Jump to content

County v Maureens 17/1/15 - how many points are at stake really?


Recommended Posts

Probably not gonna be popular here, but the more I watch it the more it looks justified to me. Straight leg, and Arquin's boot comes down with the studs showing above the ankle. Perhaps harsh but by the letter of the law probably a red. Can't see an appeal being successful but I thought that about Kenny's as well, so what do I know.

Oh and we can put the tin foil hats away seemingly he was the intended 4th official and he comes from Aberdeen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Probably not gonna be popular here, but the more I watch it the more it looks justified to me. Straight leg, and Arquin's boot comes down with the studs showing above the ankle. Perhaps harsh but by the letter of the law probably a red. Can't see an appeal being successful but I thought that about Kenny's as well, so what do I know.

Oh and we can put the tin foil hats away seemingly he was the intended 4th official and he comes from Aberdeen.

:huh:

Just when it seemed a good conspiracy was stoking up nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all know pictures don't give a fair indication of what's happened though. Look at the second picture, it looks like the County boy has gone in with two feet.

No it doesn't:

post-7081-0-94471400-1421620085_thumb.pn

(hint: that's Toshney kicking the ball)

It looks to me as though he then tried to stretch for the ball and it was a coming together.

Much ado about hee haw....yet again!

Well no because even if that is the case (which I think it is), it doesn't mean it isn't a "red card offence".

...actually even though video with all the frames is better, what these snaps do show quite clearly is that Arquin stood on the ball squirting it out of picture by the time of the last picture. The County player swinging slightly late but making a fair attempt to clear the ball kicks into the sole of his boot in the last picture with Arquins boot no more than 5 or 6 inches off the ground. Sore yes but as the referee decided at the time no foul. Ridiculous decision.

You actually what mate?

post-7081-0-94471400-1421620085_thumb.pn

We're going around in circles - and I do think it's a harsh red card - but it's pretty obvious why it was given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both feet were off the ground as he made challenge, not together but both off the ground. The important issue is was it a Reckless challenge- my view is yes.

I think when most people talk about two feet being off the ground, they're not counting one being 1m away from any contact :-).

Stills really don't tell the story.

It's NEVER a red.

Scott Brown wouldn't even have a foul given against him for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arquin's studs clearly make contact with the player's ankle, both the video footage and the stills prove this. He's unlucky in the sense that if he'd done it anywhere else other than right in front of the 4th official he'd have been safe, but I'd be very surprised if the decision was rescinded on appeal (if St Mirren even bother).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh don't think we'd win the appeal. After seeing it on a big screen tv it's probably a red card. Definitely enough evidence for the 4th official to justify his decision anyway.

I'd be shouting for it if it was against us ( strategic booing n that ) but you do see yellow cards given for tackles like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh don't think we'd win the appeal. After seeing it on a big screen tv it's probably a red card. Definitely enough evidence for the 4th official to justify his decision anyway.

I'd be shouting for it if it was against us ( strategic booing n that ) but you do see yellow cards given for tackles like that.

The ref gave a throw in :).

Arquin made contact with the ball first, Toshney kicked the ball too, and there was contact.

If Arquin was trying to 'do' Toshney then he'd have aimed at the player, not the ball.

Can see a foul being given because of how it ended up, but it was not intentional, and was not reckless.

I hope we appeal.

The strategic passiveness from the County faithful ensured that decision went our way. 8)

Not giving a toss > booing

I think maybe the lack of reaction from the fans was for the same reason as there was a lack of reaction from the ref and linesman - they didn't think there was anything in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a bad tackle, probably an orange card, TBH. Utterly no point appealing it.

My observations based on the highlights alone:

1) shame Arquin's suspended now as he seemed to be have added a bit of crucial presence and mobility to our front line.

2) Kenny is on fire. He's playing the Ricky Gillies role from 2000/1, hopefully with a better end result.

3) Mallan looks great. You can see his style of play developing - relies on his reactions and pace to nick the ball away from clumsy defenders. Happy to take people on, he definitely looks the part.

4) I think appealing for consistency is the mantra of the team that's just had a player rightly sent off, but it can be frustrating when it feels like you've just seen a fourth official wade in on on-the-pitch matters for the first time ever, and it was to send your guy off. Or when you see the likes of Scott Brown kicking a player and receive absolutely no scrutiny whatsoever.

5) Was Jim Goodwin just angry cos he had a cold head? Seems much happier now he's got more hair.

6) Pounding the floor doesn't make pain go away. Fucking cúnt.

7) Richard Brittain still runs like a fanny.

Even with Motherwell's game in hand, that three-point gap is encouraging. If we can pull off the highly unlikely on Wednesday night, and assume they succumb to a routine defeat at Parkhead, we could go ahead on goal difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...