matchday thread Inverness CT -V- Hearts

[old caley girl]

Spare me the sanctimony. If you raise your hands to an opponents face and the referee/ assistant sees it, you are off - rules of the game. It was a clear punch. Neil Alexander called it right last night - he was screaming at Oshinwa, calling him a "stupid ba****d - you can't do that here" as he pulled him away. Unlike Chris Sutton, who reckons that modern players can't handle being punched and others here who reckon "if he was in a boxing ring he wouldn't last 30 seconds" Fair point but it's a football pitch he was on, not canvas. Correct decision, no fault attached to Silva.

Totally agree Davie. If you watch Alexander's reaction it says it all. Hearts by this point were majorly rattled and their discipline continued to deteriorate with players argueing shoving each other etc. Doubt the off the ball stuff made BT sports. Personally glad to see us a bit more streetwise. 

[tm4tj]

https://www.facebook.com/CaleyThistleOnline

Report now published

 Oshaniwa saw red after clashing with Tobi on the goal line whilst waiting for a corner to be taken. I hope Gary Cornish has a better chin than Tobi, but no excuse for the defender pushing his fist onto Tobi's head.

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Of course it was a red card. The off the ball stuff was clear on BT Sport - If you watch the incident there was evidently some verbals prior to it and that happens in football all the time. Alexander was also clearly shocked and angered by Oshinwa's behaviour BUT it was no more than a clip. On TV Silva also clearly took the knock, thought about it for a moment and then threw himself to the ground in an attempt to heighten the situation and influence the referee's decision. I think that he was totally out of order in regard to that - even if the "excuse" is that it is part and parcel of football today. Lets just hope that he was given a good bollicking for it and let his football do the talking in the future.

I find it also amusing how a win and three points exudes the positivity on here. The first half - as Yogi alluded to - was simply awful. The second half was a massive improvement and long may it continue. There is a long way to go and I feel that we need more from the likes of Tansey.

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

Great result after a dire first half. Liked Storey, he looked quite quick and took his goal well.  Maybe he'll be the finisher we've been missing.  What great work by Christie for Vincent's goal too.   Pleased for Tansey that he re established himself  and got MOM after a couple of below par performances.

Only downside for me was our other new boy, Tobi Sho-Silva getting the Hearts player sent off.   Many of us still remember how we felt when scum bag Neil  Lennon did something similar to Juanjo many years ago. So, for me, Tobi can feck off back to Charlton if he thinks that is acceptable.

Apart from that a great win which should do our confidence no end of good.

 

 

I was very disappointed to see one of our players behaving in such a way , I really hate play acting to get a fellow professional sent off . Hopefully someone at the club will have a word with him and let him know this is not acceptable at ICT , as for posters on here condoning his actions well I'd better not post what I think of them !

[LundavraJag]

Buzzing after the second half last night, huge improvement on the dire first but the attacking football and drama really got the crowd going so really enjoyed the both atmosphere and football on show. First half was a continuation of what I've seen at home already this season bar the euro game, second half a different game altogether. Thought Hearts were poor, a bit dirty, didn't offer much at all and their players very keen to go to ground and once they were a man down they just deteriorated further allowing us to kill the game off for a deserved 3 points.

I thought there were some poor performances in the first half but most if not all improved for the second. I thought Christie was being given a hard time but overcame this later on and did well to capitalise on poor defending to get the ball in for Vincent. Thought Tremarco was good and Storey grew with confidence as the game went on and probably deserved a goal, you can see he has a bit of presence about him and some good pace. Thought Tobi did well and looks good on the turn, I completely missed his carry on in the box but after watching it in the highlights there was definite contact. It is a double edged sword for this one, if he acts as if nothing happened then Oshinuwa gets away with running a fist across his face? Why should he let that go? Instead he makes a hash of it and looks a bit of a muppet going down so late but in my opinion does the right thing and brought it to the ref's attention. If there had been no contact then fair play, give him grief but there is little excuse for ramming a fist into anyone's face in any walk of life so the Hearts player got what he deserved.

Overall a terrible first half from both sides, we stepped up a gear in the second and deserved all 3 points. 

Edited September 12, 2015 by LundavraJag

[old caley girl]

Great result after a dire first half. Liked Storey, he looked quite quick and took his goal well.  Maybe he'll be the finisher we've been missing.  What great work by Christie for Vincent's goal too.   Pleased for Tansey that he re established himself  and got MOM after a couple of below par performances.

Only downside for me was our other new boy, Tobi Sho-Silva getting the Hearts player sent off.   Many of us still remember how we felt when scum bag Neil  Lennon did something similar to Juanjo many years ago. So, for me, Tobi can feck off back to Charlton if he thinks that is acceptable.

Apart from that a great win which should do our confidence no end of good.

 

 

I was very disappointed to see one of our players behaving in such a way , I really hate play acting to get a fellow professional sent off . Hopefully someone at the club will have a word with him and let him know this is not acceptable at ICT , as for posters on here condoning his actions well I'd better not post what I think of them !

so you'd have rathered Hearts player didn't get sent off? Btw Hearts fans think their guy got what he deserved! 

[Mithrandir]

Great second half performance. Having Meekings back and Draper in his natural position made so much difference and Vincent and Storey were also good. Sho-Silva also looked good when he came on. Overall very encouraging. Also in my opinion if you punch someone it is always your own fault for getting sent off not the victims fault even if he is play acting a bit...

[DALNEIGHCALEY]

Great result after a dire first half. Liked Storey, he looked quite quick and took his goal well.  Maybe he'll be the finisher we've been missing.  What great work by Christie for Vincent's goal too.   Pleased for Tansey that he re established himself  and got MOM after a couple of below par performances.

Only downside for me was our other new boy, Tobi Sho-Silva getting the Hearts player sent off.   Many of us still remember how we felt when scum bag Neil  Lennon did something similar to Juanjo many years ago. So, for me, Tobi can feck off back to Charlton if he thinks that is acceptable.

Apart from that a great win which should do our confidence no end of good.

 

 

I was very disappointed to see one of our players behaving in such a way , I really hate play acting to get a fellow professional sent off . Hopefully someone at the club will have a word with him and let him know this is not acceptable at ICT , as for posters on here condoning his actions well I'd better not post what I think of them !

so you'd have rathered Hearts player didn't get sent off? Btw Hearts fans think their guy got what he deserved! 

Where did I say I'd have rathered he wasn't sent off ? Of course he should've been sent off . My problem is with the reaction of Tobi , totally unacceptable IMHO .

[old caley girl]

Great result after a dire first half. Liked Storey, he looked quite quick and took his goal well.  Maybe he'll be the finisher we've been missing.  What great work by Christie for Vincent's goal too.   Pleased for Tansey that he re established himself  and got MOM after a couple of below par performances.

Only downside for me was our other new boy, Tobi Sho-Silva getting the Hearts player sent off.   Many of us still remember how we felt when scum bag Neil  Lennon did something similar to Juanjo many years ago. So, for me, Tobi can feck off back to Charlton if he thinks that is acceptable.

Apart from that a great win which should do our confidence no end of good.

 

 

I was very disappointed to see one of our players behaving in such a way , I really hate play acting to get a fellow professional sent off . Hopefully someone at the club will have a word with him and let him know this is not acceptable at ICT , as for posters on here condoning his actions well I'd better not post what I think of them !

so you'd have rathered Hearts player didn't get sent off? Btw Hearts fans think their guy got what he deserved! 

Where did I say I'd have rathered he wasn't sent off ? Of course he should've been sent off . My problem is with the reaction of Tobi , totally unacceptable IMHO .

didn't say you did? Personally doubt he would have walked if Tobi hadn't gone down. Just my opinion. 

[CaleyD]

If Tobi stays on his feet and Oshaniwa doesn't get a red card, then those chastising him for going down would be the exact same people who'd be on here now having a pop for not being "street wise".

[Kind of Blue]

Great to be back on our winning ways and hopefully this result will kick-start the season.  I thought we did okay in the first half without creating any real chances.  In the second half the team came out with a determined attitude and bossed the game.  Christie showed his class with his movement and cross for Vincent to score.  The goal from Storey looks better every time I see it and he showed a lot of promise.

On the second half showing we more than deserved the 3 points.

 

[AlexJones]

Diving to win a penalty, or simulating to get a player booked when they haven't hurt you are both unacceptable IMO. However, the incident in question doesn't fall into either of those categories. The Hearts player threw a punch (though not a very good one) and deserved to be sent off - he was not cheated. If the roles were reversed I wouldn't have any complaints about the decision.

Edited September 12, 2015 by AlexJones

[+DoofersDad]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

[lightlamp2]

The sending off was simple. If Silva didn't go down Oshaniwa would have stayed on the pitch for punching another player. The rules are very simple. You can't punch another player and he needed to make the ref aware of that

Can't agree. Yes there was contact and if the ref sees it it's a red card but there was never anything like enough contact to send him down. That was pure gamesmanship. I realise it's part of the modern game but I'd rather not see our players indulge in it.

Then he would have stayed on the pitch for punching another player and would have made the game more difficult to win. Certainly to score another goal

[CaleyMax]

Spare me the sanctimony. If you raise your hands to an opponents face and the referee/ assistant sees it, you are off - rules of the game. It was a clear punch. Neil Alexander called it right last night - he was screaming at Oshinwa, calling him a "stupid ba****d - you can't do that here" as he pulled him away. Unlike Chris Sutton, who reckons that modern players can't handle being punched and others here who reckon "if he was in a boxing ring he wouldn't last 30 seconds" Fair point but it's a football pitch he was on, not canvas. Correct decision, no fault attached to Silva.

Nice one Davie agree 100%

Edited September 12, 2015 by CaleyMax

[CaleyD]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

[+DoofersDad]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop.  The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled."  These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not.  Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant.  Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident.  If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury.  I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet.

[Sir C the 3rd]

The sending off is very similar to an incident involving grant Munro and Chris McGuire a few seasons ago. We were hard done by there and by the letter of the law Munro was off. Same thing last night. That said in the last home game there was a 100% certain red card for Christian Nade and he got away with it. So swings and roundabouts

[CaleyD]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop.  The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled."  These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not.  Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant.  Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident.  If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury.  I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet.

Sorry, but you are wrong.  It is only an offence to feign injury in order to win a foul or in an attempt to get an opponent cautioned. If the rule was as per your interpretation, then every time a player was fouled and took an extra roll or held a shin and then got back up, they would be booked....and that doesn't happen.  The reason it doesn't happen is because the rules don't say it should.

In short....Sho-Silva did not pretend he got punched.....he DID get punched and the rule you quote (which is the rule on simulation) does not get any consideration the moment the referee determines that he was fouled.

[+HawkeyeTheGnu]

Simulation? No. Exaggeration? Yes. And possibly the worst acting seen out with "Take The High Road". 

[Row S]

BBC highlights clearly show Tobi was punched - watch the slo-mo replay. Okay is wasn't a heavy blow but I can't blame him for going down after the rough handling he got as soon as he got on to the field of play when Rossi started pushing and elbowing him for no reason.

In terms of Tobi's direct play and putting himself about I think he is the sort of player we have been missing up front since Richie Foran got injured. This and the gutsy performance from many others last night gives me confidence that we can kick on from here and climb the league. Seven games in but welcome to the 2015/16 Scottish Premiership season!  

Edited September 12, 2015 by Row S

[+DoofersDad]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop.  The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled."  These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not.  Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant.  Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident.  If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury.  I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet.

Sorry, but you are wrong.  It is only an offence to feign injury in order to win a foul or in an attempt to get an opponent cautioned. If the rule was as per your interpretation, then every time a player was fouled and took an extra roll or held a shin and then got back up, they would be booked....and that doesn't happen.  The reason it doesn't happen is because the rules don't say it should.

In short....Sho-Silva did not pretend he got punched.....he DID get punched and the rule you quote (which is the rule on simulation) does not get any consideration the moment the referee determines that he was fouled.

Just because players don't get cautioned every time for the minor types of simulation you quote does not mean that such actions aren't against the rules.  By your very flawed logic you might as well say that because players don't always get booked for holding and shirt pulling in the penalty area that the rules don't say that holding and shirt pulling is not allowed.

Presumably you can provide some quote or reference to support your opinion that the rules on simulation do not apply if the referee judges that the player actually was fouled?  What you are saying is that it is perfectly OK under the laws of the game for a player to feign injury in order to make an offence look worse than it actually was, provided that the referee actually awards a foul.  You must accept that whether the referee awards a foul or not, the intention and actions of the player simulating is exactly the same and therefore should logically be dealt with in the same way. 

 

[+HawkeyeTheGnu]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop.  The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled."  These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not.  Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant.  Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident.  If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury.  I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet.

Sorry, but you are wrong.  It is only an offence to feign injury in order to win a foul or in an attempt to get an opponent cautioned. If the rule was as per your interpretation, then every time a player was fouled and took an extra roll or held a shin and then got back up, they would be booked....and that doesn't happen.  The reason it doesn't happen is because the rules don't say it should.

In short....Sho-Silva did not pretend he got punched.....he DID get punched and the rule you quote (which is the rule on simulation) does not get any consideration the moment the referee determines that he was fouled.

Just because players don't get cautioned every time for the minor types of simulation you quote does not mean that such actions aren't against the rules.  By your very flawed logic you might as well say that because players don't always get booked for holding and shirt pulling in the penalty area that the rules don't say that holding and shirt pulling is not allowed.

Presumably you can provide some quote or reference to support your opinion that the rules on simulation do not apply if the referee judges that the player actually was fouled?  What you are saying is that it is perfectly OK under the laws of the game for a player to feign injury in order to make an offence look worse than it actually was, provided that the referee actually awards a foul.  You must accept that whether the referee awards a foul or not, the intention and actions of the player simulating is exactly the same and therefore should logically be dealt with in the same way. 

 

He didn't simulate. He was punched, he may have exaggerated the effect of the punch, but he didn't try and make out something happened which didn't. The one phrase I would avoid is that the Hearts player threw a punch, it was more a very gentle lob than a throw.

I guess this is the extension of the "entitled to go down" argument when a defender makes the merest contact with a forward in the box. Maybe he had been briefed on the magnificence of Scottish referees and decided to give a bit of help with making the decision. 

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Fer fecks sake - he was struck - he was innocent in regard to the incident -  it was a red card - he did exaggerate the contact. His reaction was not good for the game and should not be defended. He WILL get a behind doors bollicking. Hopefully it is a learning curve and will not be repeated.

[CaleyD]

Whether he went to ground or not should be irrelevant with respect to whether the Hearts player got sent off or not.  If the officials saw the punch, regardless of how hard it may have been, then the player should be off.  If the officials did not see the punch then the player should stay on.  Going to ground after the punch was thrown cannot change whether the officials saw the punch or not.  If the victim of a punch goes to ground then the referee needs also to consider whether that is a reasonable response to the punch that was thrown.  If the referee decides it wasn't then the "victim" might also receive a card.  Best to stay on one's feet IMO but we do need the clubs and the footballing public to expect firmer action from referees and the SFA to address all the cheating nonsense off the ball that has become such an integral part of the modern game.

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop.  The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates.  He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked.

I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop.  The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled."  These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not.  Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant.  Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident.  If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury.  I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet.

Sorry, but you are wrong.  It is only an offence to feign injury in order to win a foul or in an attempt to get an opponent cautioned. If the rule was as per your interpretation, then every time a player was fouled and took an extra roll or held a shin and then got back up, they would be booked....and that doesn't happen.  The reason it doesn't happen is because the rules don't say it should.

In short....Sho-Silva did not pretend he got punched.....he DID get punched and the rule you quote (which is the rule on simulation) does not get any consideration the moment the referee determines that he was fouled.

Just because players don't get cautioned every time for the minor types of simulation you quote does not mean that such actions aren't against the rules.  By your very flawed logic you might as well say that because players don't always get booked for holding and shirt pulling in the penalty area that the rules don't say that holding and shirt pulling is not allowed.

Presumably you can provide some quote or reference to support your opinion that the rules on simulation do not apply if the referee judges that the player actually was fouled?  What you are saying is that it is perfectly OK under the laws of the game for a player to feign injury in order to make an offence look worse than it actually was, provided that the referee actually awards a foul.  You must accept that whether the referee awards a foul or not, the intention and actions of the player simulating is exactly the same and therefore should logically be dealt with in the same way. 

 

Starting to think you're on the wind-up now.  How can a player be booked on the rules pertaining to simulation after the referee gives a decision which, in and of itself, states that there has been no simulation.

I'm not making an argument that "sometimes players don't get booked for it".  I'm saying that players "NEVER" get booked for it....and the reason for that is because the rule is not there to be applied in the strange manner that you are suggesting.  The evidence (and logic) speaks for itself.

That's my last post on the subject.