Match Thread Aberdeen 3 - 1 Hibernian

[Ke1t]

4 hours ago, redone said:

McGeouch hasn’t been used much because whenever he’s been given game time he’s usually done fuck all. If he had anything about him , he should’ve  nailed down a starting place quite easily given the mediocrity of other players who have been picked ahead of him. I think he’s happy just to drift along , getting a game now and again picking up a decent wage. 

As far as Im concerned he doesn’t have the heart or desire to push himself to be the best he can be.  A Hibee mate told me a few years ago that their support felt that he was potentially one of their best players , but often too keen to rule himself out of contention , using injuries as an excuse.

 

I think Glass' pathological need to play Ojo... for whatever mental reason... has limited McGeoch's game time. 

I wouldn't ever say McGeough is brilliant, but his physical presence alone puts him a level above Ojo in an area where we've been constantly outplayed and out muscled. Brown was supposed to be the guy who pushed his weight around in midfield, but we never really saw that. 

[Ten Caat]

1 hour ago, Durrant Dived said:

top fin betta flo filter

Absolute melt of a man.

Tbf I actually do believe him. He's just of such low intelligence that it doesn't register with him that the only way he could possibly play the ball is by wiping out McCrorie into the bargain.

Hibs might think more carefully in future about which red cards they choose to appeal. 

[StandFree1982]

14 minutes ago, Ten Caat said:

Tbf I actually do believe him. He's just of such low intelligence that it doesn't register with him that the only way he could possibly play the ball is by wiping out McCrorie into the bargain.

Hibs might think more carefully in future about which red cards they choose to appeal. 

I'm sure there was an "attempt" at getting the ball, but there has to be a reasonable chance of winning the thing:

Second paragraph basically confirms it, and this is from the IFAB website, the official rules. In saying that, there should be a LOT of red cards if pulling/holding/pushing was classified as a sending off offence. 

Denying a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity

Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence, the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

A player, sent-off player, substitute or substituted player who enters the field of play without the required referee’s permission and interferes with play or an opponent and denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity is guilty of a sending-off offence.

 

 

[Schapenneuker]

I'm not sure which more hilarious.....the arse getting an extra ban for the frivolous appeal, or the the fact that some Hibs fans actually, truly believe that it should only have been a yellow, or equally the fact that there are Hibs fans out there who believe that this square-headed walloper is actually a footballer and worth over  a million quid to them. 

What a team. What a set of deluded, fuckwit supporters. 

 

[Schapenneuker]

1 hour ago, Ten Caat said:

Tbf I actually do believe him. He's just of such low intelligence that it doesn't register with him that the only way he could possibly play the ball is by wiping out McCrorie into the bargain.

Hibs might think more carefully in future about which red cards they choose to appeal. 

This is my favourite part. Porteous actually seems to believe that because he was apparently watching the ball, that's somehow mitigation for flying into a thigh-high lunge from directly behind McCrorie, with the ball about 4 feet away. 

The tackle itself was worthy of a red card, never mind it being a penalty. What a tit of a man. 

 

[fine-n-dandy]

? fk you MalMoaney, here’s that additional match ban for Porteous for your daft appeal. 
 

Hopefully we make top six & we play Hibs in on of for 2 games post split just to put cherry on top ?

[thurso]

10 minutes ago, Schapenneuker said:

This is my favourite part. Porteous actually seems to believe that because he was apparently watching the ball, that's somehow mitigation for flying into a thigh-high lunge from directly behind McCrorie, with the ball about 4 feet away. 

The tackle itself was worthy of a red card, never mind it being a penalty. What a tit of a man. 

 

The guys is such an idiot he would of thought at the time Iv no way of getting the ball but if I swipe at it they will get a pen and might miss it and we will still have 11 on the park as I’m only getting a yellow as it will look like I made an effort for it 

[minijc]

7 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

? fk you MalMoaney, here’s that additional match ban for Porteous for your daft appeal. 
 

Hopefully we make top six & we play Hibs in on of for 2 games post split just to put cherry on top ?

Hahaha cracker.

[thurso]

7 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

? fk you MalMoaney, here’s that additional match ban for Porteous for your daft appeal. 
 

Hopefully we make top six & we play Hibs in on of for 2 games post split just to put cherry on top ?

Rather have portious in their team, he’s a liability, fuck up waiting to happen 

[fine-n-dandy]

11 minutes ago, thurso said:

Rather have portious in their team, he’s a liability, fuck up waiting to happen 

Or a potential match winner ? 50/50 really 

[thurso]

Just now, fine-n-dandy said:

Or a potential match winner ? 50/50 really 

Was a liability that match to and should never have been still on the park to score it but ref fucked up 

[fine-n-dandy]

3 minutes ago, thurso said:

Was a liability that match to and should never have been still on the park to score it but ref fucked up 

So you have to have faith in our shite refs to hope to benefit from Porteous playing. 
Last week we got fortunate & a ref on a rare ‘ok’ day.  Not normally the case

 

I’d prefer Porteous out of their team than in it v us. 

[Guest milne_afc]

1 hour ago, minijc said:

Hahaha cracker.

?

[Ke1t]

2 hours ago, thurso said:

The guys is such an idiot he would of thought at the time Iv no way of getting the ball but if I swipe at it they will get a pen and might miss it and we will still have 11 on the park as I’m only getting a yellow as it will look like I made an effort for it 

I genuinely don't think Porteous' brain works that quick. 

[fine-n-dandy]

48 minutes ago, milne_afc said:

?

Wow. You are so clever to understand his sarcasm that rather than give him an anonymous ? you had to quote comment ? to make sure others knew you were the cleverest person in the room 

 

sook arse ? 

[Tommy]

7 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

Wow. You are so clever to understand his sarcasm that rather than give him an anonymous ? you had to quote comment ? to make sure others knew you were the cleverest person in the room 

 

sook arse ? 

?

[fine-n-dandy]

? the more I have watched that Porteous tackle the more ridiculous their ‘going for the ball’ excuse is ? you watch it in real time he thinks he’s auditioning for Kobra Kai ?

 

Sweep the leg Johnny 

[sheepcrooky]

Went to have a look on Hibs.net, but now you can’t view it unless you are registered. Spoon burning fuckers. 

[DandyWarhol]

55 minutes ago, sheepcrooky said:

Went to have a look on Hibs.net, but now you can’t view it unless you are registered. Spoon burning fuckers. 

https://www.hibs.net/forumdisplay.php?2-hibs-net-Main-Forum

[StandFree1982]

11 hours ago, DandyWarhol said:

https://www.hibs.net/forumdisplay.php?2-hibs-net-Main-Forum

They genuinely thought the appeal might have been successful. I'm embarrassed for them. 

 

Quote

I reckon that was a 50/50 chance of being successful.

And seem to think he's the victim rather than just an overrated idiot

Quote

Ryan needs to leave in the summer as the media are never going to leave him alone I wonder what the daily rag headlines will be
 

Quote

Agreed. He dared to incite one half of the duopoly and has been punished accordingly.

 

I never used to hate Hibs, but I'm starting to despise the spoon burning junkie cunts. 

 

Quote

Porto is the player that ALL rival clubs love to hate, much like Scott Brown. No surprise there's not any support for him.

People hate him because he's an idiot and constantly trying to hurt opposition players. He's probably the most overrated non OF player in the league. 

[Andy_123]

There's a couple of folk on there who seem to have been able to see what everyone else did, but some of the comments on there are complete fantasy. Even after factoring in a bit of bias because it's their team, they are still totally nuts.

He'll give 100% for the cause and willing to go challenge every ball etc which is probably why the Hibs fans like him, and he said something once that wound up the Huns, but talent wise he's mediocre at best and discipline wise he's a complete liability. 

9 games he's been suspended for the Hibs fans are saying. Should have had a red card against us last time as well. 

 

[Durrant Dived]

13 hours ago, DandyWarhol said:

https://www.hibs.net/forumdisplay.php?2-hibs-net-Main-Forum

Tbf, the majority agree its a red and think he shouldn't have made the tackle. 

[zeroisgod76]

A lot of delusion from Hibs fans when it comes to the first penalty. Claiming that the first penalty shouldn't have been given as it 'struck Bushiri on the knee and then his arm'. and 'the tv replays showed that the ball ricocheted off Bushiri's leg onto his arm and was therefore not a pen.'

It clearly struck another player on the knee (Porteous?) before hitting the arm of Bushiri?

[Schapenneuker]

1 hour ago, zeroisgod76 said:

A lot of delusion from Hibs fans when it comes to the first penalty. Claiming that the first penalty shouldn't have been given as it 'struck Bushiri on the knee and then his arm'. and 'the tv replays showed that the ball ricocheted off Bushiri's leg onto his arm and was therefore not a pen.'

It clearly struck another player on the knee (Porteous?) before hitting the arm of Bushiri?

Some of them seem to be claiming that it hit Bushiri's thigh a half second before it hit his arm. It which case it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

I've watched it half a dozen times and I honestly can't tell if it hit his thigh or not. I'm not saying it didn't, but if you can't tell after half a dozen slow motion views, it would be impossible for the referee at the game. 

From his viewpoint, it looked like a stonewaller. 

 

[strachanmcgheegoal]

I don’t remember anyone from that Club speaking about the nonsense interpretation that impacted Hedges against, unsurprisingly, the hun.

so fuck em.

[Andy_123]

1 hour ago, Schapenneuker said:

Some of them seem to be claiming that it hit Bushiri's thigh a half second before it hit his arm. It which case it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

I've watched it half a dozen times and I honestly can't tell if it hit his thigh or not. I'm not saying it didn't, but if you can't tell after half a dozen slow motion views, it would be impossible for the referee at the game. 

From his viewpoint, it looked like a stonewaller. 

 

Wonder how many of the Hibs fans would be saying that wasn't a pen had it been the other way round and it was Bates or Gallagher's arm it hit.

My guess would be none.

[zeroisgod76]

1 hour ago, Schapenneuker said:

Some of them seem to be claiming that it hit Bushiri's thigh a half second before it hit his arm. It which case it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

I've watched it half a dozen times and I honestly can't tell if it hit his thigh or not. I'm not saying it didn't, but if you can't tell after half a dozen slow motion views, it would be impossible for the referee at the game. 

From his viewpoint, it looked like a stonewaller. 

 

All i can see from watching it is it hitting the foot of the other player and then onto Bushiri's arm. That was the only time there was a deviation of the ball. If it did skim his thigh it must have been a miniscule touch and i doubt even VAR (if we had it) would have overturned the decision.

[Ke1t]

Doesn't really matter if it was a pen or not, since the second pen was a pen all day, and we'd still have won anyway. 

 

[sooth_stander]

5 minutes ago, Ke1t said:

Doesn't really matter if it was a pen or not, since the second pen was a pen all day, and we'd still have won anyway. 

 

And, we should have had a pen earlier, when Ramirez was clipped after McLennan missed that chance at the back post

[fine-n-dandy]

3 hours ago, Schapenneuker said:

Some of them seem to be claiming that it hit Bushiri's thigh a half second before it hit his arm. It which case it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

I've watched it half a dozen times and I honestly can't tell if it hit his thigh or not. I'm not saying it didn't, but if you can't tell after half a dozen slow motion views, it would be impossible for the referee at the game. 

From his viewpoint, it looked like a stonewaller. 

 

Regardless. His arm is up & it basically prevents a shot at goal.

 

so if we interpret the rules according to them any player can stop a shot on goal with a hand as long as they lift their knee up to ‘deflect’ it slightly. 
Normally with penalties that opposition fans are moaning about you could see a case for arguing & say maybe ‘if it was against us I would be pissed off’ but in this instance I would say ‘ fair enough, ball to hand or not, his hands up & blocked a shot on goal, penalty’