RicoS321

Nope. Not sure why it would? You've misunderstood it. The severity of harm to the injured party is not relevant, it's the likelihood of harm. The two will often go hand in hand of course in that if I two footed tackle someone in the balls it is going to hurt and it's a red card, but there are a large number that will be only based on intent. Similarly, petulant kicks like Morelos' aren't intent on causing injury. You're clearly not addressing that incident, as you know it wasn't and so do every other non-partisan viewer. In those cases it's clearly easy. If McKenna had gone down screaming and clutching his knee then the red would still have been rescinded as there was clearly no contact with his knee. In other instances it may be harder to adjucate and so the red would not be rescinded (ie. the same as exists currently). Your point about refs in the grassroots game aren't pertinent to the point in question, you're putting up a strawman argument based on verbal threats or abuse that nobody is arguing for or against and are covered in the rules of the game (new and old). In addition, the arguments I'm making are based on the fact that the law has already been changed some time ago, I'm not arguing based on the laws of the game that don't exist anymore (like I was when Morelos was originally red carded as I was unaware of the actual rules).

Yes. One has the potential to seriously harm if it is deemed reckless or out of control (depending on the challenge it could be, and often is, complete luck that a player gets there before the opponent) and the other is an act of petulance that is unlikely to cause injury. I'd have thought that's exactly how we'd want to view it? What you're saying happens all the time unspotted by the ref. Little digs in the ribs, shirt tugging, barging (McKenna), standing on toes, slagging his ma, homophobic abuse, racist abuse (Tims™) etc. etc. The kick that Morelos did, and probably the barging that McKenna did (given he repeated it) are yellow card offences. The notion that you can do it all the way through the game isn't true, it's covered by this ruling - you can do it twice and get booked twice. Morelos and McGregor's incidents were both yellow cards by the current rules governing the game (which has fuck all to do with the SFA). The ref in our game made a misjudgement on the severity of the Morelos incident just as Thompson made a misjudgement on Brophy's goalscoring opportunity at the weekend - both acceptable mistakes for a ref to make in theory. The panel's decision on these may vary, but I'm struggling to see how anyone can possibly say that McGregor or Morelos' acts were in any way worthy of more than a yellow on looking at the actual rules of the game - it's very clear cut. There is certainly no hun-bias in the decision. There could indeed be anti-AFC bias if they don't overturn Devlin's card but that has nothing to do with the hun decisions which were blatantly obvious to any impartial reviewer (unfortunately, hun cunts). McGregor got away with not getting a yellow card, Morelos didn't as his was subject to review. It's taken us by surprise because we (me included) did not know the rules and neither did any manager it seems (judging by Stubbs' reaction) and no BBC pundit did either until confirmed by DB the other night (which they then proceeded to ignore). As for "if this happened in the street", it's a bit of a stupid argument. If I sliding tackled someone in the street then I'd probably be cautioned, similarly if rugby tackling. The notion that sport should adhere to those rules is ludicrous. If someone punched someone in a game then they may indeed face a caution as that could be deemed a criminal offence, but that would be up to the police. There is nothing currently preventing them investigating incidents like these and it is not up to the SPFL to decide that. Similarly, if I bump into someone's car and a wee bit of handbags insued then the police would likely just calm the situation down and leave the resulting damages up to the insurance companies (varies depending on the officer of course, but you can see that it's not just fitba where things are open to interpretation). In terms of Ramos' actions, they are supposed to/should be entirely irrelevant. Ramos would likely see the opponent getting a red card in real time, but when reviewed by panel they'd reduce to a yellow. I'm not sure it has any bearing on the argument - simulation being a different problem. It was clear thon Ajer cunt acted in a "Ramos-like" fashion as he went down like he'd been shot. In grass roots fitba, refs appropriately deal with this shite all the time as they did before 1998 when gently kicking an opponent (see Beckham v Simeone) became some sort of vicious assualt.

It's not the SFA, and it's not a millstone. One of the points that Darryl Broadcunt made - and it rings true - when talking about the rule changes is that ex-refs are the worst people to discuss incidents with as they never keep up to date with rule changes once they leave that employment. His point that you've quoted is just lazy shite. It's a refs job to judge these things just as it's his job to judge whether someone is last man, handball is deliberate and so on. It's not difficult. The Tim clearly (and most likely deliberately) had McGregor's leg trapped under his own and McGregor kicks him off it. Similarly Morelos takes a couple of shunts from McKenna and gives a petulant tap back. These things aren't difficult to judge, we all know - objectively - that there was no risk of injury on either occasion and they were both mitigated incidents in response to something else. The phrase "there was fuck all in it" springs to mind on both occasions. There is far more of an issue in the game with people feigning injury in an attempt to get others sent off (something I think thon Tim was doing on Sunday) than there is with players dangerously hoofing others and risking injury. Yellow cards all round and get on with playing the fitba.

Another contract signed with little to no fuss. Good stuff dons.

Nope, the rules have been changed after UEFA decided it would be a good idea if actual players were invited to discuss amendments to the rules and it was thought that were too many red cards in the game and efforts should be made to reduce that. One of them was the change to the rules as stipulated in the hun case: That makes perfect sense to me, and one I'd absolutely support. This pish about kids doing it because they see player X doing it is nonsense. I booted a kid in another team when I was playing primary fitba because he booted me first and it was fuckin sare. The ref had a quick word and we played on (I later killed his entire family). Fitba is a contact sport where tempers get high and as a result people lash out as a reaction - i.e. it's nae in the street. Morelos' "lash out" was nothing more than a girlie tap, as confirmed by this: That encapsulates it perfectly. By the rules of the game it isn't a sending off. Nobody in their right mind would say that there was violent conduct involved and that there was any danger that McKenna would have been hurt. By suggesting that it got rescinded because he was a hun just makes us sound like Tims. I originally thought that a kick out was a red card (not helped by the fact that nae cunt at the BBC knew, nor any manager), so I couldn't believe it was overturned, but the rules clearly state the above and so the decision to overturn is pretty much indisputable. I'm very glad that petulant pish like this isn't a red card anymore. It's a contact sport, get up and get on with it (as McKenna did).

Those aren't red cards in the rules anymore (see my post on the hun thread). Neither Morelos's That sounds more like VAR rules than panel rules. I think the panel can take a more in depth view as they're not there to correct in real time. You could be right with your first part, however if it is deemed that Devlin wouldn't have been behind the player if he hadn't been pulled back himself then that could come in to it. I thought Thompson was fucking atrocious at the weekend, and I genuinely think it was arrogance and personality that led him to his red card decision. I could see his reasoning, and it could very much have been read the way that he read it, but I would think that 80-90% of refs in Scotland would have given the yellow card in that instance without cause for complaint/citation. After the pull on Devlin, Brophy is at a standing start from 30 yards going toward the corner, rather than the centre, of the box in a straight line (i.e. his first touch would have had to have been a turn toward goal rather than a shot/clear opportunity). I'm 100% certain that we'd have had a player back in time. I think that the panel will have overturned too many decisions already and will feel obliged to retain one, and Devlin will be suspended. I've looked out a pretty good jobby that I've been saving in the freezer for this type of occasion and I'll be addressing to the SFA on confirmation of that suspension.

I'll add this to this page for you lazy fuckers, to explain why McGregor shouldn't receive any punishment. Weird that the BBC cannot include the rules in their reports to put the matter to bed.

Makes sense. Seems to be playing pretty well at the minute so a bit of a loss. Especially as guys like McDonald are clearly inferior. Forgot Fraser was in the squad, he'll be at right wing back I reckon ----------------------McGregor---------------------- -------Souttar-------Mulgrew--------Tierney------- Fraser--McTominay--Cairney--McGinn--Robertson ----------------Naismith------------------------------ ----------------------Griffiths------------------------- That's what I'm guessing. Although, in reality, I have nae idea about any of those English based midfielders.

I would think that McLeish will play a 3-5-2 or 3-5-1-1 or variation of that. It'll almost definitely be a back 3 of Souttar, Mulgrew and Tiernery in my opinion. Robertson as wing back and Patterson or Jack on the other side. I could actually see Naismith starting in behind Griffiths too. Surprised that McArthur isn't in the squad on recent form but youngsters seem to be the order of the day for McLeish which is no bad thing.

11 each in SPL and non-SPL players. Must be a recent record.

Was listening to the radio the night and one of the cunts (might have been Darryl Broadcunt) on made a really interesting point and something I wasn't aware of. Apparently the rules were changed a while back for these types of incident. It's apparently not a red card unless there is "danger" (or something to that effect) to the victim rather than just a player acting in anger. I can't remember the exact wording but he read out the rule and it made complete sense. It was apparently changed after they added more players to the committees deciding on these rules. Regardless of the huns benefitting, it can only be a good thing. Neither Morelos or the other hun did anything malicious, reds for that type of thing is nonsense. No chance of this one getting reviewed by the actual laws of the game.

Subbsy binned. Hilarious. Worst management performance I've seen at Pittodrie since McGhee in that cup match. Sticking with ridiculous tactics despite shipping goals - classic McGhee.

That is a ridiculously partisan view of that pen. It was an atrociously stupid challenge by a player so far off the pace it was embarrassing (don't remember if he played again?). It was a pen all day long. Anyway, onto Rocket's point. I disagree. We've got the remnants of a decent squad as well as a few that should be on their way. Lewis, Devlin, McKenna, Considine, Logan, Shinnie, Ferguson, Wright, GMS and McGinn on his day (still) are good players with Anderson, Campbell, maybe Ross (I don't think he'll make it) and others from the youngsters to supplement. Lowe looks decent, Wilson it remains to be seen. The rest are filler that could be replaced, but there isn't a squad in the league bar Celtic who don't have that filler (they do, just at a different level). We're significantly fitter, more professional and more consistent than we've been in years and behind the scenes we've progressed in terms of training methods, soon to be training infrastructure, contract renewal, player sales, fan engagement (sort of), marketing etc. etc. The club are night and day from when McInnes joined. We can argue/agree on McInnes' failings, but anyone who couldn't make something of the squad and environment if McInnes were to leave tomorrow wouldn't be fit to be dons' manager. If the club could take more lead on player recruitment (better scouting) and introduce a strategy for youth development and introduction then we'd be only looking at McInnes' cautious tactics and failure to appropriately motivate his team in bigger games. But then that would be ironing out every single error in our manager, which is probably a little unrealistic.

Was this not due to police shutting a road or some such? Not stadium planning requirement, but match day planning requirement?

What happened in that first game like? I remember Tansey giving away a blatant pen, but I don't remember much else (Stewart having an atrocious game rings a bell).

Surely Rocket is allowed some sort of poetic licence here? They were fucking atrocious by any standard, but not SP or MM bad. However, if you compare peak Mcghee with the poorest McGhee performance then the difference between those performances would be comparable to peak McInnes and those hun performances - they were fucking atrocious. The only problem that I have is that he wasn't "considering" anything as no offer had been made and so there was nothing to consider. McInnes had already made his intention to stay clear (as announced by Milne in the prior weeks), we just had to hear it twice to be certain due to a huge media campaign by the impartial BBC who attempted to railroad our manager into resigning. In the end, we got over it and finished above them in the league. I don't think we'll be saying the same this season unfortunately.

That's about it. He was atrocious at the weekend, his worst game this season and probably his time here. There was a gaping chasm between him and the rest of the team when we went down to ten, but he was on his heels throughout the entire match. Normally he'll make the runs into the channel and get his body in front of the man and retain possession, but he was Nicky Maynard poor at the weekend, hiding behind the defence. The only decision Thompson got right in the first half was when he told May to get up after he inexplicably dived after skinning a defender (not really, inexplicable, the real explanation was that he didn't fancy his chances in front of goal and took the easy option). That said, I understand McInnes starting him and I understand his attempts to play him into form. Anderson has a bit to go yet and I don't imagine we'd get even half a season out of him of consistent form. I don't think it was wrong to play May against Killie, and I think it was even correct to give him a bit of time with an additional striker alongside him in Cosgrove to see if that would help. However, he definitely shouldn't start the next game after that performance. It's a shame that Wilson will be fit for the next match, I imagine, and so Anderson won't get the opportunity but as long as there is a change then that's a start. The sub of Gleeson was telling at the weekend. It shows that McInnes doesn't have the faith in him at all, yet. McGinn would have been the obvious one to take off in the circumstances but Gleeson clearly couldn't be trusted and I agreed with McInnes' decision to hook him. In reality, yer centre mids should be the last people you're considering taking off in that situation but there are serious question marks over his coverage, in exactly the same mould as Tansey last season (although Tansey should have been no surprise). Overall, I had no issue with McInnes' approach at the weekend, made his subs in decent(ish) order - I'd have had them on sooner like - and took on/off the correct people. However, it is abundantly clear that beyond our preferred 11-13 players we are pap and nowhere near good enough to be beating a team when down to ten men (compare that to the huns v us in the first game; it's night and day). We're possibly looking at another window of sub-50% effective recruitment, which has to be questioned. McInnes has earned, financially, a bit of leeway here as we can afford to bring in slightly more players due to past-seasons' performances but there is only so far that can be tested if we continue to bring in below-par players. If Lowe turns out to be decent - early signs promising - and Wilson too, then he's got his breathing space and it could be deemed a succesful window (including Devlin of course), but I think that's a big "if" and it still leaves us significantly reliant on the loan market to supplement poor recruitment. That poor recruitmentis also hindering our youth as May becomes first sub for Wilson over Anderson, and Gleeson fills a hole that objectively could be better filled by Campbell (I don't think Campbell is ready, but he'd be a more worthwhile project than getting Gleeson up to speed on current showing). Similarly Forrester coming onto the pitch ahead of anyone at present is bad use of first team time. Special mention for that cuntpiece Thompson at the weekend. What a total fucking dick. Arrogant wanker that shouldn't be anywhere near a pitch. Steaming up to give the red card to Devlin (disagree with whoever suggested that the Killie players surrounding him made any difference - he'd made up his mind in .01 seconds) when every other ref would have understood that it was a booking (just like he did with Hayes a couple of seasons back). Generally imposing himself on a match that didn't require it to make himself centre of attention again. When every other ref in world football draws a straight white line in front of the defensive wall as a signal to the players, the fans and as an aid to themselves, Thompson decides that he doesn't need that and places a small dot to the side because he's such a good ref he has it under control. It opitimises his arrogant wankerishness and is a personality that isn't required of a ref. It showed throughout his entire performance at the weekend and in recent years. He doesn't make mistakes like other refs, he is the mistake. Everything about him is just wrong and he can't be trusted to ref a football match. Anyway, Killie very good for the win and a sublime goal by Stewart in an advanced role. Considine poor for sending off and the second goal, Ball doing another thankless task wasn't great, McGinn looked fucked, May pap, GMS less than average, Shinnie and Ferguson looked okay but had too much to do. We need to get our first eleven worked out and hope we can get them on the pitch at the same time soon.

It would be written into the deal that he was there player but effectively loaned back, with a watertight contract. It's happened in the past. There's no way AFC would accept anything else, and Villa not stupid enough to try it. Otherwise we'd just wait until January. Anyway, it's some serious dealing by the dons if they've turned down £6.5M. A bizarre gamble to be honest. There's nothing that AFC could win this season - that having McKenna here would make significantly more likely - that would get us close to that type of figure. It's a fee that would fund the entire training complex at the shitebag arena (which is insane really). I don't imagine even McInnes would kick up a fuss at losing McKenna for that type of fee. Perhaps McKenna thinks Villa are shite? Is it midnight for the window? Expect more movement if so. The beeb reporting that it was in excess of £3.5M offered by the Tims. Have to admit, not seen anything reliable in regard to the supposed £5M+ offers, all just gossip.

Yep. It's a shame McCoist wasn't still in charge. He'd have fucked it up properly for them.

Except that he can't even finish above us and hasn't yet won Hibs a trophy or looked likely to (despite a healthy budget similar to our own). He talks a good game, occasionally performs well against the Tim and the Hun but his tactics are at times bordering on stupidity. He's been outwitted (actually outwitted, not just had an off-day) by McInnes on more than one occasion and has never produced a Hibs team close to the one we had a couple of seasons ago when we were banging in goals for fun. He's "a winner" except when he invariably isn't and goes in a huff blaming anyone and everyone. He lacks nuance and class - he's fucking Kevin Keegan. I don't get the love in, and I certainly don't get your stated to desire to bring him in and give him more money than McInnes has had in total over his 5 years here, that's just fucking stupidity. Nor would it prove that Lennon is a better manager, it would just prove that spending £2-3M in Scotland gives you a good chance of winning a trophy (something I think that we'd have done last season if we'd spent £750K on Moult, or whatever the asking price was). I actually don't mind listening to Lennon's commentary and in some interviews comes across very well but he's shown nothing on the pitch to warrant the weird adoration by some dons fans.

Totally agree. I think you'd need near perfection for us to win the league - zero mistakes. I think McInnes has too many individual flaws to ever do that. I also think that poor recruitment over the last 2-3 seasons is now beginning to take it's toll. My only hope for a decent season is that Wright finally comes of age and makes that attacking midfield spot his own. That role could be the difference between us challenging for second all the way (again, we're nae going to get first with this squad/McInnes) and scrapping it all the way for 3rd-5th. I don't think there is a manager in the SPL at present who would take the dons to the league title, and there hasn't been one in recent memory. None of them seem to have the right blend of risk-taking without being shite at the back and the ability to get >50% return (of good players) in the transfer market. I'd include Rogers in that.

Why? Those are massive games for them that'll earn them a fortune. They've done the hard bit and have reaped the rewards, anything else from now on is a bonus. They won't give a shite whether they win, lose or draw.

Because ayrshire_don74 is, almost without exception, unhelpfully negative without reasoned argument. Nobody on here is arguing that Ball is a great midfielder, so the unnecessary attack on him as a player isn't required. In short, he was being a dick about it, so the only reasonable response was either not to respond or a facetious/wind-up type of response. I've never argued against that, I've only argued over what is put in front of me. My points have been regular and clear that McInnes' problems lie in his recruitment (striker/midfielder - see my points regarding Gleeson), his lack of youth development, his cautious approach - i.e. the same as everyone else. I don't need to argue that further, I don't see it as beneficial. Nor do I see the need to be massively critical of McInnes at every venture because he's done a better than reasonable job so far and we don't live in some alternate univserse where we can afford a better manager or have a chairman with the ability to find one without catastrophically fucking it up. The point about Shinnie is a great case-in-point. People were arguing that Shinnie should be playing left back because he's ace there. My point was that you can't just say that Shinnie is ace at left back and move him from midfield without addressing the gaping hole left behind. We were a couple of days before the end of the window and unlikely to be getting in any further players that would be any good (maybe this new left back will be of course). There was no point in me going over old ground and saying McInnes is shite at recruitment - I've made that once or twice before (Gleeson, Forrester, Tansey) more quickly/aggressively than most - I'm interested in the nuance of "we are where we are, with the players we've got" how we get the best out of the existing situation. I'd say that's the point of a fitba forum and indeed watching fitba - talking about how best we could set up the existing team, not some team that doesn't exist where we've signed an ace midfielder and a 25 goal a season striker. I actually don't mind a major slump, that's what fitba is about for me. Being good one year, shite the next. We're nae the Tims, winning every week. If I can understand, or at least think I can understand, why we're shite because I've watched us every week then that's quite enjoyable and it makes it great (and frustrating) when you see things turn around, or even see us set up well in individual games like we did against St Mirren, Burnley and much of the post-split last season. It makes it frustrating when you see repeated errors such as in our recruitment and in youth development and our apparent (I still haven't seen the highlights of the hibs game) cautious approach to the game, but that's what makes fitba worth it for me. McInnes will be gone in a year or so, and someone else will come in with a different way of working. It's the big things, the major fuck ups that I get annoyed by: the new stadium location, the 11-1 vote split - things that'll fuck us up for generations. On the playing side, the inability to recognise and capitalise the opportunity we had to get into the Europa league last year, which has set us back a couple of years. Those bigger black marks are the stuff that concerns me, the detail is the stuff that is great to discuss on fitba boards and the like. Should Wright have started more games: is he a dick in training, or is McInnes just too cautious? Does McInnes buy too many squad players, rather than supplementing with youth? Should McInnes have said: X,Y,Z after the game (and if he said that a point would have been taken before the game against Hibs, then that's very poor). These sorts of things I think are great topics, but the margin for error is so tight - and the buffer so small - at our level that I find it difficult to be completely scathing either way - especially when I don't know the exact reasons for decisions that are made: attitudes in training, player X decided to go to club Y for £2K more per week and so on (i.e. I don't have a complete picture). I'm not sure where you got the idea that I was optimistic from either? I'd say balanced perhaps, I think we'll finish 3rd this season and won't win any silverware - exactly where our budget and the bookies would put us. I think that our personnel are not good enough to get us beyond that unless we can keep everyone fit every week.

Both. I ken like, I was being facetious mainly.

Can you name a single fixture in which we've lost in normal time with Ball in midfield?