Kmcalpin

Aberdeen scudded us 7-2 at Pittodrie in 1972 and fortunately I wasn't at that game. However I was unlucky enough to be there when they beat us 8-0 in 1979. We have previous for heavy defeats in Aberdeen.

Our primary aim now is to avoid injuries and red cards.

Do we have a midfield tonight? It certainly doesn't sound like it. Now damage limitation.

When we play with a lone striker it allows opposition defenders, especially full/wing backs, more licence and freedom to advance up the pitch and put pressure on our midfielders.

If true thats downright ridiculous. Theres manhy fans who haven't the slightest interest in Champions League ( a misnomer if ever there was) games.

Hopefully someone from the club reads this and adds it to the list of evidence for presentation to the SFA.

Agreed. Mark McGhee is no worse than other managers. Most of them are adept at saying one thing then doing the exact opposite.

A good gesture by Les and I hope we can raise monthly income to take advantage of it. I now intend to increase my monthly contribution.

Ian Clinging - Carluke Rovers John Goldthorpe - Lesmahagow Graeme Forbes - Lochee United I'll stop at that.

I think they're missing the point. The club is not complaining about the red cards per se but rather about them in the context of other decisions in similar or identical situations. It really is about consistency. We have been on the receiving end twice recently whilst other similar fouls were not punished to the same extent.

Its difficult to understand, as mere fans, what has gone on behind the scenes. If as seems likely there has been some kind of recent SFA guidance issued to referees, then it certainly didn't reach our club and I suspect others. A meeting with the Head of Refereeing Operations should therefore prove helpful. However it also seems very likely that something has failed in the SFA communication to its employees ie the referees, if such inconsistencies are occurring. Its worrying that the SFA doesn't seem to recognise this. Whether it likes it or not there is a problem and that august body does need to examine its procedures. Any organisation should take external feedback seriously especially on issues relating to potential organisational failings and should examine matters. It seems to me that our club is querying inconsistent application of these new guidelines or whatever they are. Most of us would agree that refereeing inconsistencies have occurred as shown by examples on this forum. Its simply not good enough for the SFA to hide its head in the sand and effectively say "Nothing to do with us". Its interesting that the club has said that the onus is on clubs to prove an obvious refereeing error. I take it from that that its not enough to show, in an appeal, that the referee made an error, it has to be obvious. This suggests that it has to be proved, beyond all reasonable doubt that an error was made ie the burden of proof is the same as that required in a Court of Criminal Law, not a Civil Court. If the club could prove that the probability of error in a case was say 90% that would not be deemed to be sufficient to win an appeal. The SFA should not sidestep this issue and must examine its own procedures to promote consistency in refereeing decisions.

Well done to the club for issuing this statement. It covers a lot of the discussion we have been having on these boards of late. The key will be in interpreting the law and broad guidelines, which are very broad and perhaps worse than useless. There's so much inconsistency between games and within the same game. Referees have to be given specific advice and apply it consistently.

He was played out of position on quite a few occasions last season, not just in the one game.

Excluding distance cheating, which I detest, you will on average see about 3-4 foul throws per game. Very occasionally a referee will take a rush of blood to the head and penalise a player randomly.

Yes, thats very worrying. On a separate but related note I've noticed for some time that referees are totally unconcerned about tackles from behind. I recall a few yeas ago that referees were told to clamp down on this practice. Presumably thats a passing fad thats come and gone?

There's also another dimension to this issue, a very important one and that is fan awareness. To many, fans are an important part of the game and to the best of my knowledge the SFA did not issue a press release about this. You would think that a change as important as this would be broadcast, in advance, to all and sundry connected to the Scottish game. We are really only discussing this after the change came into force as a result of recent happenings on the pitch. I don't doubt for a minute that there are clubs, both professional and amateur, that don't know about the change and also many players. There could also be referees who don't know about it. The great issue now will be one of refereeing consistency...........I won't hold my breath.

Does that then mean that any slide tackle, which involves going to ground, will be deemed a red card whether or not contact is made with the opposing player?

Its a very poor day indeed, although not surprising, when the SFA cannot ensure consistent interpretation amongst its own employees.

So did our representatives know about the rule change before going to Hampden? If not why not? The issue of inconsistency won't go away however. In the light of the above, I'd like to know more about the respective referees' reasoning for not issuing a red card to Cole at Inverness and Kiernan at Fir Park (less of a mystery). Did these refs not know of the rule change or did they just refuse to implement it?

Fair comment. Its hard to say why Bowman wasn't fielded on Saturday. It could be because Mark McGhee always intended to play just one out and out striker or whether he just doesn't rate Bowman, in which case why was he on the bench?

I think this highlights the difference between the Scots and English games. The English game is harder and physically tougher and what is unacceptable up here is quite acceptable in England. I tend not to place too much store on the so called Scots' media views. Their opinions are overly influenced by which teams are playing.

Mark McGhee has made some good signings, some mediocre ones and some poor ones. Most managers do the same. I wonderhow Lee Clarke's record at Rugby Park compares. The current team is performing slightly better than our historic average. We've seen some very good teams at Fir Park and a lot of dire ones. Even Tommy MacLean had a mixed record. Yes he made some very astute signings but he also signed quite a few duds. For years his teams were ultra defensive and boring to watch but they got results. However they were capable of defending. I think our current problem is that the squad we have is not cut out to play the way Mark McGhee wants them to on many occasions. Some resemblance to the Jim Gannon era. I loved his footballing tactics but the problem was that the players he brought in weren't capable of playing that way.

Our pitch has improved beyond all recognition and thats down to investment by the club and hard work by excellent groundsmen.

Having just watched the TV highlights I would say he was indeed offside when the ball was played, albeit very slightly. Another bad officiating decision.

I very much agree with Sieb and Jay's comments on another thread. Pre match I thought Mark McGhee would set us up to try to stop Hearts and so he did. Thats acceptable to a certain extent but not to the extent we did. Our formation was what a 3-5-1-1 or a 5-4-1? Whatever it was, the players were not comfortable and it showed. Despite having 5 at the back we still played very narrowly. We didn't compete in the midfield and Hearts' work rate was far higher than ours. We simply didn't get in their faces. Frequently, Cadden and Ainsworth were closed down by 2/3 or even 4 opponents on occasions. Ainsworth and Moult did not link up well at all, playing far too far apart and on occasion Moult playing wide left with Ainsworth in the middle. Our lone striker was far too isolated - no surprise there then. All too often in the first half we resorted to long high balls to whoever was up front with the inevitable results. That was because we picked the wrong midfield. No Lucas or Pearson to provide some offensive support. It was noticeable that after they came on we enjoyed our best spell. Up until the red card did our plan work? I'd argue no. We were very rarely seen as an attacking force and seemed content to hold on for 0-0 draw. It was only a matter of time before Hearts scored. However the first goal came that was our plan scuppered. However the main talking point was the referee. Andrew Dallas had a shocking and inconsistent game. As early as the 3rd minute the Hearts no 77 (whatever his name was) took to diving and that continued for 90+ minutes as Ian Cathro will know. Lasley was rightly booked for hauling him down but when he returned the favour he got off scot free with no foul even given. It was very annoying to see him plead with the referee later to book Lasley for a second time for guess what - diving! You can imagine my disgust when he scored 2 goals - in my book he didn't deserve them. The Martin booking was downright bizarre as others have said. However in my view it should have been a red card (albeit in error) as Moult was tearing into the box with a clear sight of goal. A goalscoring opportunity if ever there was. I thought Heneghan's yellow card was very harsh and McHugh's red downright absurd. A disappointing and frustrating day all round.