Dargo V Mcguigan

[Metzmagic]

Dargo used his "experience".

 

Mcguigan didn't, stayed on his feet, hussled, fought and somehow got his shot away with the result a corner.

 

What has Mcguigan possibly learned and what experience has he gained?

 

No one wants "simulation", "diving" etc but that imo is what message the ref sent out today. Stay on your feet you get nothing. Hit the deck- penalty.

[potty trained]

Outcome?

 

I'd have Mcguigan in my team, every week.

 

No matter the result today. I challenge anyone to come on and slate the big man.

 

Apart from the offside thing when Craig wanted the ball. He had a perfect 20 minutes. And I'd take that every week, thanks very much.

[Trotter]

Dargo used his "experience".

 

Mcguigan didn't, stayed on his feet, hussled, fought and somehow got his shot away with the result a corner.

 

What has Mcguigan possibly learned and what experience has he gained?

 

No one wants "simulation", "diving" etc but that imo is what message the ref sent out today. Stay on your feet you get nothing. Hit the deck- penalty.

 

He attempted to stay on his feet but went down as got shot away as was being fouled.

 

The only difference between two was one ref recognised the foul, decided Muirhead was last man & sent him off. Today's clown on a ref played his own rules allowing advantage in one incident then pulling back if none then in the most obvious incident in the match he closes his eyes & hopes for best.

[scottymagoo]

A similar thing happened with Benteke in the Liverpool-Villa game yesterday except that it would take a cruz missilie to knock him off his feet and he smashed the ball into the back of the net. Tevez did the exact same as McGuigan a couple of weeks ago though and ended up putting his shot past the post and didn't even get a corner to show for his honesty. What I'm saying is that it's not just referees at our level who are making poor decisions here, the professionals in the 'biggest league in the world' are doing the exact same, punishing the honest and rewarding the cheats. It needs direction from a higher level, FIFA, UEFA, FA, SFA whoever. The whole notion that any contact in the box which results in a player throwing himself to the ground equals a penalty is ridiculous. In the same vein the conclusion that if a player stays on his feet no matter how hard you kick him isn't a penalty is equally as daft.

[The Mighty Quinn]

Dargo used his "experience".

 

Mcguigan didn't, stayed on his feet, hussled, fought and somehow got his shot away with the result a corner.

 

What has Mcguigan possibly learned and what experience has he gained?

 

No one wants "simulation", "diving" etc but that imo is what message the ref sent out today. Stay on your feet you get nothing. Hit the deck- penalty.

I want simulation. Cheatings an admirable quality, shows a will to win. Football's a results business, so if you are not doing everything to win a match (that includes cheating,) in theory you are falling outwit the remit of your job specification and should be disciplined. If i was a manager, and one of my players missed an opportunity to dive and win us a penalty but didn't, and we lost or drew the match, i'd be raging and he'd be pulled into my office and asked to explain his actions. What you gonna do, finish bottom of the league and say 'we may be bottom but it's a moral of victory because we never cheated.' Of course not! Cheats are life's winners!

[Norman]

I want simulation. Cheatings an admirable quality, shows a will to win. Football's a results business, so if you are not doing everything to win a match (that includes cheating,) in theory you are falling outwit the remit of your job specification and should be disciplined. If i was a manager, and one of my players missed an opportunity to dive and win us a penalty but didn't, and we lost or drew the match, i'd be raging and he'd be pulled into my office and asked to explain his actions. What you gonna do, finish bottom of the league and say 'we may be bottom but it's a moral of victory because we never cheated.' Of course not! Cheats are life's winners!

[The Mighty Quinn]

mate i'm serious. i'd rather we cheated and won than played like a saint n got beat. Not to cheat is being nieve. other teams will do it to you

[Jaggernaut]

I want simulation. Cheatings an admirable quality, shows a will to win. Football's a results business, so if you are not doing everything to win a match (that includes cheating,) in theory you are falling outwit the remit of your job specification and should be disciplined. If i was a manager, and one of my players missed an opportunity to dive and win us a penalty but didn't, and we lost or drew the match, i'd be raging and he'd be pulled into my office and asked to explain his actions. What you gonna do, finish bottom of the league and say 'we may be bottom but it's a moral of victory because we never cheated.' Of course not! Cheats are life's winners!

 

Nice one. You'll be aware of a club not too far from Firhill who take cheating to a whole other level. You might find a lot in common with fans of that club.

[scottymagoo]

Football needs both good guys and bad guys, it's all part of the plot, but it also needs the bad guys to get caught more often than not and punished when they do. The problem nowadays is this isn't happening and therefore cheating becomes endemic. We've also got ourselves into the situation where cheating isn't even regarded as cheating anymore. The question asked is 'Was there contact' and if there is it's apparently a penalty when in fact the question should be 'Was there enough contact to make it a foul'. And even when there isn't contact and people are caught blatantly cheating like Santi Cazorla was a week ago they don't use the evidence to punish afterwards. The result is that there's very little to lose by cheating and lots to gain so it has become expected and is now the norm rather than the preserve of a few pantomime villians that we can all love to hate.

[ClydebankJag]

Too many football fans take the moral high ground, including quite a few Jags fans on here recently, but answer this honestly - do you celebrate a Jags goal even when cheating has been involved?

[danish jag]

I agree with The Mighty Quinn. The way the glorious game is constructed, major game changing decisions are in the hands of three men supervising 22 and you would be off your nut, if you didn't take advantage of that. The competition is fierce and if you get the upper hand by tricking the ref then well done. I don't want to go all high and mighty morally. I cheer any Thistle goal regardless of how it came about.

[Duck snort]

Too many football fans take the moral high ground, including quite a few Jags fans on here recently, but answer this honestly - do you celebrate a Jags goal even when cheating has been involved?

 

I honestly can't remember the Jags profiting from cheating in the recent history. Calum Campbell took a few dives late 80s/early 90s and I hated that. I was shocked to see the number of tweets praising Cazorla for "earning" the penalty last week. I'm sure they all came from Arsenal fans who would have been just as quick to tweet their disgust if it had been a West Brom player doing the same thing at the other end.

[Jaggernaut]

Liam Buchanan was prone to going down very easily in the box, to the point where it was occasionally embarrassing.

[chunky jag]

Erskine doesn't take much encouragement to go down in the box either, and every week at least once, Sinclair goes down rather easily at some point.

 

Some of you may argue this is because they are players who are regularly fouled, which is fair enough, but I've seen them both go down with little encouragement. Last year, Off the top of my head, Erskine won us 3 pens, away to ross county in 2-2 draw, cant remember the incident especially. Away to dundee, thought he went down when he could have been "honest", not won us the penalty plus a sending off. Then he won us a pen against ayr united, when in my opinion he dived from a tackle from ex jag john robertson. Some of you may say he didnt dive, just took advantage of a careless leg from robbo, well it doesn't matter in your terminology, if you want cheating eradicated, where do you draw the line? We can't act like we're whiter than white, because everyone has benefitted from this at some point, we are no different.

 

Plus in my opinion, there was absolutely nothing wrong with what Dargo did, got in front of the defender, felt the contact, went down, page 1 of the modern day strikers manual I'm afraid, need to get on with it.

Edited December 17, 2012 by chunky jag

[G SUS]

McGuigan was fouled in the box, but the referee clearly played advantage. McGuigan failed to score with the shot, instead winning a corner. It would have been wrong to pull it back for a penalty after the advantage had been played.

[GrantB]

McGuigan was fouled in the box, but the referee clearly played advantage. McGuigan failed to score with the shot, instead winning a corner. It would have been wrong to pull it back for a penalty after the advantage had been played.

 

But that was exactly what happened at Dens last week. In fact the one at Dens was worse as it was the guy who passed the ball that was fouled rather than the guy trying to score.

 

If only the rules of the game were interpreted the same all over. Having said that, I dont mind because we scored from the corner. If the game had finished 2-2, I'd have been raging.

[John Blutarsky]

It would have been wrong to pull it back for a penalty after the advantage had been played.

 

It would have been entirely consistent with the rule if he had awarded a penalty.

 

The ref didn't play advantage anyway, he just didn't judge it to be an infringement. Same with the earlier 'penalty' incident, which was a tackle from behind.

[G SUS]

But that was exactly what happened at Dens last week. In fact the one at Dens was worse as it was the guy who passed the ball that was fouled rather than the guy trying to score.

 

If only the rules of the game were interpreted the same all over. Having said that, I dont mind because we scored from the corner. If the game had finished 2-2, I'd have been raging.

 

Yes and at Den's he was widely criticised as being wrong with his decision. An advantage has to be allowed, it doesn't have to be taken so the referee was perfectly correct to allow it.

[GrantB]

Yes and at Den's he was widely criticised as being wrong with his decision. An advantage has to be allowed, it doesn't have to be taken so the referee was perfectly correct to allow it.

 

Not by Dundee Utd he wasn't!

 

My point is about why one was a pen and the other wasn't. Like I said, I don't mind as we scored from the corner but it would have been an absolute travesty if we hadn't.

[G SUS]

Not by Dundee Utd he wasn't!

 

My point is about why one was a pen and the other wasn't. Like I said, I don't mind as we scored from the corner but it would have been an absolute travesty if we hadn't.

 

I get your point about lack of consistency between referees but Clancy got it right and Collum got it wrong.

 

McGuigan had the chance and failed to take it. Therefore he was given a, legitimate, advantage.

[Willjag]

I get your point about lack of consistency between referees but Clancy got it right and Collum got it wrong.

 

McGuigan had the chance and failed to take it. Therefore he was given a, legitimate, advantage.

You're not quite right G. If the advantage comes to nothing, the referee can then go back and give the penalty as it was still within the same phase of play. He did actually do that at one point on Saturday. He allowed Raith to play on at one point, then when it fizzled out, he took the play back and awarded Raith a free kick. I think he may have a problem deciding when one phase of play has finished and the next has started.

[G SUS]

You're not quite right G. If the advantage comes to nothing, the referee can then go back and give the penalty as it was still within the same phase of play. He did actually do that at one point on Saturday. He allowed Raith to play on at one point, then when it fizzled out, he took the play back and awarded Raith a free kick. I think he may have a problem deciding when one phase of play has finished and the next has started.

 

From the laws of the game:

 

Advantage

The referee may play advantage whenever an infringement or offence occurs.

The referee should consider the following circumstances in deciding whether to apply the advantage or stop play:

• the severity of the offence: if the infringement warrants an expulsion, the referee must stop play and send off the player unless there is a subsequent opportunity to score a goal

• the position where the offence was committed: the closer to the opponent's goal, the more effective it can be

• the chances of an immediate, promising attack

• the atmosphere of the match

The decision to penalise the original offence must be taken within a few

seconds.

If the offence warrants a caution, it must be issued at the next stoppage.

However, unless there is a clear advantage, it is recommended that the referee stops play and cautions the player immediately. If the caution is NOT issued at the next stoppage, it cannot be shown later.

 

The advantage was played on(McGuigan had the chance to score, but failed to take it). Nowhere in the laws of the game does it say that an advantage has to be taken, just the opportunity to have one. The next phase of play would then be the corner kick.

 

The referee had an ok game(the JH linesman was the worst of the three officials IMO) but in the penalty incident he was correct

 

ETA: The issue is the lack of consistency between refs. See last weeks game @ Dens and this weeks as a prime example of this.

Edited December 17, 2012 by G SUS

[Willjag]

From the laws of the game:

 

[/size][/color][/font]

 

The advantage was played on(McGuigan had the chance to score, but failed to take it). Nowhere in the laws of the game does it say that an advantage has to be taken, just the opportunity to have one. The next phase of play would then be the corner kick.

 

The referee had an ok game(the JH linesman was the worst of the three officials IMO) but in the penalty incident he was correct

 

ETA: The issue is the lack of consistency between refs. See last weeks game @ Dens and this weeks as a prime example of this.

There are refereees directives issued from the SFA each season though filtered down from FIFA. The laws are there as a base but they can't and don't cover every eventuality. If you attend referreeing classes you might get a better understanding of the rules and how how to intepret them.

 

Also from the passage of rules you posted above.... "If the offence warrants a caution, it must be issued at the next stoppage". If he had merely played an advantage he should have booked the Riath player, but he didn't so clearly, he didn't think it was a foul.

[thriller]

From the laws of the game:

 

[/size][/color][/font]

 

The advantage was played on(McGuigan had the chance to score, but failed to take it). Nowhere in the laws of the game does it say that an advantage has to be taken, just the opportunity to have one. The next phase of play would then be the corner kick.

 

The referee had an ok game(the JH linesman was the worst of the three officials IMO) but in the penalty incident he was correct

 

ETA: The issue is the lack of consistency between refs. See last weeks game @ Dens and this weeks as a prime example of this.

Take it your not a McGuigan fan then G SUS? You say he failed to take the chance while conveniently forgetting the fact the centre half had half of his strip while grabbing him round the neck. He actually did well to get a shot away at all but then again you probably won`t think so.

[G SUS]

There are refereees directives issued from the SFA each season though filtered down from FIFA. The laws are there as a base but they can't and don't cover every eventuality. If you attend referreeing classes you might get a better understanding of the rules and how how to intepret them.

 

Also from the passage of rules you posted above.... "If the offence warrants a caution, it must be issued at the next stoppage". If he had merely played an advantage he should have booked the Riath player, but he didn't so clearly, he didn't think it was a foul.

 

Not every foul is a caution. Given his reluctance to book players prior to the game, then he was clearly keeping his cards in his pocket.

 

He'd been playing advantage for the entirety of the game. Look at our first goal, Craig was being fouled multiple times, yet the ref played advantage superbly and we scored. Should he have booked the Raith player for the foul after we'd scored, despite the fact we took advantage of the advantage?