[Markie]

neilta, on 16:22 10 Feb 2009, said:

Jesus Christ, give it a pumping rest.

If it bothers you that much, dont read the thread.

But I suppose logic like that is to simple for an Anderdeen fan

[Markie]

Malkyffc, on 16:32 10 Feb 2009, said:

No the ref did get it correct ...at first, but Elvis changed his mind.

Fixed

This post has been edited by Markie: 10 February 2009 - 05:18 PM

[denhaagdavid]

Bzzzz, on 14:57 10 Feb 2009, said:

Strangely enough if I goggle my own name I get "the man with the platinum eyes!"

do a google search on bzzzz and select images, the 3rd hit is a bit worrying

[Alexi]

denhaagdavid, on 18:58 10 Feb 2009, said:

do a google search on bzzzz and select images, the 3rd hit is a bit worrying

[Bzzzz]

Could have been a lot worse!!!

http://cardboardspaceshiptoys.com/shop/ima...he%20beaver.jpg

[calmac_man]

Not going to read the whole thread, but:

Paddy Capri, on 18:02 7 Feb 2009, said:

Offside goal awarded against Hearts.

No it wasn't. It was onside, as proved by Hearts' own cameras.

Quote

Driver Sythed down in the box. McHibby and Linesman Chris Young (who also changed his mind at Hearts v Aberdeen pen decision) gives a penalty only for them ti change their mind and give a corner after having a word with SFA delegate Pressley - cheating gash.

It was a penalty, but not totally obvious. From the linesman's perspective he would have seen the Falkik boy touch the ball firmly, but wouldn't have appreciated how much he came through Driver first. A mistake, but an understandable one.

Quote

Hearts player sent off - probably a sending off

PROBABLY???



What would it have taken for you to say definitely, use of a pick-axe handle and a signed confession?

Quote

but if it was a Falkirk player it would never have been a sending off as was demonstrated when Stewart burst through the Falkirk defence, goal scoring oppertunity denied when Elvis chopped both his legs away from him (only a booking!!!)

There were a couple of defenders after Pressley. A very cynical, professional foul but in no way last man.


FFS, proof my bahookie. Are you sure you wouldn't be more comfortable supporting Celtic?

[dan cake]

i think its good for the competition hearts are out
a lot of people are getting sick of hearts winning it every year

[hannibal smith]

calmac_man, on 00:46 12 Feb 2009, said:

Not going to read the whole thread, but:


No it wasn't. It was onside, as proved by Hearts' own cameras.


It was a penalty, but not totally obvious. From the linesman's perspective he would have seen the Falkik boy touch the ball firmly, but wouldn't have appreciated how much he came through Driver first. A mistake, but an understandable one.


PROBABLY???



What would it have taken for you to say definitely, use of a pick-axe handle and a signed confession?


There were a couple of defenders after Pressley. A very cynical, professional foul but in no way last man.


FFS, proof my bahookie. Are you sure you wouldn't be more comfortable supporting Celtic?

dont have to be last man to get sent off, i thought it was denying a clear goalscoring chance? which is what pressley did

[Knoxy]

dan cake, on 06:40 12 Feb 2009, said:

i think its good for the competition hearts are out
a lot of people are getting sick of hearts winning it every year

It was disappointing to go out on sat but you know what, it was all worth it getting to punt you lot out first, ahhh bisto!!!

[calmac_man]

hannibal smith, on 08:29 12 Feb 2009, said:

dont have to be last man to get sent off, i thought it was denying a clear goalscoring chance? which is what pressley did

Only if you take a definition of clear goalscoring chance that's much wider than referees are told to take.

It wasn't that clear a chance. It was the chance of a chance. There were other defenders around.

[Markie]

Do folk not think this has been discussed enough and its time to move on ffs