Eurosport - Thu, 14 May 09:51:00 2009
Scott McDonald has hit out at the SFA after they referred the Celtic striker's tackle on Lee Wilkie to their review panel.
McDonald, 25, faces trial by television after referee Stuart Dougal was unable to get a proper view of the original incident during the Hoops' 2-1 SPL victory over Dundee United on Tuesday night. McDonald's studs caught United defender Wilkie on the shin after he raised his foot while stretching to make a sliding challenge.
McDonald told the Daily Record: "I find it astonishing that the video review panel will be looking at this when the referee was standing only five yards away from it when it happened. I thought these reviews were for incidents that were missed by the referee during the match.
"Stuart Dougal didn't miss this one. He just didn't think there was anything in it - and Lee's reaction suggests he felt the same way. He even asked me for my shirt at the end of the game. Do you think he would have done that if he thought I had tried to seriously injure him? We shook hands and swapped shirts and I even had a laugh with him asking him to do us a turn by beating Rangers in the last game of the season!
"It's only because the tackle has been highlighted on TV and in the papers that the SFA have stepped in. It's become a big deal because the ref wouldn't allow Lee to be treated. Yes, I must admit, when you look at the pictures in slow motion it doesn't look good. But in actual speed it was nothing much more than a brush and I certainly did not try to injure big Lee.
"Lee knows I wasn't trying to hurt him and the ref knew it too. That's why I don't understand what this is all about."
Comment 7 - 26 of 26
I think you should go and do a wee bit of research mate before you you grace us with your digital diarrhoea.
Sports aren't just classed as contact and non-contact.
I'm a Celtic Fan and I thought McDonald should have went off, it was a tackle with studs showing, which is reckless, had it been Wilkie doing the same to McDonald I'm sure he would have got the heave, but that's what happens when teams are playing mine and the other half of the Old Firm, descicions that would normally go your way don't. T do however not believe that Skippy should face trial by TV, if he had punched someone (we all know that incident with Bobo) and the ref and Linesmen hadn't seen it then I agree that should be looked over by the Disciplinary Beaks but it was a tackle in the middle of a game that could have happened with anyone at any time, Stuart Dougal admitted he saw the incident but couldn't get a good look at it, that is no call for a review from the muppets in the SFA.
George Wilson....I stated football was a non contact sport in response to Singing Gingers statement that it was. You replied, and I quote verbatim "Football is a non-conact sport?????????? Behave ya dafty." To anyone who does joined up thinking, implicite in your reply is the fact that you say it is a contact sport.All sports ARE either contact or non contact sports, this is defined in the rules of each sport. Having read your idiotic replies I can see why less patient people than myself could lapse into verbal abuse and demeen themself.
I have never once said it was a contact sport.
It appear you are making the foolish mistake and thinking sports are either contact or non-contact.
George Wilson ....You are wrong. Just because contact occurs does not make it a contact sport. Remember Zola Budd at the Olympics, what about cricket where batsmen running between the wickets sometimes collide with the bowlers does that make it a contact sport. You obviously dont understand that a contact sport is where contact is allowed by the rules a non contact sport is one where the rules prohibit contact but as in football accidental and incidental contact is ruled on by the ref applying common sense on an incident by incident basis. Basketball is totally non contact, this is why they have the offence of "fouled in the act of shooting" which allows a team free shots even after they have scored a basket. Dont take my word phone the basketball association. Try this analagy.. Murder is against the law, does the fact that it regularly happens somehow change its status? of course not. Dont make wild claims without knowing the facts, take your lead from the more reasoned contributors.
Football is not a non-contact sport!
And neither is basketball.
he's right, a player wont trade shirts with a man who tried to hurt him...
RARKLESS, perhaps accusing you of being facetious was a bit harsh. I apologise for any offence. Like you, I am sick of the narrow-minded bigots who only see their side of any opinion, and scoff at anybody elses. I prefer to reserve the name-calling for the BAWBAGS that post here - guys like WILLIELAW and UKREDNECK, for example!
Singing Ginger.... Told you right from start I agreed with a certain amount of your points . A bad injury? can you get a good one..............Who is being facecious? I am as unhappy as you about match official's decisions being scutinised after the event but unfortunately that has been part and parcel of the game for some time. Enjoyed the banter with you and happy to call it a draw I appreciate the fact that you never launched into petty name calling like some of the hard of thinking idiots who contribute...Enjoy your football til we meet again.
Anyway, RARKLESS, I take your points. It's just that you are beginning to come across as facetious. You have your viewpoint - I have mine. Let's declare it a draw, ok? Bottom line, and I'm sure you agree.. DANGEROUS PRECEDENT!
14 - A BAD injury? Can you get GOOD wan's?
George Wilson...The police enquiry into the Duncan Ferguson incident was instigated by a senior Glasgow Procurator Fiscal on the day of the incident and the first interviews by the police took place the following day. There was no reaction to any SFA inaction.The SFA attemptd to punish Ferguson using a rule which allowed them to levy "additonal punishment" Ranges appealed that decision on the grounds that no punishment had been levied and therefor there could not be anything "additional" . Ferguson should have been ordered off that day without a shadow of doubt but your theory is wrong
Yes never made it senior but played junior football for a couple of clubs before a bad injury forced me to quit.I was at end of playing days and am not claiming I would have made it any higher... Hope this helps you with what ever irrelevant theory you are working on.The vast majority of football fans never played above juvenile level but are still entitled to their opinion.Read the rules and answer my question don't ust mouth cliches.
Pt12...Rarkless every played the game?
Singing Ginger just noticed your definition of assault please note to punch someone in the face is an assault regardless of where the ball is. An assault is committed when you ,with intent. strike or attempt to strike another person, except in specific circumstances such as self defence, so to throw a stone at someone and miss is still an assault.No such thing as attempted assault in Scottish common law.
In football the referee allows accidental and incidental contact between players using his common sense to allow the game to flow. The old saying "its a mans game " grew form players going for the same ball crashed into each other, and this developed into "its a contact sport" by those who do not know the rules. If it is a contact sport why are fouls given for contact? Please direct me to the rule which allows you to grab hold of an opponent.
Singing Ginger.. You do not seem to grasp the difference between a contact sport such as boxing where the boxers are allowed to punch each other and rugby where you are allowed within the rules to grab and hold down an opponent and a non contact sport such as football, basketball and running where none of these things are allowed. However in the three non contact sports obviously contact takes place......part 2 to follow
4 - if it's a clumsy challenge, then it's down to the ref, but if for example Pual Hartley punched Davie Weir in the face whilst being nowhere the ball at the time, then it would definitely be assault. A prosecution would be axpected, but let's be honest here - how many times have players on both sides of the old firm spectrum made clumsy late challenges? Why only now are these incidents being investigated? And why has the media chosen to highlight that 2 CELTIC players are under review? Are the other SPL teams so lily-white that they don't merit investigation also?
Football is a non-contact sport??????????
Behave ya dafty.
Fergusson was only pulled up as the SFA didn't act on it.
Petulent, accidental, dangerous.....say what you like about the tackles but if anyone would care to google/ youtube the Mcgreggor challange on Callum Elliott the other season at Tyncastle, you'd see a real bad tackle going unpunnished.
Too many fans just getting a bit jittery as their mouths have been out of control for so long they need someone to blame.
Please login to post a comment
Not already a Yahoo! user ? Sign up to get a free Yahoo! Account