Peter Pawlett

[RUL]

Banned for 2 games for Diving.

 

Another boy, Goodwin, banned for 2 games for throwing a punch?

 

Fair.

[Jazzer_Bett]

Ach, its because of the Aluko thing - they had to do it or the Huns would be up in arms

[RUL]

Perhaps, my point is more is 2 games for diving really appropriate if boys that throw a punch are getting the same ban?

[Redstar]

Banned for 2 games for Diving.

 

Another boy, Goodwin, banned for 2 games for throwing a punch?

 

Fair.

 

You knew the second AFC bumped their gums about appealing Pawlett's red that this was in the post...I reckon if we'd STFU about the red this wouldn't have happened.

[vanderark14]

Ach, its because of the Aluko thing - they had to do it or the Huns would be up in arms

 

for once I agree with Jazzer.

 

nothing afc said or did would have changed this.

 

one question though, is his ban now extended after the sending off?

[RUL]

for once I agree with Jazzer.

 

nothing afc said or did would have changed this.

 

one question thought, is his ban now extended after the sending off?

 

AFC are appealing the red but no mention of it so far.

[Foster14]

You knew the second AFC bumped their gums about appealing Pawlett's red that this was in the post...I reckon if we'd STFU about the red this wouldn't have happened.

 

Rubbish. He is facing two bans just now, and that would have been the case with or without appealing the red card. A precedent has now been started on diving and retrospective punishments are (hopefully) going to be the norm now...

[King Street Loon]

You knew the second AFC bumped their gums about appealing Pawlett's red that this was in the post...I reckon if we'd STFU about the red this wouldn't have happened.

 

Afraid not redhand.

 

A precedent had been set with Aluko getting a 2 game ban for the same offence.

This would still have happened regardless if we'd STFU or not.

[The Boofon]

Rubbish. He is facing two bans just now, and that would have been the case with or without appealing the red card. A precedent has now been started on diving and retrospective punishments are (hopefully) going to be the norm now...

 

 

We'd have got 1 point if Pawlett hadn't dived instead of 3.

 

Will we drop more than 2 points by not having Pawlett for 2 games?

 

IU'd say no since he's only got a chance in the Hibs game and has been warming the bench for most of the season.

 

It's irritating he's getting banned for 2 games as it means Clark will get a start but I'd say those extra 2 points were worth the 2 game ban in the long run.

[Redstar]

Rubbish. He is facing two bans just now, and that would have been the case with or without appealing the red card. A precedent has now been started on diving and retrospective punishments are (hopefully) going to be the norm now...

 

Well we'll never know now...So Pawlett is out for 2 possibly 3-4...nice...still we could have played all day and never scored from open play...a means to an end...eh Brooner

[Crossbow]

I think it is a good thing - I hope it is enforced fairly (though with the SPL you have to be sceptical) - it has at the least started fairly.

 

I must confess to liking the idea of penalising the club too (perhaps 2 points for each offence) - it'd kill the practice; though it would obviously hurt us were such an idea being used at present. Don't see that happening though.

 

Is it as bad as hitting someone - well both people penalised gained their clubs 2 extra points so I'd have to say yes.

[Redstar]

Hun

You do realize that if I was a hun I'd be overjoyed by Broon's reign at AFC?

[vanderark14]

Well we'll never know now...So Pawlett is out for 2 possibly 3-4...nice...still we could have played all day and never scored from open play...a means to an end...eh Brooner

 

I'm struggling to think of a thread where some how you haven't managed to take a dig at Brown.

[The Boofon]

 

 

I must confess to liking the idea of penalising the club too (perhaps 2 points for each offence) - it'd kill the practice; though it would obviously hurt us were such an idea being used at present. Don't see that happening though.

 

 

Fantastic idea. :applause:

 

That should be started next season. I'd go further and hand the two points to the opposition.

[tainboy]

In this instance. Just to rile the hunnery we should publicly applaud the diving punishment but appeal the red.

[tommo1903]

So what is he currently looking at serving?

 

2 games for diving, plus 2 games for his straight red?

 

Think we'll win the straight red appeal no bother.

[scottydoo85]

But does this not mean every time someone goes down in the box it must be a pen, if not its a dive, or if a soft award is given then its thought of as a dive, I personally don't think Pawlett dived, there was pressure and intact even if minimal, and when running at pace the will send you to the ground, but not a dive, not a pen either, we/Pawlett, you could say are the ones being punished overly hardly for a referees mistake, its not always black and white in these situations and I think this has been lost along the line somewhere, anyway, O'Connors non dive was as much as a non dive as Pawletts......... this could turn out into a mine field and lead to more problems than solutions, divers should be punished, but as I said its not always a dive

[Sandafc]

But does this not mean every time someone goes down in the box it must be a pen, if not its a dive, or if a soft award is given then its thought of as a dive, I personally don't think Pawlett dived, there was pressure and intact even if minimal, and when running at pace the will send you to the ground, but not a dive, not a pen either, we/Pawlett, you could say are the ones being punished overly hardly for a referees mistake, its not always black and white in these situations and I think this has been lost along the line somewhere, anyway, O'Connors non dive was as much as a non dive as Pawletts......... this could turn out into a mine field and lead to more problems than solutions, divers should be punished, but as I said its not always a dive

Good post. certainly dont think it was a dive even sproule and stevenson have said there was contact but wasnt a pen. I totally agree with that but after the aluko incident was no way he wasnt being banned.

[RUL]

It's a mess, how do they work out its 2 games if it's a yellow for the same offence?

[Red Morning Light]

Not a pen, not a dive. Did he even claim for a pen? Can't remember.

 

Where will it end eh? Surely if players are punished the refs should be handed bans too for missing incidents?

[Miglo don]

Total nonsense, what if someone dives in the middle of the park? Will they ban any simulation? Total minefield, and all because Ally fucking McMoist spouted his fat ageing smarmy coupon off about things! Joke!

[Roo]

The player is basically being punished for the refs incompetence.

 

How about retrospective punishments for players kicking the ball away?

 

That's what annoys me - can't argue with it to the extent that precedence has been set (and as much as I don't like diving, it was a dangerous precedent to set), but once again the ref who gives the decision gets away scot free. Apalling refereeing never gets addressed, because the refs have the audacity to throw a strop and go on strike when anyone dares to question their integrity

 

Refs now as well will find it easier to give a 'soft pen' should they choose to, because if it's wrong then the punishment can be dished out retrospectively

[strachanmcgheegoal]

as I said in another thread, would we swap a bit part winger for two games for the three points on Saturday - damn right - so where's the disincentive. And the richer club and bigger squad you have the less of an impact it has.

 

as for points deduction (which I'm all for incidentally) we all know that the gruesome twosome would insist on an agreement whereby they were both docked the same points in any season (if any) and even then claim it's no fair.

[Stoney]

If pp hadnt claimed for the pen fair enough but hes dived then claimed for it

 

Worth it for the two point imo taken one for the team

[a don in oz]

I don't get why if spotted retrospectively a dive leads to a ban personally. During the game O'Connor was just given a yellow for diving. Why is after-the-fact more serious?

 

Couldn't they at least make *this* consistent?

 

I missed it during the game and not seen it since... was it a dive? The red certainly was never a red.

 

 

[Crossbow]

I don't get why if spotted retrospectively a dive leads to a ban personally. During the game O'Connor was just given a yellow for diving. Why is after-the-fact more serious?

 

Couldn't they at least make *this* consistent?

 

I missed it during the game and not seen it since... was it a dive? The red certainly was never a red.

 

I guess if you spot it during the game you don't give the diving team a penalty which allows them to win the game. Both Aluko and Pawlett penalties effectively won their side the match. I presume this is why they are giving the ban. Diving resulting in a free kick which does not immediately lose a goal is effectively less of a stolen advantage.

[Tommy]

I still think Pawlett's heel was kicked but ignoring that aspect, i think match officials who make

an arse of things should be demoted to a lower league game so they recognise that they aint

the infallibles many of them think they are.

[Dandyjam]

Wonder if we'll appeal the ban for the dive. Hibs did and it got overturned and it was as much a dive as Aluko's. Personally I'd just accept it and move on. Confident the appeal for the sending off will be successful.

[Sandafc]

If we dont accept it tho, is that not accepting that your players a diver? Think we have to appeal it and im pretty sure she got touched and not a dive but accept he didnt exactly stop himself going to ground. Pretty sure the best PP can get out of the 2 offences is a 2 game ban cant see the SFA accepting Aberdeen were right to appeal twice.

[inverkipdons]

I still think Pawlett's heel was kicked but ignoring that aspect, i think match officials who make

an arse of things should be demoted to a lower league game so they recognise that they aint

the infallibles many of them think they are.

 

It really doesn't look good for the ref when two of his big decisions are overturned. He should get a 2 game ban/demotion for each of these.