Pars vs. Doonhamers

[HoBNob]

Im fine thanks. We got the benefit of a debatable referee decision and won the game.

Some of the Pars fans, on the other hand, are swinging from two footed tackle from behind to Falkirk conspiracy in a desperate bid to justify defeat in a game they were second best in.

I've probably missed that aswell but I think most Pars fans have been pretty honest that outwith about twenty minutes in the game we were second best.

[da_no_1]

12 minutes ago, Doonhamer doon south said:

This. Some of the pars fans have been gracious in defeat and are looking instead to the season ahead. Others well . . .

The decision went with us it won't always but Saturday it did. The exact same tackle on another day or different ref may well well be given as a penalty. I will concede that because it's fine margins. Penalties are given when they shouldn't be and not given when they should.


Until video referee decisions come into the game debates like these will continue to be the norm.

I've yet to encounter one single Pars fan who thinks we were anything other than shite on Saturday. However, your team didn't use the man advantage well at all (you actually should've been 4 up at half time and that was 11 v 11) & if it wasn't for a terrible decision (in my opinion!) you would have left with only a point which would've been a bad result given how you dominated the first half & most of the second.

I don't think it's desperate to discuss the game in this manner.

[Distant Doonhamer]

My take on the game is pretty much as follows.

We were comfortably the better side for the majority of the match albeit we didn`t play that well.

We should have been more than 1-0 up but didn`t manage this.

We played really poorly once Pars went down to 10 men with poor decision making and being really wasteful in terms of possession.

We ended up hanging on at the end and were somewhat fortunate as a result to end up with 3 points.

The penalty could easily have been given but the level of debate on here tends to suggest it wasn`t a "stonewaller". We certainly caught a significant break there though.

As others have said I don`t see a problem with much of the debate around the match and I don`t see many, if any, Pars fans suggesting they were anything but really poor on the day.

[Stellaboz]

I'd agree with all of that. We deserved sod all from the game and if McCabe starts against Brechin, someone should have words with AJ.

Also noticed our sponsor MOTM was Geggan. Jesus min, marginally better than McCabe and Higgincunt.

[Socks]

2 hours ago, die hard doonhamer said:

 It may not have been the correct decision, but he could not have given the penalty with any credibility. If socks is a ref then he will know this.

Well I did say earlier: "To be fair to the referee, there was a lot going on and I can just about understand why he didn't feel certain enough to give it".

I haven't refereed for quite a while actually, though I do still read right through the updated laws of the game before each season starts - I feel that if I'm going to be critical, I should at least take the time to make sure it's informed criticsim. As an aside, this year's version, with almost complete rewriting of parts, took quite a while to get through - the aim seems to have been to remove ambiguity, but to me it hasn't been too successful in that. And then there's the relatively trivial change in the offside law that means the free kick doesn't necessarily have to be from the defender's own half - it took quite a few readings to understand that one!

[die hard doonhamer]

Well I did say earlier: "To be fair to the referee, there was a lot going on and I can just about understand why he didn't feel certain enough to give it".

I haven't refereed for quite a while actually, though I do still read right through the updated laws of the game before each season starts - I feel that if I'm going to be critical, I should at least take the time to make sure it's informed criticsim. As an aside, this year's version, with almost complete rewriting of parts, took quite a while to get through - the aim seems to have been to remove ambiguity, but to me it hasn't been too successful in that. And then there's the relatively trivial change in the offside law that means the free kick doesn't necessarily have to be from the defender's own half - it took quite a few readings to understand that one!

There was something like 95 changes this year, as you say most of them trivial. The yellow card for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity brings in grey areas, which I'm not too keen on. The change to the offside law just means there is no interpretation needed with where the free kick is taken, it never stated previously where it should be taken, it does now (and that's always a joy to explain to amateur footballers).

[MOTD Wannabee]

 

 

 

[Homer Thompson]

Around 12:40 for the behind the goal footage of the "penalty"

Pretty clear that Tapping gets the ball, its a fantastic saving challenge.

ETA - some amazing CGI at 11:00 too, incredibly life like.

Quite clearly a foul on Dykes when he was injured too. Not intentional but the defender pretty much stands on his ankle with the follow through. Not as high on the leg as it looked at the time but still a foul.

[Beachbum]

[Skyline Drifter]

35 minutes ago, Mr X said:

Around 12:40 for the behind the goal footage of the "penalty"

Pretty clear that Tapping gets the ball, its a fantastic saving challenge.

ETA - some amazing CGI at 11:00 too, incredibly life like.

Quite clearly a foul on Dykes when he was injured too. Not intentional but the defender pretty much stands on his ankle with the follow through. Not as high on the leg as it looked at the time but still a foul.

Indeed. Some outstanding footage there which pretty much clears everything up. Also, the free kick for our goal is, as I said at the time, a clear foul, not "soft".

The challenge by Tapping is clearly outstanding defending (as is Hamill's clearance off the line) and not a "stonewall penalty" at all. It appears "the whole of the Norrie" were wrong and owe Craig Charleston an apology.

The defender stands on Dykes foot causing him to roll his ankle. Not sure if he touches the ball first. Clearly no intent. Not sure it is a foul, just unfortunate.

[Skyline Drifter]

On 28/08/2016 at 14:44, Grant228 said:

Telling surely that everyone in the Norrie / Left of the main is adamant it was a penalty? The ones with the best view?

 

On 28/08/2016 at 14:46, DAFC. said:

I was right in line with it in the NW and it was a stonewall penalty. He got nowhere near the ball. Charleston at his very best. 

[Tam]

4 hours ago, Doonhamer doon south said:

This. Some of the pars fans have been gracious in defeat and are looking instead to the season ahead. Others well . . .

The decision went with us it won't always but Saturday it did. The exact same tackle on another day or different ref may well well be given as a penalty. I will concede that because it's fine margins. Penalties are given when they shouldn't be and not given when they should.


Until video referee decisions come into the game debates like these will continue to be the norm.

Sadly the common sense of using video replay to help get major decision correct appears to be a long way off. They can do it in rugby and nobody's bothered about delays, but somehow in football everybody seems to want to get in for a cup of tea or get to the bookie / pub asap. Bonkers!

[die hard doonhamer]

This shows it perfectly. Excellent challenge and clearance. Fantastic stuff.

[die hard doonhamer]

Sadly the common sense of using video replay to help get major decision correct appears to be a long way off. They can do it in rugby and nobody's bothered about delays, but somehow in football everybody seems to want to get in for a cup of tea or get to the bookie / pub asap. Bonkers!

Even if it is introduced, the chances of it coming in at our level are very slim thanks to the costs involved.

[Tam]

7 minutes ago, die hard doonhamer said:

Even if it is introduced, the chances of it coming in at our level are very slim thanks to the costs involved.

Agreed. Again, common sense would say any video is better than none and club footage ( one angle stuff) would probably not be helpful in many cases. However, getting more of the big decisions right ( pens, award of goals, redcards) is a worthwhile target imo.

Great footage of the big penalty shout btw. I think it's exonerated the ref. No way he could award a pen for that.

[Sloop John B]

22 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

The challenge by Tapping is clearly outstanding defending (as is Hamill's clearance off the line) and not a "stonewall penalty" at all. It appears "the whole of the Norrie" were wrong and owe Craig Charleston an apology.

But...But ... But...  Falkirk tattoo tho.

At least with all that cleared up Dunfermline fans can get back to analysing how bad their team are rather than making a scapegoat out of innocent victims like Craig Charleston for their own inadequacies.

[HoBNob]

This shows it perfectly. Excellent challenge and clearance. Fantastic stuff.

Very good from Tapping and Hammil, awful from Robinson and Spence, he was in front of Tapping and shouldn't be getting beat to the ball like that. Bit more intelligence and he would've got his body in-between the man and ball.

Any footage of this apparent second penalty shout?

[palmy_cammy]

That's an outstanding challenge from Tapping.  Great work also from the referee in not bowing to the pressure of "the whole of The Norrie" and thus proving that even when it comes to Falkirk fans there is a an exception to every rule!

I expect this thread will start slipping down the board now...

[MONKMAN]

So the stonewall penalty was a great challenge by tapping. Glad that's been cleared up, as the conspiracy claims were getting a bit embarrassing.

[Doonhamer doon south]

Even if it is introduced, the chances of it coming in at our level are very slim thanks to the costs involved.

In Scotland at least if it were to come in it would be mandatory in premier League and would slowly filter down the leagues over time as optional or with promotion and relegation of clubs.

I am actually in favor of the technology and am not satisfied with goal line tech alone. Not every decision would be right but the technology would certainly clear up a lot of the dramas in the game.