RandomGuy. Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 7 hours ago, Liam899 said: Probably ruffle a few feathers with this but I’m not a fan of Mitov. He’s clearly a very good shot stopper but I think his distribution and kicking is poor, and he always looks very erratic. Just lacks a calming presence for me. Maybe I’m being harsh because I don’t see a lot of him but just based on observation from games we’ve played. Sidibeh is an absolute menace but his general play is poor. He’s one that could be a good player though in time. Mitov is getting ropier as the season goes on, probably his confidence now dipping because he spent the first 30 games single handedly keeping us in games and still conceding while we lose. He's the one player who can take no blame for our potential relegation even if he chucks one in during a play off game though, without him we'd be closer to Livingston than County. Fairly sure Sidibeh only left the Gambian league about 2/3 years ago, and then had time in the proper depths of English football. He's clearly still adjusting to the highest level (by a distance) he's ever played at but everything about him suggests he'll turn out okay if given time and support, and some luck. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Play Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 30 minutes ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said: Wasn't the wee boy I seen. It's cool though you can all jump to conclusions and assume I was talking about the wee boy and laughing at him cause that's the usual on the internet. About 6 of you quoted me jumping to that wrong conclusion. It was an idiots who lit and chucked them getting his hand treated I seen is everyone wanting to feel sorry for and jump to his defence as well? The fact you said “it wasn’t the wee boy I seen” would indicate the person you state you saw getting treatment was still a “wee boy”. Yes, he definitely shouldn’t have holding a flare and yes he should get suitably punished but, no sorry, I’m still not seeing humour in the scenario where a “wee boy” get his hands burnt. Do you genuinely still maintain you think that’s funny? You’re obviously entitled to your own opinion but I just find that bizarre. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ludo*1 Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 45 minutes ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said: Wasn't the wee boy I seen. It's cool though you can all jump to conclusions and assume I was talking about the wee boy and laughing at him cause that's the usual on the internet. About 6 of you quoted me jumping to that wrong conclusion. It was an idiots who lit and chucked them getting his hand treated I seen is everyone wanting to feel sorry for and jump to his defence as well? You are coming across like a right arsehole here with the doubling down. Pathetic behaviour blaming the 'big bad internet' when you were either laughing at a very young child getting medical treatment or someone that's likely no older than 15 getting medical treatment regardless of how stupid they've been. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 6 hours ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said: Wasn't the wee boy I seen. It's cool though you can all jump to conclusions and assume I was talking about the wee boy and laughing at him cause that's the usual on the internet. About 6 of you quoted me jumping to that wrong conclusion. It was an idiots who lit and chucked them getting his hand treated I seen is everyone wanting to feel sorry for and jump to his defence as well? What a fuckwit. Quit while you're behind. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino Bolognese Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 12 minutes ago, The Marly said: This is why I don't understand why people defend the use of pyrotechnics. They are fucking danger in the wrong hands and the average football fan is definitely the wrong hands. Couple of inches to the left and that wee laddie loses an eye. Punishment for having them on you inside the ground should be tougher. A lot tougher. Hope the wee lad is OK. AFAIK that's the second kid injured just at McDairmid in the last couple of seasons (Celtic gamelast year). Also the debate about the disallowed goal. Maybe I've missed something obvious here but all the focus has been on whether it was a foul which resulted in the ball going over the line. From where I was sitting it looked like the ball had crossed the line in the keeper's hands before the supposed foul, and I assumed that's what the check was for. Of course having VAR instead of goal-line technology means it still comes down to someone's interpretation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 5 minutes ago, Valentino Bolognese said: AFAIK that's the second kid injured just at McDairmid in the last couple of seasons (Celtic gamelast year). Also the debate about the disallowed goal. Maybe I've missed something obvious here but all the focus has been on whether it was a foul which resulted in the ball going over the line. From where I was sitting it looked like the ball had crossed the line in the keeper's hands before the supposed foul, and I assumed that's what the check was for. Of course having VAR instead of goal-line technology means it still comes down to someone's interpretation. The referee wouldn’t be called to the monitor to check if the ball had crossed the line. In the very few scenarios where VAR can make that determination, it would be a matter of fact (like 99% of offsides), so no on-field review required. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Play Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 (edited) 46 minutes ago, The Marly said: This is why I don't understand why people defend the use of pyrotechnics. They are fucking danger in the wrong hands and the average football fan is definitely the wrong hands. Couple of inches to the left and that wee laddie loses an eye. Punishment for having them on you inside the ground should be tougher. A lot tougher. Hope the wee lad is OK. Well said. Unless an official display on the pitch pre match etc this pyrotechnics nonsense has to stop. BBC stating that 5 people were arrested as a result of using pyrotechnics at McDiarmid on Saturday. I can’t see how many people were arrested for having pyrotechnics at the recent Dundee v Rangers match. I would imagine it would be at least treble that……….surely? Edited April 1 by Shadow Play 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valentino Bolognese Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 11 minutes ago, The Master said: The referee wouldn’t be called to the monitor to check if the ball had crossed the line. But with o/side there are the lines that can be drawn to make it a VAR and not ref decision. I don't believe such lines exist for over the goal-line calls? Not disagreeing that the rules are that a ball over line decision is VAR only, I don't know enough about the implementation to say one way or the other. I'd be interested in what cameras etc they use to decide that though, especially if as you say they have the final decision and not the ref. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted April 1 Share Posted April 1 11 minutes ago, Valentino Bolognese said: But with o/side there are the lines that can be drawn to make it a VAR and not ref decision. I don't believe such lines exist for over the goal-line calls? No, there’s no lines. It’s eyeball only. We don’t have the full range of angles at non-televised games, which is why I said there were very few scenarios where VAR can make a determination. Live games are different because Sky use goal-line cameras. Early in the season, there was a lengthy VAR check to see if St Mirren should have had a third goal against us. Ultimately, VAR didn’t have the angles to overrule the on-field decision of no goal, so that stood. By the same token, VAR couldn’t conclusively say it wasn’t over the line either - so if a goal had been given, that too would have stood. 11 minutes ago, Valentino Bolognese said: Not disagreeing that the rules are that a ball over line decision is VAR only, I don't know enough about the implementation to say one way or the other. I'd be interested in what cameras etc they use to decide that though, especially if as you say they have the final decision and not the ref. Technically the referee always has the final decision - but in this situation (as with offside) he’s told the factual situation, from which he makes the decision. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee Man Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 It's not often you get to enjoy an opponent"s goal but the boy's overhead kick was a superb finish. Clearly I didn't really appreciate it at the time due to it being the equaliser and the fact I knew a goal was coming as soon as I saw it was 3 v 2 at the back stick, but with the benefit of hindsight and 3 points under the belt, that was a beauty of a goal. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewh Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 2 hours ago, Dee Man said: It's not often you get to enjoy an opponent"s goal but the boy's overhead kick was a superb finish. Clearly I didn't really appreciate it at the time due to it being the equaliser and the fact I knew a goal was coming as soon as I saw it was 3 v 2 at the back stick, but with the benefit of hindsight and 3 points under the belt, that was a beauty of a goal. Most of the goals we see are scrappy, deflected or unintentional. That one was as you describe. They all count though, unless VAR disagrees. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 It's just a shame Sidibeh didn't score his overhead kick at Dens too. Can't be many who've scored two in the same season, never mind against the same opponents. 0 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.