Arquin was brought down? No? Me neither. Anybody at all surprised that Sutherland mentioned, yet again, the supposed handball goal last week? No? Me neither. I AM surprised that Thommo didn't stand up for us better. Even a simple "Mallan says it wasn't handball, and despite your attempts to show it was, it doesn't prove anything" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windae cleaner Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I'm surprised Thommo didn't stick up for us better too. Even their equaliser goal. The scorers knee! could have been offiside..yes yes, we have seen goals/disallowed goals discussed in that forensic detail! most linesmen seeing the almost offside attacker first would have flagged for offside. We cant criticise him for getting it right, probably, but Thommo could have alluded to that fact that 9 times out of 10 he would have been ruled offside. Can still hardly believe Arquin was sent off for so little. You toe the line on telly else you're out The goal was onside and Arquin stumbled and fell over his own feet never a dive All the highlights showed we has a stonewaller but Sportscene decided at the last second not to show it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Dundee have more than a few odious pricks who know how to con incompetent referee's. It's no more than you would expect from a team managed by an odious wee rat like Hartley. "Are Saint Mirren being persecuted though?" wee odious smarmy prick Jonathan Sutherland ,25/01/15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmer john Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 good grief, just saw the Harkins tackle on Tesslar. That was an absolute certain yellow card and when you think of what happened to Arquin in the same game, and last week, it is sickening. Also, I saw the Hamilton player, Gillespie's dive. No doubt about it, no ambiguity no nothin' he dived looking for a penalty....yet, play on from the referee and no mention of it in the Sportscene studio. AND! the Arquin non penalty before the red card incident...the defender threw himelf between Arquin and the ball, didn't touch the ball himself, there was plenty 'contact' but the fact he was sprawled there meaning Arquin couldn't get a strike at the ball was enough to make it a penalty also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Given that the club have finally grown the b*lls to take the SFA to task re Referees, maybe they should go the "whole hog" and make up a montage of the dubious incidents and put them on their facebook page and, ala DU, on their official website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintargyll Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Given that the club have finally grown the b*lls to take the SFA to task re Referees, maybe they should go the "whole hog" and make up a montage of the dubious incidents and put them on their facebook page and, ala DU, on their official website. Even better if all the clubs could get together and go to the SPFL/SFA as one body and complain about the standard of refereeing.....£800 per game?.....FVCK THAT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Given that the club have finally grown the b*lls to take the SFA to task re Referees, maybe they should go the "whole hog" and make up a montage of the dubious incidents and put them on their facebook page and, ala DU, on their official website. Was chatting to my Dons supporting colleague earlier this morning about this. He recalled a period when Aberdeen felt that they had been on the receiving end of numerous dodgy decisions and eventually decided to take it up with the SFA. It seems that for the next month or two following this, they were absolutely hammered in matches, with yet further, even more dubious decisions. There could be a backlash as a result of the club raising this matter formally. As we know only too well, the SFA is an organisation populated by petty, self-important, and precious wallopers who will be less than thrilled at their authority being questioned in this manner. I'm not suggesting that the club shouldn't formally raise its concerns, but I have no faith whatsoever in this being resolved in a manner that will be of any ultimate benefit to the club. Perhaps we should channel more energy into ensuring that our players can convert chances.... Edited January 26, 2015 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stlucifer Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Was chatting to my Dons supporting colleague earlier this morning about this. He recalled a period when Aberdeen felt that they had been on the receiving end of numerous dodgy decisions and eventually decided to take it up with the SFA. It seems that for the next month or two following this, they were absolutely hammered in matches, with yet further, even more dubious decisions. There could be a backlash as a result of the club raising this matter formally. As we know only too well, the SFA is an organisation populated by petty, self-important, and precious wallopers who will be less than thrilled at their authority being questioned in this manner. I'm not suggesting that the club shouldn't formally raise its concerns, but I have no faith whatsoever in this being resolved in a manner that will be of any ultimate benefit to the club. Perhaps we should channel more energy into ensuring that our players can convert chances.... SUE THE CNUTS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) I reckon there are three types of the 'Arquin incident' - one is where a defender fouls an opponent and it's a penalty, the second is where the attacker takes a dive, and should be booked - help ma' boab' what about the Accies dive v ICT in the same Sportscene!, and thirdly where it's simply a stumble, a trip, or a coming together.... and while I appreciate referees have a tough job, in my opinion the Arquin one comes firmly into the third category - a stumble where neither attacker or defender does pretty much of anything and the referee should just wave play on. The Accies one was unbelievable, how did the referee not dish out a yellow for simulation? Stevie Wonder could have seen that dive. I don't think there's any organised campaign to 'get' St Mirren - we are just on the end of a few really inept decisions in games close to each other. So are Motherwell mind you - the McManus sending off and penalty for 'handball' by the muppet that is Willie Collum, and in the same Sportscene show this weekend, it looked like they had one, if not two, clear penalties not given against the Arabs. I'm with Drew on this - if we start being gobby about this, we are only likely to be on the end of more 'questionable' decisions. If we crack on - like Jim Goodwin has, it will die down. Goodwin hasn't been involved in anything rash for a while now, and it has co-incided with him sailing under the radar and playing some decent solid football. Edited January 26, 2015 by pozbaird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Planet Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 I reckon there are three types of the 'Arquin incident' - one is where a defender fouls an opponent and it's a penalty, the second is where the attacker takes a dive, and should be booked - help ma' boab' what about the Accies dive v ICT in the same Sportscene!, and thirdly where it's simply a stumble, a trip, or a coming together.... and while I appreciate referees have a tough job, in my opinion the Arquin one comes firmly into the third category - a stumble where neither attacker or defender does pretty much of anything and the referee should just wave play on. The Accies one was unbelievable, how did the referee not dish out a yellow for simulation? Stevie Wonder could have seen that dive. I don't think there's any organised campaign to 'get' St Mirren - we are just on the end of a few really inept decisions in games close to each other. So are Motherwell mind you - the McManus sending off and penalty for 'handball' by the muppet that is Willie Collum, and in the same Sportscene show this weekend, it looked like they had one, if not two, clear penalties not given against the Arabs. I'm with Drew on this - if we start being gobby about this, we are only likely to be on the end of more 'questionable' decisions. If we crack on - like Jim Goodwin has, it will die down. Goodwin hasn't been involved in anything rash for a while now, and it has co-incided with him sailing under the radar and playing some decent solid football. > in my opinion the Arquin one comes firmly into the third category - a stumble where neither attacker or defender does pretty much of anything and the referee should just wave play on Agree with 99% of that Poz, a stumble, no more. However, I believe the ref reached for the card purely based on the horizontal Arquin turning round and looking at him. Open to opinion of course, but if you watch the sequence closely you see Arquin stumbling as though he is wearing clown shoes, he hits the deck, the ref is perfectly positioned (to be fair) and makes no immediate reaction. Then Arquin, while lying on the grass, clearly turns round and looks directly at him. It's then the ref reaches for his pocket. For me the ref took the 'look' to be an appeal for a penalty and therefore decided it was a dive. Had the big man just bounced back up I think he would have avoided the booking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WirralSaint Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 The Accies one was unbelievable, how did the referee not dish out a yellow for simulation? Stevie Wonder could have seen that dive. Ahhh but like Ciftci of Dundee Utd throwing his arm at McGinn's face (especially after the high profile retrospective action last time this happened in the same fixture) he'll be cited by the compliance officer and retrospectively banned. they don't like blatant dives look at what happened to Gonçalves v Celtic. Bound to both have action taken.... bound to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzy Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 > in my opinion the Arquin one comes firmly into the third category - a stumble where neither attacker or defender does pretty much of anything and the referee should just wave play on Agree with 99% of that Poz, a stumble, no more. However, I believe the ref reached for the card purely based on the horizontal Arquin turning round and looking at him. Open to opinion of course, but if you watch the sequence closely you see Arquin stumbling as though he is wearing clown shoes, he hits the deck, the ref is perfectly positioned (to be fair) and makes no immediate reaction. Then Arquin, while lying on the grass, clearly turns round and looks directly at him. It's then the ref reaches for his pocket. For me the ref took the 'look' to be an appeal for a penalty and therefore decided it was a dive. Had the big man just bounced back up I think he would have avoided the booking. Look at McPake in the video he thinks the ref is sending him off if no contact why is he so worried?thinks he is going he is bricking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbyreid Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Look at McPake in the video he thinks the ref is sending him off if no contact why is he so worried? thinks he is going he is bricking I believe there was contact look how close together there feet are and McPake looked like a guilty man to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby_F Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 > in my opinion the Arquin one comes firmly into the third category - a stumble where neither attacker or defender does pretty much of anything and the referee should just wave play on Agree with 99% of that Poz, a stumble, no more. However, I believe the ref reached for the card purely based on the horizontal Arquin turning round and looking at him. Open to opinion of course, but if you watch the sequence closely you see Arquin stumbling as though he is wearing clown shoes, he hits the deck, the ref is perfectly positioned (to be fair) and makes no immediate reaction. Then Arquin, while lying on the grass, clearly turns round and looks directly at him. It's then the ref reaches for his pocket. For me the ref took the 'look' to be an appeal for a penalty and therefore decided it was a dive. Had the big man just bounced back up I think he would have avoided the booking. So, Arquin stumbles, and looks up at the ref, and the ref - knowing it means a red card - sends him off without hesitation. Meanwhile in Hamilton.... a guy takes three steps then does a 9.9/10 dive, jumps up and screams at the ref for a penalty - and the ref just plays on. No wonder we're angry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Was chatting to my Dons supporting colleague earlier this morning about this. He recalled a period when Aberdeen felt that they had been on the receiving end of numerous dodgy decisions and eventually decided to take it up with the SFA. It seems that for the next month or two following this, they were absolutely hammered in matches, with yet further, even more dubious decisions. There could be a backlash as a result of the club raising this matter formally. As we know only too well, the SFA is an organisation populated by petty, self-important, and precious wallopers who will be less than thrilled at their authority being questioned in this manner. I'm not suggesting that the club shouldn't formally raise its concerns, but I have no faith whatsoever in this being resolved in a manner that will be of any ultimate benefit to the club. Perhaps we should channel more energy into ensuring that our players can convert chances.... I think in recent years ,the Club have complained before. There was the ref' (whose name escapes me now) whom we asked not to ref a game but the SFA went ahead with it anyway . We then went on to get a decent game (against Dimdee Utd) and Dargo scored even tho' his arm was offside the goal stood. . I also think we managed to get Eddie Smith dropped from ref'ing our matches . Nae luck so far with Coll*m but I'd be happy enough if Steve Mclean got him self tae f**k. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardeebuds Posted January 26, 2015 Report Share Posted January 26, 2015 Where do you sit? I ask because the Harkins incident was right in front of us at the corner flag and every single person in the same section as me said it was a great tackle. We were all laughing because we could hear all the shouts from around the ground but it was honestly a great tackle, not dangerous or over the ball and he won the ball cleanly. Didn't stop us giving him a load of abuse though. Totally agree with your points on McLean though, he was fouled from behind on numerous occasions in the first half and I think it took the ref about 55 minutes to give a foul for one of these and when he did he failed to book the player. I think you are talking about the 1 in front of the main stand which was a good tackle, But the 1 in front of us in the west stand that led to Arquins first header was a really bad tackle. 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.