bingboy Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) Funnily enough I made the same suggestion in my work (before seeing this thread) and it was also sneered at. In fact I've thought something should be done about this ever since it happened to Saints in the late 80's/ early 90's when Ian Baird of Hearts took out Campbell Money with about 5 or 10 minutes to go in a Scottish Cup tie. So not only were we reduced to 10 men through an act of thuggery, but we had no keeper either. Would those people who are completely against it revise their opinion if it only applied to goalkeepers? Edited August 27, 2015 by bingboy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Did the fouled player have to be substituted because of the Red Card Foul? No. So no extra sub. Some folk are just trying to twist a simple idea, just for arguments sake. They KNOW what Drew originally meant. If they don't, they are just.... Ken whit yae mean Sir Alex, if we issue sanctions just based on facial hair i think we can shave off a lot of this fluff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 It's a noble cause but it's open to abuse and wouldn't work. It would mean that managers would tell their players ' If we have used all our subs and you get a tackle which you think could be a red, make sure you stay down and milk it incase I want to make another sub '. And rightly so, if a rule like that's there you'd expect your club to take full advantage of it. I see what your driving at...! There could be some shenanigans going on when the physio is tending to an injured player he might gie him a quick trim to gain advantage, or worse still in open play there may be a spate of attempts to stick false beards/moustaches on dangerous opponents...! We are gonnae huv tae carefully comb through this and weed out the nits! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Ken whit yae mean Sir Alex, if we issue sanctions just based on facial hair i think we can shave off a lot of this fluff! Eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Pityme Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 At the end of the day, I just put it out there for discussion, and thanks for (almost) all the contributions. If nothing else, it distracted a little from the numerous tear-stained threads we have had since Tuesday. Theres nothing like a clean shave to see the possibilities! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Did the fouled player have to be substituted because of the Red Card Foul? No. So no extra sub. Some folk are just trying to twist a simple idea, just for arguments sake. They KNOW what Drew originally meant. If they don't, they are just.... He asked for opinions, surely you can't complain that the opinions were put forward? In essence, it IS an argument, surely the intention of the thread-starter? He put forward his point for the sake of argument and others put forward their counter-arguments. Poor form to make unspecified assertions just because people took up the challenge. Or should we just agree the F**K out of everything on the forum? Maybe that would take away the anonymous personal attacks that have become rife whenever people disagree with another's post? Or maybe it will be cynically exploited, just like fitba' rules are Back on topic, there is not meant to be a specific advantage gained by an ordering off-it is a penalty not a remedy or a levelling of a score. And the use of subs must imply an element of risk, otherwise, why have them? They are there because you took a risk with your original selection and you take a variety of risks by introducing a sub. We can't risk-proof the whole game. When you use up all your subs early you are simply asking the other side to take out one of your better players properly because they know that the ordering off won't weaken them. it is actually a big risk for a manager to take as they know the opposition can kill the game from there on in using one scything challenge and the roll of the dice as to whether the ref shows red or not. That is actually quite a tempting offer to a cynical coach. We can't complain if others take advantage of our naivety by taking a red to win the game. That is our fault, not the game's or the opposition's and a rule change won't make any difference there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nosferatu Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Funnily enough I made the same suggestion in my work (before seeing this thread) and it was also sneered at. In fact I've thought something should be done about this ever since it happened to Saints in the late 80's/ early 90's when Ian Baird of Hearts took out Campbell Money with about 5 or 10 minutes to go in a Scottish Cup tie. So not only were we reduced to 10 men through an act of thuggery, but we had no keeper either. Would those people who are completely against it revise their opinion if it only applied to goalkeepers? But you have sub keepers don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bingboy Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 But you have sub keepers don't you? Yes but you can't bring him on if you have already used 3 subs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 (edited) Jose Mourinho would have a field day if such a rule was introduced - although I appreciate what Drew was driving at. I can just imagine Eden Hazard having a quick crash course at RADA to brush up on his acting skills. The more pressing question in regard to those utter cnuts and multiple administration, tax dodging, rent avoiding f**ktards Ferranti Thistle is this: Were their players, on the say-so of their management given the instruction - 'right, they've played their three substitutions, now, cripple someone as we discussed'. If so, let's get into this scum on Saturday and turn our season around. Livingston, Gretna, Spartans... Never a tactical nuclear strike around when you most need one. Edited August 27, 2015 by pozbaird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Jose Mourinho would have a field day if such a rule was introduced - although I appreciate what Drew was driving at. I can just imagine Eden Hazard having a quick crash course at RADA to brush up on his acting skills. The more pressing question in regard to those utter cnuts and multiple administration, tax dodging, rent avoiding f**ktards Ferranti Thistle is this: Were their players, on the say-so of their management given the instruction - 'right, they've played their three substitutions, now, cripple someone as we discussed'. If so, let's get into this scum on Saturday and turn our season around. Livingston, Gretna, Spartans... Never a tactical nuclear strike around when you most need one. Last time I confirm that your new moby is working, bawbag! ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 Last time I confirm that your new moby is working, bawbag! I agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan4ever Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 I think it is time that players are penalised for bad sportsmanship. In tryinh to get someone sent of. I watched jim against Berwick a couple of times he was taken out the game did he roll about no he go back up didnt run to ref. It's time referee's booked players for play acting. Towards the mid to end of season last year referees had clamped down but sorry to say its gone backwards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted August 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 I think it is time that players are penalised for bad sportsmanship. In tryinh to get someone sent of. I watched jim against Berwick a couple of times he was taken out the game did he roll about no he go back up didnt run to ref. It's time referee's booked players for play acting. Towards the mid to end of season last year referees had clamped down but sorry to say its gone backwards That's one thing I have always respected about Jim. He just gets back on his feet, and gets on with the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
windae cleaner Posted August 27, 2015 Report Share Posted August 27, 2015 That's one thing I have always respected about Jim. He just gets back on his feet, and gets on with the game. He takes more than he gaves out No bitching or moaning about it either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vambo57 Posted August 28, 2015 Report Share Posted August 28, 2015 What you really mean is that because you agree with Drew's point of view then no-one else is allowed to have an opinion and to disagree. Cue for your usual personal abuse... I wouldn't give you the pleasure... BTW I didn't say I agreed with Drew's point of view. I was just pointing out that some CHOSE to misinterpret his OP, just for the sake of an argument. There is a difference. 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.