Jack Ross- Porteous admittted there was contact but it was minimal

I really don’t understand this anymore. How can it be 50/50. Proteus has kicked his foot away as he’s shifted his balance, if he didn’t do that then Kent gets the shot away because he’s beyond him.

Contact is contact, there is no minimal or any of that crap. You’ve either made contact or you haven’t. And contact like that without getting anything on the ball is a foul.
 
The length of time taken to give it?

I’ve seen a few Hibs fans mention this as well. I even saw one Hibs fan admit it was a penalty, but say that Beaton couldn’t wait to give it and because he did is job correctly, but quickly shows he was corrupt.

They’re almost as bad as the parkhead victims when it comes to refs. Of course there was universal silence from them when Goldson almost had his shirt removed a few weeks ago and no pen was given.
 
Why is this even a point of discussion?
because the press is desperate for there to be some sort of controversy around this. they want nothing more than an absolute fucking frenzy to be whipped up over the next week or so because of this

if it had been a pen in the 20th minute nobody would be complaining. but because it was late in the game it must be deemed "controversial". its fucking sad
 
Was this fanny trying to belittle GVB with the sarcastic laughing during the game or was it a genuine mutual thing they were both laughing at?

He's good a good reputation as a coach within the game but recently has come across as an absolute twat.
 
Was this fanny trying to belittle GVB with the sarcastic laughing during the game or was it a genuine mutual thing they were both laughing at?

He's good a good reputation as a coach within the game but recently has come across as an absolute twat.
To be fair they were both laughing at one point - presume that was the same time and it was mutual
 
Why is it when it’s not Rangers minimal contact is a penalty no debate. Whenever it’s a penalty to us it’s a forensic examination. Good to see them all slavering about it though.
 
You can see Porteus drag Kent's foot from almost horizontal to where the toes are , in a vertical plane , behind the heel.
That is not a slight touch and is the sole (geddit) reason that Kent goes down. He was tripped.
 
It really does get so tiresome listening to our bitter bheast mhedia droning on about perfectly correct decisions that go our way.

100% stonewaller penalty. I’d be calling a ref a cheat if he didn’t give us that penalty
 
Motherwell are 7/2 to win at Easter Road on Saturday. I think that's worth a punt after Hibs' hangover from their 2nd Cup Final in 10 days.
 
What a load of shite
There is a world of difference between minimal and no contact.
Contact is contact, minimal or not.
Same as no such thing as a soft penalty. It’s either a penalty or it’s not
 
I find it amazing that they are not trying to get the message across to Porteous that he needs to get these rash tackles and mistakes out of game, it is always someone else’s fault.

He actually has the potential to be a good player but I can see him wasting his career because he comes across as a thick ned. He will probably follow the career path of Riordan and O’Connor and be playing for a junior team in 5 years
 
Noticed during the game that Ross is one sleekit looking prick, and he only makes himself look even worse with the craven pathetic drivel he comes up with there.
Feck him, feck his shitty club, and feck the mhedia bubbling Iike big jilted lassies.
 
Penalty because it was a penalty
It was Rangers so let’s debate it not being a penalty
Moonhowlers
 
Porteous fouled Kent in the area as Kent was about to take a shot on goal from an excellent goal scoring position.

Its a penalty anywhere, everywhere except Scotland where its maybe not, if it involves Rangers.

An embarrassment to anyone trying to pretend there is an element of controversy around it.
 
It's absolutely mental that what he's saying confirms it was a penalty but thinks he's arguing the opposite :))

What a fucking laugh this is!
 
Back
Top