match thread (image) [FT] 1 - 4 Rangers (Arfield 25, 90+2; Aribo 68; Morelos 85)

[Gaffer 1,665]

2 hours ago, der Berliner said:

Funny that all the BT / BBC experts were going on about the penalty without actually knwoing the updated rules.

 

BTW, when Kamara made that last ditch tackle to deny the Accies counter attack, he toe-poked the ball to McGregor, which was a back-pass all day long. The goalie should have booted it away instead of picking it up. (Unless they changed the back-pass rules too ... )

It wasn't a back pass though.  It was his attempt to clear the ball from the attacker.  It just so happened to get to the keeper.  It has to be a deliberate pass to the keeper, which it wasn't.

[Bluedell 5,624]

On 09/02/2020 at 09:25, Uilleam said:

Re: The Goldson "Penalty"

 

The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above situations:

 

If a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body bigger)

 

Explanation

It is natural for a player to put their arm between their body and the ground for support when falling.

 

Ergo: The ref dun good. 

 

Goldson's arm wasn't supporting him. It was closer to being extended to making the body bigger. At no point did his arm support him.

 

It therefore should have been a penalty and I'd be screaming for one if it had happened up the other end.

 

The ref got it wrong.

[Uilleam 5,929]

20 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

Goldson's arm wasn't supporting him. It was closer to being extended to making the body bigger. At no point did his arm support him.

 

It therefore should have been a penalty and I'd be screaming for one if it had happened up the other end.

 

The ref got it wrong.

Have you been in secret conclave with Mr Michael Stewart? 

The Law , to me, is quite clear, and there is no series of ifs, buts, maybes, and/or whatevers to qualify it.  

It was not a pen.

 

[Bluedell 5,624]

5 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Have you been in secret conclave with Mr Michael Stewart? 

The Law , to me, is quite clear, and there is no series of ifs, buts, maybes, and/or whatevers to qualify it.  

It was not a pen.

 

It's not a penalty if you ignore the word "support" in the rules, but as it's there, yes the rules are quite clear and it was a penalty. 

 

 

[onevision 1,568]

The intent to support was quite clear though....?

[Uilleam 5,929]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

It's not a penalty if you ignore the word "support" in the rules, but as it's there, yes the rules are quite clear and it was a penalty. 

 

 

You can't throw yourself forward and down and successfully support yourself, and save your kisser biting the turf, or, nastier, the 3G plastic, while keeping your arms perpendicular to or behind your shoulders. 

Try it; or better still, get Michael Stewart to try it. (Then kick him while he is down.)

[26th of foot 6,082]

1 hour ago, Uilleam said:

You can't throw yourself forward and down and successfully support yourself, and save your kisser biting the turf, or, nastier, the 3G plastic, while keeping your arms perpendicular to or behind your shoulders. 

Try it; or better still, get Michael Stewart to try it. (Then kick him while he is down.)

Since Michael Stewart is the participant in any re-enactment, I would be delighted to prove the difference between Alfredo volleying an opponent and Leigh Griffiths stamping upon an opponent.

 

Where are my BIG tackety BITS?

[Uilleam 5,929]

2 hours ago, 26th of foot said:

Since Michael Stewart is the participant in any re-enactment, I would be delighted to prove the difference between Alfredo volleying an opponent and Leigh Griffiths stamping upon an opponent.

 

Where are my BIG tackety BITS?

I'm taking bookings. 

[Gonzo79 15,292]

Any chance we can get an elephant to reenact the stamp and a zebra the kick?

[der Berliner 3,744]

20 hours ago, Bluedell said:

Goldson's arm wasn't supporting him. It was closer to being extended to making the body bigger. At no point did his arm support him.

 

It therefore should have been a penalty and I'd be screaming for one if it had happened up the other end.

 

The ref got it wrong.

Haven`t seen a slow motion since the game, but I would assume Goldson went down trying to block/head it behind and was sure stretching his arms out to stop hitting the plastic turf face and chest first. As anyone would do. That`s probably the way both linesman and ref saw it ... even though I also thought that it was a clear hand ball at first. Didn`t know the "support the fall" rule before either.