Kevin Mirallas

[Shukes]

Shukes if you are brushed or nearly touched it is the same thing - neither causes you to fall over -

going down without having to is a dive in my book and should get the same treatment --

not a penalty for Liverpool ans a yellow card for Mirallas - never if you are consistant

Honestly mate. I couldn't give a shit about Liverpool.

 

All I care about is us. I won't compare what happens over there with what our players do.

A mistake is a mistake, a dive is a dive.

Just because it doesn't get punished one week doesn't mean we should get away with it another.

 

I get the whole supporting him thing, I really do. I want him to turn it around too. But if you support him then you have to give everyone the same treatment.. Including the manager.

 

The same way as I have to admit that Roberto has had enough chances. I have supported him through and through, but I can't argue his case anymore...only results can. For me it's the same with Mirralas.

[Cornish Steve]

To be booked for the "dive" was tough. But Lukaku played an absolute hospital ball for his second yellow yes it was rash and silly but you have to look at player who passed the ball to put him in that situation.

 

Obviously a Kev fan and not an Everton fan.

 

Honestly, I was waiting to see what you would post on this. To my mind, Mirallas lost us the game yesterday through sheer stupidity. Would you face facts and accept that? We have our answer. How many more games must Mirallas lose before you see his weaknesses as well as his strengths? As mentioned above, he has his good days when he's the best player on the field, but he also lets frustration and recklessness get the better of him, costing us another three points. If we knew in advance which days are which, he'd be a major asset. Since we don't, he's inconsistent and a liability.

[MikeO]

Honestly mate. I couldn't give a shit about Liverpool.

 

All I care about is us. I won't compare what happens over there with what our players do.

A mistake is a mistake, a dive is a dive.

Just because it doesn't get punished one week doesn't mean we should get away with it another.

 

I get the whole supporting him thing, I really do. I want him to turn it around too. But if you support him then you have to give everyone the same treatment.. Including the manager.

 

The same way as I have to admit that Roberto has had enough chances. I have supported him through and through, but I can't argue his case anymore...only results can. For me it's the same with Mirralas.

 

My hand slipped Shukes and I negged you mate, it was supposed to be green, sorry .

[Shukes]

 

My hand slipped Shukes and I negged you mate, it was supposed to be green, sorry .

Don't worry I don't see them as I'm on my phone :-)

 

I'm guessing my posts are full of them haha.

[Deacs]

Because we have watched it over and over again. There is no..I think...he was touched or wasn't.

Every replay I have watched shows the same thing....no contact.

I will gladly change my mind if I see just one that shows contact.

Heck, I would even soften if he came out and looked sorry instead of looking hard done by.

I will never write a player off as long as he wears our shirt. If he came back and performed great I would he right behind him. I just get let down time and time again by him.

It's up to him not us. He is the only one who can change people's perception of him.

I'm not convinced must have seen it a 100 times now and I still can't say for sure he didn't get clipped.

Doesn't mean it was a foul though, what's happened to accidental contact? Couldn't the ref just have waved play on?

Edited March 7, 2016 by Deacs

[StevO]

I don't think he should have been booked for the first one, but to then even go near that tackle was just stupid. I don't care how frustrated he may have been, just keep your head until half time.

 

That said, we didn't lose the game because of Kev in my opinion. So not mad at him, just gutted as he started the game well, he played well against Villa, I was hoping he was getting some form going. Now we miss him for a big game at the weekend.

[Shukes]

I would just lice to see him grit his teeth and come out for the fans and himself.

 

I was secretly hoping we would finish the match with 3 points and that Kev would run onto the pitch celebrating with his teammates.

 

Just want some of our players to show a bit of guts.

Someone mentioned about seeing them care too.

Let's see it on your faces boys.

[Romey 1878]

I don't think he should have been booked for the first one, but to then even go near that tackle was just stupid. I don't care how frustrated he may have been, just keep your head until half time.

 

That said, we didn't lose the game because of Kev in my opinion. So not mad at him, just gutted as he started the game well, he played well against Villa, I was hoping he was getting some form going. Now we miss him for a big game at the weekend.

And the Arsenal game.

[StevO]

Didn't mention it because I didn't see it as a big game now, the league is dead for us.

[Hafnia]

Didn't mcgeady get slated by the majority of us for such stupidity against West ham?

Edited March 7, 2016 by Hafnia

[Hafnia]

Been a great buy.

[JoeQuince]

Shukes if you are brushed or nearly touched it is the same thing - neither causes you to fall over -

going down without having to is a dive in my book and should get the same treatment --

not a penalty for Liverpool ans a yellow card for Mirallas - never if you are consistant

No. No. And, no. Brushed and nearly touched are not the same thing. Whether or not being brushed should actually take you down, the defender still made contact. If contact is made, you are well within your right to go down. If no contact is made, and you are just anticipating it, you are diving and deserve a yellow.

 

Now, we can debate the morality of going down with just a brush all we want. It won't change the the rule. If the rules said "a foul is only committed if the contact is particularly egregious, and light contact is not deemed sufficient for a foul," then we would have even more grey area and even more to complain about in terms of uneven officiating. There's already a significant amount of grey area in how the black and white rules are enforced. But, arguing that light contact IS the same as no contact is absurd. Maybe it "should be," but it isn't.

[Romey 1878]

I think the shites one was a penalty anyway myself. Don't really see what the debates about.

[JoeQuince]

I think the shites one was a penalty anyway myself. Don't really see what the debates about.

There's no debate. Benteke was well within his right to exploit the contact and go down. Mirallas had no contact and went down and was justly carded. He doesn't need to be apologized for. He tried to be cute and fucked up. It happens. It's reality.

[MikeO]

I think the shites one was a penalty anyway myself. Don't really see what the debates about.

 

Not seen it; tried to keep away from football for the last forty-eight hours. inevitable email from my West Ham supporting kid brother aside.

[markjazzbassist]

 

Not seen it; tried to keep away from football for the last forty-eight hours. inevitable email from my West Ham supporting kid brother aside.

 

damnit richard!!! (or whatever his name is)

[Hafnia]

I think the shites one was a penalty anyway myself. Don't really see what the debates about.

The fall didn't match the contact IMO. There may have been a touch, exaggerated the fall.

[MikeO]

 

damnit richard!!! (or whatever his name is)

 

Robin actually (so you weren't far off), never really been that close but sadly I can now never ever speak to him again.

[Newty82]

The thing is, whether the first booking was right or wrong, the 2nd was definately not wrong. And when you're on a booking, common sense says not to throw yourself into a challenge like that. Especially in an area where it's unwarranted and especially when it's not your job anyway!

 

Winger. Stay on the wing. That's why I wonder if Kev just doesn't fit into this team. He likes to move all across the pitch freely. Not stay in his position. I think a free central role is ideal for him. But we don't have that role in this team.

 

I don't want to get into whether the defeat was his fault or whatever. Buy what I will say to those who think he was just overly keen to prove himself is that there is another winger who recently got given a chance and instead of getting injured then sent off then injured again...and again...and again...then sent off again...Lennon has netted 5 goals and put in some stunning shifts. You've got other players who have been given a chance. Mori. Besic.

 

I just think Mirallas needs to be the central figure in a team in order to play to his full ability. And I don't think that's Everton anymore.

[MC11]

The thing is, whether the first booking was right or wrong, the 2nd was definately not wrong. And when you're on a booking, common sense says not to throw yourself into a challenge like that. Especially in an area where it's unwarranted and especially when it's not your job anyway!

 

Winger. Stay on the wing. That's why I wonder if Kev just doesn't fit into this team. He likes to move all across the pitch freely. Not stay in his position. I think a free central role is ideal for him. But we don't have that role in this team.

 

I don't want to get into whether the defeat was his fault or whatever. Buy what I will say to those who think he was just overly keen to prove himself is that there is another winger who recently got given a chance and instead of getting injured then sent off then injured again...and again...and again...then sent off again...Lennon has netted 5 goals and put in some stunning shifts. You've got other players who have been given a chance. Mori. Besic.

 

I just think Mirallas needs to be the central figure in a team in order to play to his full ability. And I don't think that's Everton anymore.

When he was the right winger. He didn't drift. He'll naturally go onto his right foot because well..... He's right footed Edited March 7, 2016 by MC11

[Newty82]

When he was the right winger. He didn't drift. He'll naturally go onto his right foot because well..... He's right footed

Yep. I understand that. But this is more than drifting. It's full on positional movement. He looks like he is 'free roling' but I highly doubt he's been given that role.

 

Just an opinion, not at all an attack on him.

[Cornish Steve]

 

Robin actually (so you weren't far off), never really been that close but sadly I can now never ever speak to him again.

 

Just let him know that's a girl's name.

[pete0]

No. No. And, no. Brushed and nearly touched are not the same thing. Whether or not being brushed should actually take you down, the defender still made contact. If contact is made, you are well within your right to go down. If no contact is made, and you are just anticipating it, you are diving and deserve a yellow.

 

Now, we can debate the morality of going down with just a brush all we want. It won't change the the rule. If the rules said "a foul is only committed if the contact is particularly egregious, and light contact is not deemed sufficient for a foul," then we would have even more grey area and even more to complain about in terms of uneven officiating. There's already a significant amount of grey area in how the black and white rules are enforced. But, arguing that light contact IS the same as no contact is absurd. Maybe it "should be," but it isn't.

Contact is allowed. There was no were near enough to go down. It didn't impede him. No foul. Yellow for diving. 10 years ago this wouldn't even be a discussion.

[StevO]

It is a contact sport. I hate seeing things like if there's contact it's a foul.

 

Every foul should have contact, but not every contact is a foul.

[JoeQuince]

Pete and Steve, I agree with both of you. I don't like the ethic of "if you feel contact, go down." Nor do I like seeing players play for fouls rather than playing with an integrity that says "if you can stay up, stay up and play." I'm saying that we know the rule and we know how it is enforced, not just in England but in world football. We know there is grey area. But, I don't think the solution is to create more grey area and leave the ref to decide if the severity of the contact was enough to really trip the player up.

[StevO]

I'd like to see refs stop giving yellows for diving in game, because when they get it wrong it can be a disaster and ruin the match. But I think every dive should be analysed post match, if video evidence shows you dived then issue a three match ban. Every diving incident is analysed on TV now anyway, I think if players know they may con the ref to get a penalty in that game they might get the three points, but then you miss the next three, what would they do?

 

As it is now you cant appeal a yellow, and retrospective action is hardly ever taken.

[Matt]

I'd like to see refs stop giving yellows for diving in game, because when they get it wrong it can be a disaster and ruin the match. But I think every dive should be analysed post match, if video evidence shows you dived then issue a three match ban. Every diving incident is analysed on TV now anyway, I think if players know they may con the ref to get a penalty in that game they might get the three points, but then you miss the next three, what would they do?

 

As it is now you cant appeal a yellow, and retrospective action is hardly ever taken.

Nice idea, but a dive can destroy a game just as easily as a yellow card mate

[Lowensda]

I'd like to see refs stop giving yellows for diving in game, because when they get it wrong it can be a disaster and ruin the match. But I think every dive should be analysed post match, if video evidence shows you dived then issue a three match ban. Every diving incident is analysed on TV now anyway, I think if players know they may con the ref to get a penalty in that game they might get the three points, but then you miss the next three, what would they do?

 

As it is now you cant appeal a yellow, and retrospective action is hardly ever taken.

 

I agree in principle.

 

Nice idea, but a dive can destroy a game just as easily as a yellow card mate

 

But in reality, I agree with Matt.

 

So if a player has 'dived' and the ref knows it, what happens if there's no initial punishment? Does he award the freekick to the diving players team for the tackle? Does he award the FK to the opposing team? Does a repeat offender continue to get away with it, if there's no punishment, if so the game would be littered with controversy?

 

I think they have to card them. But i'd like retrospective action to add further 'game bans'. So their actions cause more harm to the team in the long run.

Dive once (successfully con the ref) - 1 game ban.

Dive twice (consecutive games or over 2 legged cup games) - 3 game ban.

Dive 3 times (consecutive games or in a single game) - 5 game ban, fine for parent club.

All in addition to the yellow they'll still receive.

[StevO]

Nice idea, but a dive can destroy a game just as easily as a yellow card mate

 

I know the dive can destroy a game, my point is that would the player still dive if he knew he would definitely get a three match ban regardless of if the ref believed it was a foul or not?

 

If the ref thinks its a dive the game plays on, if the ref thinks its a freekick he gives the free kick, but I think it would cut out nearly all diving if the player knew he would get a three match ban if retrospective action is taken on every single offence.

Edited March 9, 2016 by StevO

[Matt]

 

I know the dive can destroy a game, my point is that would the player still dive if he knew he would definitely get a three match ban regardless of if the ref believed it was a foul or not?

 

If the ref thinks its a dive the game plays on, if the ref thinks its a freekick he gives the free kick, but I think it would cut out nearly all diving if the player knew he would get a three match ban if retrospective action is taken on every single offence.

I know what you mean man. Maybe an interim period where both a yellow can be given and then automatically reviewed after the game. If it's justified, 3 game ban, if not rescind it. Then, remove the card but keep the foul and review that foul afterwards instead.