That O'Hanlon tackle

[bauhaus]

Couldnt believe the ref didnt pick that horrific tackle up at the time. I can only think he thought it was a 50/50 tackle.

Ref did not give a red card to O'Hanlon, not even a yellow, nor even a free kick. He didn't even give the free kick our way after seeing the stud marks and blood gushing down his shin.

What have we done to the refs this season, no penalties, players wrongly sent off several times, and strangely if you look at the fouls we commit compared to teams against us, why are we the team more often with the more bookings?

One thing for sure, Richie Foran is lucky to still be walking. Look at O'Hanlons face and expression when he put his studs right through Richie...... reminds me of an infamous tackle on Ian Durrant a good few years back. A couple of inches higher and it could have been Richie's blog as well as Chris Hoggs.

Now correct me if I am wrong, we continually get told that if the ref sees a bad tackle and books the offending player, the SPL can NOT take action, as the ref has been deemed to have punished the player. But when its such a horrendous tackle, Im pretty sure they have reviewed it in the past and banned the player. However because its not an old firm player, and just the highland upstarts, it will never happen.

Really urinates me off this stuff, especially when we have missed players for wrong decisions recently

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

It was a nasty tackle but lets be honest here Foran still managed the full 90 minutes .

[TopSix]

Horrific, reckless challenge. I wish the SFA could take retrospective action on this.

[Renegade]

Whether Foran played on or not is irrelevant. It was a dreadful tackle and it was just pure luck that Foran was relatively unhurt.

[PaderbornCaley]

I didn't realise how bad it was at the time. I've now see the highlights and it is truly awful. When we got the drop ball and kicked it out for a goal kick, the Hibs fans booed. Presumably because they were on the attack again after the foul, they didn't like that. They are worse than the Old filth, St Midden and Killie for their supporters maturity.

The referee was behind Foran watching the play so maybe from his angle it was hard to see. If he was in front of O'Hanlon or to the side, he would have sent him off. I never noticed the view that the linesman had. If he was keeping up with play (which he should have been) he would have seen it. So, either he ignored it or couldn't keep up with the pace. Either way, bad tackle, bad officiating, bad O'Hanlon, lucky Foran!

I do think that the compliance officer should be pulling him up for this.. but then again we are against the ten team SPL so Doncaster will have him on his leash.

[PaderbornCaley]

I've just 'tagged' Stewart Regan in a tweet with the following text:

@StewartRegan Any idea how no foul was awarded for this sir? (with Scottys 33% slowed down video included)

Go to @CapitalCaley and 're-tweet'. He'll get the message loud and clear (in a twitter sense of course... Now if only Neil Doncaster had Twitter! lol

[+DoofersDad]

As Davie said on another thread, the only reason Foran does not have a broken leg is that he was not standing on it at the time. This meant that the power from O'Hanlon's lunge was not resisted and therefore it pushed Foran's leg away rather than breaking it.

I have to say that my initial reaction had been that O'Hanlon had been trying to trap the ball but that Foran got there first. A closer look shows that is not the case for 2 reasons. Firstly, had Foran's leg not been in the way, the ball would not have been quite where O'Hanlon was aiming for. Secondly, this was a stamp, as evidenced by the damage to Foran's leg, whereas to control the ball with the sole of the boot requires give in the leg to take the pace off the ball.

Regardless of intention, it was clearly a bad foul and warranted a yellow at least even if the referee saw it at the time as a genuine attempt to get the ball.

But for me the issue is not the referee's failure to make the correct decision at the time, it is a question of what action the authorities decide to take now. The more I look at it the more it seems as though O'Hanlon is deliberately stamping on Foran. Had Foran beeen standing on the leg it could have been a career ending injury. The fact that it wasn't is down to luck and doesn't change the recklessness or intention of the challenge.

All too often people are punished for the outcome of the action rather than for the action itself. There is no doubt that had Foran's leg been broken and the referee sent O'Hanlon off, he would have been given a lengthy ban. But would that outcome mean that O'Hanlon's actions were any more reckless. No. Of course not. O'Hanlon made a reckless challenge that could have ended the career of a fellow professional. The SFA have the evidence and should throw the book at him. Will they take action? Probably not. Instead they will hide behind the ineptness of the referee and do nothing.

[AJS]

Whether Foran played on or not is irrelevant. It was a dreadful tackle and it was just pure luck that Foran was relatively unhurt.

Tbh i wouldnt be suprised if Foran simply battled on with an injury. He is that sort of player.

[bauhaus]

Nice to see that SPL are probably going to take action over the silly belly headbutt that happened in the Hibs-Hearts derby at the weekend. Nice to see them get their priorities right. An act of stupidity more important to them compared to a potential career ender. Bet it would be different if that tackle was against Scott Brown or Steven Davis. O Hanlon would be hounded by press and fans until action was taken

[Yngwie]

I'm sure I heard on the radio that members of the public can refer incidents to the SFA's compliance officer for review. Anyone know how?

[CaleyD]

The guidelines state that incidents can be brought to the attention of the Compliance Officer "by any means". So I'm guessing a letter/e.mail from a member of the public would meet that criteria.

I'm trying to get information on whether or not the club have, or aware if, the matter has already been referred.

[marks]

Letters to the compliance committee? Members of the public drawing attention to happenings on the park? Leave it to the club for pity's sake, talk about the lunatics running the asylum. I note that the rules of this forum do not tolerate mob rule, why then is one of the administrators encouraging similar actions towards another organisation?

[Yngwie]

He's not. And its the SFA's own process that invites contributions from the public.

[Scotty]

Letters to the compliance committee? Members of the public drawing attention to happenings on the park? Leave it to the club for pity's sake, talk about the lunatics running the asylum. I note that the rules of this forum do not tolerate mob rule, why then is one of the administrators encouraging similar actions towards another organisation?

How is writing a letter 'mob rule'? and how exactly is CaleyD encouraging it by simply stating whats in the guidelines?

You are correct, this site does not allow 'mob rule', it says that right in our terms .... However, we DO allow users to use the facility we have in place to make a complaint, which we then consider .... which - in terms of the compliance officer/committee - is what CaleyD is drawing attention to and which is more closely comparable to the letter writing scenario.

You also conveniently forget to include the part where CaleyD mentions he would try to find out if the club had complained ....

If you are going to try and denigrate the admin or moderators please at least be truthful and straightforward about it and call us out when we do actually say (or do) something wrong rather than twisting words or making assumptions or deductions that are not actually there. Otherwise, please dont let the door hit you on the way out .....

[marks]

Oh come on, to tell a forum full of football supporters that they have the power to force an investigation on someone is inviting the idiots amongst us to follow through. I agree that it was a bad tackle and I will go further and say that if Foran or his bosses feel that it merits an investigation then by all means they are in a far better position to do so and would also add that if they do not feel the need then it is not really up to others to force it.

Yngwie you are as bad for suggesting it, why not look up the rules yourself and write to the compliance committee instead of trying to get the less intelligent amongst your readership to do your dirty work?

EDIT okay Scotty, I'll call you out, why even mention the possibility when intelligent people know that the internet can stir up a sh*tstorm at the click of a button? Agitation does not need to be called for directly, a well placed idea can be far more effective than a direct call for action.

Edited January 4, 2012 by marks

[Scotty]

Our terms of service dont make use of IQ levels as a membership factor so if "the idiots amongst us" (your words, not mine), want to follow through then so be it .... not our problem, not our fault, and we are not going to stifle this or any other decent discussion that comes along on the basis that it might cause stupid people to do stupid things !!!!

I happen to think most of our fans are relatively intelligent -- they do follow ICT instead of other teams after all - but if the people you are labelling with that brush are truly idiots then the eloquence of their complaint will surely see them get short shrift from the beaks !

For my own part, I am not going to be writing any letters, I am way too busy for that .... but I do hope the compliance folk look at it, and I would actually agree that the best course of action is for the club and the player to make a complaint if they want to ....... or for us all to let it go if they think its a storm in a teacup.

[Yngwie]

I'd be interested to know if clubs (ICT or others) have ever refer any such incidents. It's considered unsporting behaviour to try to get an opponent red carded during a match, so to do it after the event, when it is too late to have any possible bearing on the outcome of the match, would seem even more unsporting, wouldn't it?

Oh and it looks to me like O'Hanlon isn't the only person to go in studs up and miss the ball completely......

Edited January 4, 2012 by Yngwie

[marks]

I'd be interested to know if clubs (ICT or others) have ever refer any such incidents. It's considered unsporting behaviour to try to get an opponent red carded during a match, so to do it after the event, when it is too late to have any possible bearing on the outcome of the match, would seem even more unsporting, wouldn't it?

Oh and it looks to me like O'Hanlon isn't the only person to go in studs up and miss the ball completely......

I totally agree it is unsporting and it makes one look like an idiot, it therefore surprises me that you, given this stance, would broach the subject of fans making themselves look the same way.

[marks]

Our terms of service dont make use of IQ levels as a membership factor so if "the idiots amongst us" (your words, not mine), want to follow through then so be it .... not our problem, not our fault, and we are not going to stifle this or any other decent discussion that comes along on the basis that it might cause stupid people to do stupid things !!!!

I happen to think most of our fans are relatively intelligent -- they do follow ICT instead of other teams after all - but if the people you are labelling with that brush are truly idiots then the eloquence of their complaint will surely see them get short shrift from the beaks !

For my own part, I am not going to be writing any letters, I am way too busy for that .... but I do hope the compliance folk look at it, and I would actually agree that the best course of action is for the club and the player to make a complaint if they want to ....... or for us all to let it go if they think its a storm in a teacup.

Again you are correct that most of our fans are intelligent and you would be correct to assume that any idiots or fools should stand out especially if the aggrieved party feels there is no need for further action and if the aggrieved party did feel that way and made a complaint then surely that would be warrant enough to at least look at the incident making anyone else's complaint look like nothing more than malicious stirring.

[CaleyD]

Wow....the thanks you get for trying to be helpful.

Marks, if you have an issue with my (or anyone elses) posts and believe them to be in breach of site rules or common decency then please use the report function and they will be reviewed.

You are welcome to discuss the merits of the public being allowed/able to raise matters directly with the Compliance Officer, but the subject of how and why these forums are moderated should be referred via the report function or by contacting one of the moderation team directly using personal messenger. Any further posts on the later point will be removed from this and any other threads.

I have e.mailed the club to ask the question, but the person who would be able to tell me is not in the office on a Wednesday. The point of my asking the club is to answer the question asked and shed some light on whether we can expect to see any more on the topic (or not). It would be remiss of me to refuse to seek or pass on information on the basis that I do not trust the recipient/s to use it in a sensible fashion. I can only imagine the reaction I would have got had I said "I should be able to get an answer, but I'm not going to because there's idiots on here who might misuse it"!!!

FWIW, I agree with you (personally and not as a site admin) that if the club do not deem it necessary to have raised the matter then it is not for us, as fans, to interfere by contacting the Compliance Officer directly....but that is just my opinion and others are free to disagree with that and make decisions for themselves.

[marks]

CaleyD I have no issue with site rules or common decency, I was just passing my own comment. There is really no big issue here other than our fans starting to sound like Celtic fans who jump at every little thing and get their cyber offended hats on before emailing every governing body available on a Google search.

The issue is not whether or not you called the club but why did you feel the need to contact them in the first place? If you get an answer stating that no the club have not contacted the Compliance officer then what do you gain from such a reply and does it make any difference to the discussion? You say you are in agreement that if the club do not deem it necessary to push the matter then I see no reason for contacting them at all, unless you wished to give the stirrers a little more reason to go stirring.

[CaleyD]

I'm not sure I can tell you my reasons as I have no idea how responsibly you would use the answer or if you are only asking in order to stir trouble!!!!

I contacted them because it is better to know what a situation is than to allow continued speculation and because the club have invited Scotty and Myself (as site admin) to approach them with any questions that arise if we feel the club might be able to provide an answer.

[+DoofersDad]

I trust this forum will not be used again to incite ICT fans to rush down to the stadium and clear the pitch of snow. Such irresponsible action might be interpretted as inciting a mob of young men to intimidate the referee into changing his decision and declaring the pitch playable when before their arrival he considered it unplayable. Such behaviour cannot be tolerated.

[Scarlet Pimple]

Unless free speech is now outlawed in the U.K. or anywhere else, then any member of the public, whether a supporter of ICT or not, has the right to send and email or letter, or by other means of contact, to Bodies such as a compliance officer of any organisation to express his opinion on anything.

Whether he/she influences anyone to change a ruling or decision on matters such as this. or even gets the courtesy of a reply, surely depends on whether or not he or she has couched the letter in non-abusive, legal-type language and whether the recipient has, or has not, got the good manners to reply.

Attacking the Moderators in this way is meaningless and achieves nothing of value because every poster on here at this time knows, or should know, that they do an excellent job of controlling posts and opinions from many different types of member across a wide spectrum of latitude.

Without in any way trying to deny Marks his right to expression on here most of this has now degenerated into close-to farcical nonsense and seems to be more of an attempt at self-justfication rather than a genuine attempt to address the main question. This thread has, imho , been done to death and I encourage Marks to write to the Compliance officer immediately and let us know when he gets a reply.

[PullMyFinger]

He's just a WUM anyway, ignore them and they'll go away.