SFA likely to review Sone Aluko penalty award in Rangers win

[BrahimHemdani 1]

People dont always go down at the initial contact, especially if they're trying to keep their feet. Not saying that happened this time, but whether or not the fall immediately is not in the rule book as far as i'm aware.

 

Football is a contact sport.

 

What matters is if he was DELIBERATELY tripped or pulled back or pushed down, mere contact with a hand or arm or foot doesn't make it a foul, otherwise fouls would be would given every ten seconds.

 

Looking at the view from behind the goal and constantly stop starting it, it seems to me that there is about a foot between Aluko and Hardie when he starts to go down.

 

I think he has dived before the foot contact is made and as he dives his back foot contacts Martin Hardie's foot, rather than the other way about.

 

From the side it looks like Hardie tries to stop himself and brings both his feet together. There IS contact between Hardie's arm and Aluko's arm but it is not clear to me that Hardie pulled or pushed Aluko such that he would have fallen forward.

 

What you can see clearly in the still pictures is that Aluko's eyes are closed and his arms are in a suspiciously swallow like mode.

 

It looks like a dive to me but he might escape unpunished or get off on appeal because the pictures do show contact.

[Danny 0]

I thought he'd continued running, but if he did go down straight after that foot contact then it's certainly not a dive.

 

 

The circled image isn't close to being conclusive. In fact you could make a strong case for it showing the foot made no contact with his at all - I don't see any part of the Dunfermline lad's foot actually being in front of Aluko's foot. It looks behind to me.

 

At best it doesn't help. At worst it proves him guilty.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

The circled image isn't close to being conclusive. In fact you could make a strong case for it showing the foot made no contact with his at all - I don't see any part of the Dunfermline lad's foot actually being in front of Aluko's foot. It looks behind to me.

 

At best it doesn't help. At worst it proves him guilty.

 

Agreed, Aluko made contact with Hardie, as he was going down, not the other way around.

[Ergatrude 0]

Published on Tuesday 6 December 2011 00:17

 

Embattled Rangers winger Sone Aluko has found an unlikely ally in John Yorkston after the Dunfermline chairman said the player should not be hit with a potential two-game ban.

 

New Ibrox recruit Aluko will learn this week whether he is to be hauled before the SFA over the dive row that overshadowed the SPL leader’s 2-1 win over Dunfermline on Saturday. And the 22-year-old could be offered a two-match suspension from Hampden Compliance Officer Vincent Lunny if the lawyer decides there is enough television evidence to take action.

 

Aluko fell to the ground in the box even though footage shows there did not appear to be any contract between the midfielder and Martin Hardie. Referee Steve Conroy pointed to the spot and Nikica Jelavic converted what proved to be the match-winning goal in the 2-1 victory.

 

Dunfermline manager Jim McIntyre insisted Aluko dived and branded the decision “a disgrace”, but Yorkston believes Aluko should not be handed a stiffer punishment to compensate for what he perceives to be a costly mistake by Conroy. He said: “I think anyone who watched the incident on television is of the same opinion of the manager. We are obviously aggrieved just now, but the bottom line is that the referee makes the call. I do not see what this SFA panel thing is going to do, give the boy two games? If the referee had got it right all he would have got was a yellow card.

 

“If the boy is found guilty, all he should be given is a yellow card and not a two-game ban. If the player has committed an offence, he should not get a heavier penalty because the referee missed it. I just think the punishment procedure is incorrect. The bottom line is that if the referee had seen it as a dive, the player would have been booked, so how could you change it to a two-game ban because the referee missed it?”

 

Yorkston knows these kind of decisions could come back to haunt his club at the end of the season, especially with the team just one point clear of basement side Aberdeen. He added: “Whatever the SFA come up with, it’s not going to benefit Dunfermline and it’s not going to make it right for Dunfermline. We have lost the points full stop. We can’t chalk off the penalty and make it 1-1.”

 

Fair play, but he still dived.

[GovanAllan 0]

I couldn't give two flying fhucks he won us 3 points and that will do for me. Some on here seem way too happy to see a Rangers player crucified for doing what is the norm in today's game.

[ian1964 10,429]

It will be interesting to see what happens if he is invloved in another similar incident against the BHEASTS,if he plays?

[GovanAllan 0]

He will need to get shot stabbed twice then hung from the crossbar to get a pen against them Thanks to the usual suspects he's been tagged a diver they tagged Naisy with it and he got nothing before he was injured. It amazes me that Septic had half a team of divers but nothing was ever mentioned.

[pete 2,499]

Fair play, but he still dived.

 

This is what I feel how the hell can you change a yellow card into a two match ban because the ref makes a mistake. If we want to use TV pictures to prove whether it was a penalty or not then the ref should have that option at the time of the offence and not days later when the result cannot be changed. This panel is another SFA joke. If someone has punched, kicked or headbutted without the ref seeing it then fair enough pull them up, but to pull all players up who may,or may not have dived is just stupid.

 

Sorry quoted the wrong post.

[ian1964 10,429]

It was soft penalty,end of,it happens all the time,but when it is a Rangers player it turns into a witch hunt from the usual source.

[johnnyk 158]

Good on him to get us a penalty I say and as some have said get us the 3 points in the end, I thought there was slight contact but that's just my opinion. A yellow card he should get if the panel say otherwise for both him and the ref