posted Apr 23, 2008

The ref might have been wrong to give a free kick, BUT HE DID NOT DISSALLOW A GOAL. No "Goal" was scored and play and the players had stopped.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

morrison1976, nobody is arguing with Samaras' goal which was disallowed for offside (ie his first of two disallowed goals). We are saying his second was perfectly legitimate (disallowed for a "foul" by Killen) and we are correct to say this. That call was as bad as the Diamond call. Both crap calls, but if he'd been a better ref it would have finished 2-1, not 1-0. The way I see it, that's the same result really.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

Furthermore, had he been "getting decisions right" he would have given the throw in to Celtic which led to the incident, thus rendering all this debate futile.

As I say, the decision at that point in time was terrible, but the result would have been a Celtic victory if he had been better throughout the game.

It's easy to look at decisions which go against us and ignore the 5 that go for us beforehand. All that does is brew bitter resentment and anger fans. We'll never get onjectivity from football fans, but surely debates like this whch seem to be all about "shouting the loudest in the hope we win" are not the way to discuss things.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

ciarante (U1166370) - just watsched the highlight again and McMannus appears to stop but as he was behind zander any challenge he was making would have been a pen, or probably a red card for diamond as Brines was the ref, but the man in front of zander is balde who is clearly still playing has he lunges at diamond and boruc is clearly caught flat footed. However the specifics have now become incidental the whole arguement is now that Brines admitted he didnt see the handball but gave it anyway.IF YOU DONT SEE IT YOU CANT GIVE IT. oh and no aberdeen fan is moaning about how the second samaras goal wasnt really a goal because the ref blew the whistle before samaras struck the shot so people shouldt be going on about it being a disallowed goal but merely in incorrectly given free kick. Perhaps the aberdeen defenders heard the whistle just as they were about to launch a blocking tackle and stopped and merely slowed their run down which allowed samaras to get the shot off. BRINES' INEPTITUDE MEANT THAT ABERDEEN DIDNT SCORE A PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE GOAL.

Martin - you will forgive me if i find your rationalising of two wrongs make a right slightly simplistic and not the way that any profession should be run. Also the situation are slightly different as there is clearly a nominal amount of contact on consodine which the ref ACTUALLY SAW whereas for the diamond,lets call it an incident so that ciarante doesnt greet, incident he gave a freekick for something he didnt see.
The man is inept and diamond was right to say we are in trouble if he is considered one of our top refs.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

jamiemcl, that is a fair point about the contact on Considine. I don't feel it was a foul...but I can see how he gave it. To declare Aberdeen's goal perfectly legit is a bit off though, given that it resulted fro a throw in which was incorrectly awarded to Aberdeen. I can understand how you're upset...but if Aberdeen had been allowed that goal, then Celtic fans could rightly look at this inept decision as the factor which "cost them 2 points."

Football games last 90 minutes, and to blame the insipid performance and lack of atacking flair by aberdeen might be better than an "almost-kind-of-was-maybe-a ad-decision-which-might-or-might not-have-cost-us."

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

martin - i am actually more angry about the general state of refs and the lack of forward thinking and movement in the video tech department. I didnt see the game as i dont get any scottish football over here and the beeb highlights dont work outside uk. The you tube clip i saw only started from the ball into the box so cant comment on the throw in. However if it brines that gave the decision i am perfectly able to accept it was probably wrong!

The perfectly legitimat goal was more in response to ciarante and his play and players had stopped nonsense but filing to apply the same principles to the samaras situation. But i do agree it was soft call by the muppet in black.
I fully accept that if i had seen the game i would probably have seen a poor aberdeen performance, thats our lot at the mo, but the fact that brines gave something he didnt see really infuriates me

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

I can't disagree jamie- our refs are particularly inept.


How nice it is to actually see some comments on here that take reason and logic into account for a change.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

unfortunately we seem to be in the minority.
are you for or against video tech?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

unfortunately we seem to be in the minority.
The strange thing is is that i can actually feel a small amount of sympathy for refs and brines does deserve a miniscule amount of credit for actually coming out and admitting his mistake. It really is time to help them out and introduce video tech and/or make the professional.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 23, 2008

As a fan who goes to the games I'd be cautious about video tech as it'd need to be in a way that doesn't slow the game. Also, we'd need a competent guy looking at the video.

Agree about brines....he arsed it up, but fair play to him for aking comment.

add comment | complain about this comment