A bit apprehensive about this game with hibs not doing too badly and us not exactly setting the heather on fire.

 

We have not won at Easter road since early 2006 with Steve Crawford and Mackie getting us the goals that day.......that was some time ago!

That piece makes no sense whatsoever. Just "chico" trying to do his usual and sound clever. Empty vessels make the most noise right enough.

 

However, AFC have gone well over the score on this. Maguire's tackles were both worthy of bookings so he'd have been off anyway and we shouldn't really be complaining about those. Ross's second booking was wrong though, but still hardly the injustice AFC are making it out to be. Likewise with Murray's tackle, which was never deserving of a red card.

 

It seems to me like McGhee and Miller are taking a leaf out of their old gaffer's book and trying to deflect attention away from our decidedly average start to the season. I've got no problem with that and it might even help to fire the players up if they think they're being hard done by 

 

I think the point that AFC were trying to make was that a referee with experience would have followed a 'common sense' approach, i.e. having a word with players rather than simply brandishing cards. Refereeing should never just be black and white, it is all about dealing with people sensibly and making sure that the laws of the game are adhered too.

 

Cautioning players for borderline offences (particularly if its their first foul) only sets a dangerous precedent where every similar incident must also result in a caution - as seemed to be the case on Saturday. I can only assume that because it was Nicholls' second game at SPL level (and by all accounts he fucked up the first too) that he wanted to stamp his authority by sticking rigidly to the letter of the law. Hopefully he will adopt a more 'common sense' approach in time, as AFC are suggesting.

 

 

I think the point that AFC were trying to make was that a referee with experience would have followed a 'common sense' approach, i.e. having a word with players rather than simply brandishing cards. Refereeing should never just be black and white, it is all about dealing with people sensibly and making sure that the laws of the game are adhered too.

 

Cautioning players for borderline offences (particularly if its their first foul) only sets a dangerous precedent where every similar incident must also result in a caution - as seemed to be the case on Saturday. I can only assume that because it was Nicholls' second game at SPL level (and by all accounts he fucked up the first too) that he wanted to stamp his authority by sticking rigidly to the letter of the law. Hopefully he will adopt a more 'common sense' approach in time, as AFC are suggesting.

 

 

 

I'm not buying this 'common sense approach'.

 

Batter on at a hunder and 2 just south of stoney and common sense approach says its your first time caught, your young and daft and your old man will kill you when he finds out. Caution and on your way son? ??

Surely rules are rules? and this 'quiet word' business is what pisses us all off about Barry FergusHun!

Surely Sticking rigidly to the letter of the law is what Referee's are supposed to do?

 

 

Although I DO like the siege mentality approach, if that's what it is!

 

Carry on...

I'm not buying this 'common sense approach'.

 

Batter on at a hunder and 2 just south of stoney and common sense approach says its your first time caught, your young and daft and your old man will kill you when he finds out. Caution and on your way son? ??

Surely rules are rules? and this 'quiet word' business is what pisses us all off about Barry FergusHun!

Surely Sticking rigidly to the letter of the law is what Referee's are supposed to do?

 

 

Although I DO like the siege mentality approach, if that's what it is!

 

Carry on...

 

Eh? This is football, not speeding.

 

Totally disagree, a common sense approach is far more effective as you'll end up every week, dishing out reds like sweeties every week. The game will descend into total farcical conditions if we saw each tackle like last Saturday being given yellows. To get a yellow for your first tackle is ridiculous, even more so with the two that Ross made.

 

If every new ref is going to be sticking rigidly to the letter of the law, then prepare for a game with no tackles and no contact because thats what it will descend into. Players fearing the worst everytime they go to ground, one inch out of place and it's a caution and generally letting the game be ruined by letter law abiding, power hungry refs.

Got to agree about the common sense approach, you will see it in years to come from the same ref I think, he will be moulded to take a more measured approach, apparently he's highly regarded and a cert for the FIFA list, not sure if thats by default of all the other refs being old or what.... I just feel if you follow the letter of the law every time games will finish 7 on 7, except when you go to Glasgow where it will be 11 V 7.

 

Also someone posted earlier about why Nish did not get booked for celebrating his goal but fairly sure he did.

 

Also someone posted earlier about why Nish did not get booked for celebrating his goal but fairly sure he did.

 

That was me.  I must have missed his booking, I was in a right rage at the time so probably missed it!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/aberdeen/8346669.stm

 

Aberdeen have confirmed the Scottish FA has contacted the club seeking an explanation for criticism of referee Steven Nicholls earlier this week.

 

A website statement from the Dons pilloried the official for sending off Maurice Ross and Chris Maguire during Saturday's 2-0 defeat at Hibernian.

 

Aberdeen director of football Willie Miller said: "I would hope they would see there are valid points."

 

The statement was not attributed to any individual or official at the club.

 

The SFA's head of referee development Hugh Dallas had said "very comfortable with the two major decisions in the match".

 

Aberdeen's statement claimed the match had "almost descended into farce" because of what they describe as "the antics of the man in the middle".

 

It also said that Nicholls was "hell-bent" on ordering players off.

 

Aberdeen manager Mark McGhee had criticised Nicholls following the match, in which two late goals by Liam Miller and Colin Nish secured victory for the Edinburgh side.

 

But the statement, which was posted on Monday, also insisted the referee was intent on establishing his authority on the match from kick-off and appealed for a more "common-sense" approach to refereeing.

 

Responding to the remarks, Dallas asserted that football was unpredictable and referees have to martial matches on an individual basis and take the appropriate disciplinary action when players breach the rules.

 

Miller said on Tuesday that he hoped the club would avoid censure for criticising the referee.

I'm not buying this 'common sense approach'.

 

Batter on at a hunder and 2 just south of stoney and common sense approach says its your first time caught, your young and daft and your old man will kill you when he finds out. Caution and on your way son? ??

Surely rules are rules? and this 'quiet word' business is what pisses us all off about Barry FergusHun!

Surely Sticking rigidly to the letter of the law is what Referee's are supposed to do?

 

 

Although I DO like the siege mentality approach, if that's what it is!

 

Carry on...

 

Not really considering if they did then they would also add on stoppage time for every stoppage in play, making the game last about 2 1/2 hours!

 

Common sense is the ref's biggest responsibility imo because it goes hand in hand wi safety. When the ref loses the plot like he did on sat, the fans get riled and the players feed off that. The tackles weren't really flying in until the 2nd half and even more so after the red cards. Then what happened? a player got (what seemed to be at the time and what could well have been) a serious injury.

Not really considering if they did then they would also add on stoppage time for every stoppage in play, making the game last about 2 1/2 hours!

 

Common sense is the ref's biggest responsibility imo because it goes hand in hand wi safety. When the ref loses the plot like he did on sat, the fans get riled and the players feed off that. The tackles weren't really flying in until the 2nd half and even more so after the red cards. Then what happened? a player got (what seemed to be at the time and what could well have been) a serious injury.

 

Then the laws need changing!

 

I agree that going nuts will cause trouble, but where do we get this common sense from? Who dictates what common sense to use? Is it not common sense (tied in with safety) not to give the away team a penalty infront of 54,000 home fans who may start breaking chairs? (obviously thats early in the game not near the end!).

 

I think my point is that common sense is subjective, and as we saw the boy Murray's common sense was up his erse. The rules should always be followed, that's what they are there for and the added on time is a good example of where they clearly are not being followed in Scottish Football.

Reports on mad that one of the aberdeen guys dressed up as sheep set on fire on the train in Fife and taken away in an ambulance badly burned.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-11084526

 

Compensation for sheep costume football fan set on fire

 

A football fan who set fire to a rival supporter who was dressed as a sheep is to pay his victim £25,000 in compensation.

 

Hibernian fan Peter Wallace, 24, of St Andrews, set Aberdeen supporter Arjuna Rabindranath alight on a train.

 

The victim, also 24, suffered serious burns and needed extensive treatment.

 

Wallace admitted culpable and reckless conduct, and agreed to pay the compensation when he appeared at Kircaldy Sheriff Court.

 

The incident happened on an Edinburgh to Aberdeen train last October

£25k Ouch.

£25k Ouch.

 

Being set on fire. Actual ouch. The guys lucky he got off so lightly IMO.

Being set on fire. Actual ouch. The guys lucky he got off so lightly IMO.

 

My thoughts exactly.

Peter Wallace, heir to a £3m Fife farm which has been in his family for five generations, caused panic on a crowded train after setting his victim Arjuna Rabindranath alight. Mr Rabindranath, 24, ran through the carriage, blazing and in agony.

 

Sheriff Grant McCulloch ordered Wallace to be admonished, in addition to making the compensation order.

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/193856-millionaire-football-fan-avoids-jail-term-after-setting-fire-to-rival-supporter/

 

A millionaire football fan who almost killed a rival supporter by setting fire to his home-made sheep costume, avoided jail on Wednesday after agreeing to pay his victim £25,000 compensation.

 

Peter Wallace, heir to a £3m Fife farm which has been in his family for five generations, caused panic on a crowded train after setting his victim Arjuna Rabindranath alight. Mr Rabindranath, 24, ran through the carriage, blazing and in agony.

 

Kirkcaldy Sheriff Court heard that the pair were among fans, many of them in fancy dress to celebrate Halloween, returning from Aberdeen's October 31 Scottish Premier League fixture at Hibs last year.

 

Wallace, 24, who manages the farm near St Andrews, repeatedly flicked his lighter near Aberdeen fan Arjuna's costume - made of a white tracksuit and cotton wool - until it caught light.

 

Depute fiscal Mark McGuire, prosecuting, told the court: "People heard screaming and saw a man on fire running about."

 

One of the passengers on the Edinburgh to Aberdeen train described the sight of the burning, panic-stricken fan running through the carriage as "like a scene from a horror movie".

 

People threw beer on to Arjuna's sheep outfit to try and douse the flames, but to no affect. The victim was taken to hospital in Dunfermline but later transferred to the specialist burns unit at St John's Hospital in Livingston.

 

Reckless

 

The court heard that Wallace, wearing a Hibs top, later approached police at Kirkcaldy railway station and said: "It was me. I was just mucking about with a lighter and accidentally set fire to the man."

 

Arjuna suffered second and third-degree burns to more than 40% of his body, and there were fears for his life because of the damage caused to his lungs by smoke inhalation and sepsis.

 

He remained in hospital until January when he was discharged at his own request into the care of his mother, who came from India to look after him.

 

Wallace, of Kincaple Farm Cottages, near St Andrews, Fife, pleaded guilty to culpably and recklessly flicking a lighter, causing it to spark and set his victim's clothes alight.

 

David Bell, defending, said Wallace was the eldest of three and was brought on the arable family farm - but had previously received a football-related on the spot fine which, the solicitor said, resulted from him "drinking at a Hibs semi-final at Hampden Park in 2007". The offence was dealt with by a fine.

 

He said: "He went to agricutural college in Aberdeen for two years but had to return after his father died a tragic death after an eight-months fight with cancer. He moved back five years ago to work on the farm, and is now the manager, in effect.

 

"The farm is worth £3m and has assets of £250,000. My client is due a third of that, along with his two siblings. He lives for his family work and his mother describes him as a workaholic. He plays rugby and is also a Hibs fan."

 

Distraught

 

He added: "He attended the game in question. He met the Mr Rabindranath on the train and they talked in good humour about it. They even exchanged number to meet that night. He was distraught when later questioned by police about the incident, but he has always accepted responsibility.

 

"Some have described the Mr Rabindranath as looking like a fireball. It was a stupid and reckless act. He asks himself now what Mr Rabindranath must think of him, after his life was turned upside down. He has written to him apologising, and he hopes the Crown will be able to pass it onto him once the case is over.

 

"If he went to jail, it would have a catastrophic effect on the farm and his family. His younger brother, who is less experienced at farm work than he is, would have to leave his studies as an accountant to take over."

 

Sheriff Grant McCulloch ordered Wallace to be admonished, in addition to making the compensation order.

 

He told Wallace: "This case is tragic not only for you and your family, but for the effect it has had on the victim. It has been catastrophic for him. This incident again shows the dangers of playing with a naked flame. I accept you didn't want to cause harm - this is more like a terrible accident.

 

"Your behaviour since has shown a level of maturity and I have seen your letter to the victim, and it is very sympathetic. I accept you are unlikely to offend again, and there would be no benefit in imposing a custodial sentence."

Got to say I don't understand why the fine/punishment is more about justice in terms of the 'accidental' criminal, rather than based on what the victim is due. If I had...

 

"suffered second and third-degree burns to more than 40% of his body, and there were fears for his life because of the damage caused to his lungs by smoke inhalation and sepsis.

 

He remained in hospital until January when he was discharged at his own request into the care of his mother, who came from India to look after him."

 

...I'd be expecting it to cost me a fuckload more than 25k to even begingetting my life back. Even if the hibee had been on the dole the boy should've got more, but the cunt's a millionaire!! That is the biggest case of adding insult to injury I ever saw.

Should just the guy get proper revenge and set that prick on fire