Everyone knows the ‘man in the middle’ has a difficult job but both sides of the Edinburgh divide have every reason to register their disgust at the performance of Eddie Smith, the man in charge during Sunday’s clash between Hibs and Hearts.
The Glaswegian policeman – Celtic’s one time security consultant – and he who awarded Jan Vennegoor of Hesselink a penalty and sent off St Mirren’s Will Haining for breathing on the Dutchman refused Hibs a stonewall penalty with the home side already one up.
Had the award been given and converted a two goal lead at that stage would surely have seen Hibs go on to register a victory.
However Smith was the only person in the ground who never seen it although Hibees boss Mixu Paatelainen took a dignified stand afterwards.
‘We should have had a penalty – Derek said it was a clear foul and that’s the way I saw it,’ said the big Finn.
‘If we scored with the penalty it would have been 2-0 and the match could have been won. That was a turning point.
‘But the referee saw the penalty otherwise, so no complaints. There’s no point dwelling on it. Referees do a very honest job out there, and the more people who talk about decisions they get wrong the more difficult their job is, because they’re under the microscope.
‘Those situations happen very quickly. They are big decisions. Sometimes referees get it right and sometimes they get it wrong. Unfortunately this time, in my opinion it was wrong.
‘It’s a big call, absolutely, but there’s no point making headlines about it.’
Striker Steven Fletcher also challenged the decision and said ‘If it was outside the box he would have given a free-kick. If we get the penalty it’s a different game. It was just unlucky.’
Rivals Hearts also have a right to be upset with Smith’s handling of the match.
With the scores level Christian Nade had appeared to put Hearts 2-1 up with a straight forward header which saw Hibs keeper Makalamby flapping around the strikers head but this time Smith saw a foul where few, if any, others did.
Jambo’s boss Czaba Laszlo again took the diplomatic stance saying ‘I think it was a goal but that’s not a criticism of the referee.’
‘I don’t think Nade did anything wrong but I have not seen it again, I must go and watch it now.’
>>>>>>>>>>Join Vital Hibs
It’s easy to register , simply click the link and enjoy getting involved (you can even win prizes!)
Message Board To visit the message board, click here. Get involved
This website is your website and we are looking for people to help run the site. Do you go to most of the games and have an opinion? Why not write a match report? Perhaps you are a budding journalist or even just someone who is very opinionated? Well why not join our team? If this interests you please contact Vital Hibs.
The Riordan incident could have gone either way – TV pictures showed no contact but the rashness of the tackle almost deserved to be penalised with the decision going against him. Think DR just hit the deck too easily to be honest, but agree that the ref mustn’t have been sure, otherwise he’d have booked him for diving.
Have to disagree MrH I think the Riordan incident is a stonewaller. As Steven Fletcher said if it happened anywhere else on the park it’d have been a free kick so it was a pen although it was evened out by Nade’s non goal. On keekback Nade has been getting some grief – I thought he was your main dangerman along with Driver yesterday…