Establishment/Press getting worried?

Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3

Establishment/Press getting worried?
Topic Started: 16 Mar 2010, 09:20 AM (4,101 Views)
Gonga	16 Mar 2010, 03:43 PM Post #21
Off treasure hunting in Holland Posts: 11,764 Group: Snr. Member Member #5,057 Joined: 28 September 2006	I only buy it because I need something to swat the flies that hang around it.



HolyGoaly	16 Mar 2010, 04:02 PM Post #22
Club Captain Posts: 3,469 Group: Snr. Member Member #10,276 Joined: 25 August 2007	CJThunderbird 16 Mar 2010, 03:18 PM joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 01:12 PM CiaranOG 16 Mar 2010, 12:57 PM Quoting limited to 3 levels deep If the ref has deemed to have dealt with it then no further action can be taken. However that wasn`t the case last year with McDonalds challenge on Lee Wilkie which the ref dealt with and was still referred. As everyone knows the whole proccess is flawed to an unbelievable degree. Was it dealt with? I thought "dealt with" had to mean something like a yellow card or a foul was given. If he didn't award anything then he can just claim he didn't see it. Well, if he didn't see it, I don't know what he was doing laughing at Wilkie and gesturing that he'd dived and to get up. Either way, shows he's incompetent.



joe the baker	16 Mar 2010, 04:29 PM Post #23
Let`s go to WAR!!!!! Posts: 8,153 Group: Snr. Member Member #13,021 Joined: 16 December 2007	CJThunderbird 16 Mar 2010, 03:18 PM joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 01:12 PM CiaranOG 16 Mar 2010, 12:57 PM Quoting limited to 3 levels deep If the ref has deemed to have dealt with it then no further action can be taken. However that wasn`t the case last year with McDonalds challenge on Lee Wilkie which the ref dealt with and was still referred. As everyone knows the whole proccess is flawed to an unbelievable degree. Was it dealt with? I thought "dealt with" had to mean something like a yellow card or a foul was given. If he didn't award anything then he can just claim he didn't see it. Ref saw it, gave a free kick and deemed it not worthy of a booking. Seems to me it was dealt with.



aidensboots	16 Mar 2010, 04:40 PM Post #24
Oh you got green eyes, oh you got...... Posts: 14,301 Group: Snr. Member Member #17,570 Joined: 2 April 2008	kerryjim 16 Mar 2010, 01:23 PM aidensboots 16 Mar 2010, 01:16 PM I dont buy it but i do compare the breests on the dolly bird to those on the dolly bird in the Star each day when i'm in tesco. what's happened that you can't reach the top shelf anymore? They dont sell scudmags in Tesco anymore



Blairs-Bhoy	16 Mar 2010, 05:46 PM Post #25
I'm new. Be gentle. Posts: 19 Group: Members Member #25,618 Joined: 23 February 2010 Favourite all-time player Paul McStay	Rambo67 16 Mar 2010, 10:24 AM oneillsrevolution 16 Mar 2010, 10:02 AM Blairs-Bhoy 16 Mar 2010, 09:20 AM There was a D Ranger lying around in work yesterday and to my own shame I had a read at it on a break. I was very interested to read (Stuart Dougal I think it was) that they do not believe the video panel should be referred to by Internet Forums or non credible sources! They did however go out of their way to state they were not sure who could refer people/incidents to it. This led me to a choice of two conclusions: 1. They are becoming increasingly aware of their irrelivence and inability to lie convincingly in the modern media age due to sites such as this one, and are trying to extend their own relevence. or 2. They are aware that to refer RaRa to the panel will open up a can of worms as to the referal process, that will see elbows et al in the dock forthwith. Either way they can see their hold on popular perception slipping in Scotland (my opinion) and are trying to react early to it; or maybe I was reading too much into it? The old "I picked it up at work" routine - up there with "ive got a mate who needs some advice...................................................... In this instance true though...



Blairs-Bhoy	16 Mar 2010, 05:56 PM Post #26
I'm new. Be gentle. Posts: 19 Group: Members Member #25,618 Joined: 23 February 2010 Favourite all-time player Paul McStay	joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 04:29 PM CJThunderbird 16 Mar 2010, 03:18 PM joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 01:12 PM Quoting limited to 3 levels deep Was it dealt with? I thought "dealt with" had to mean something like a yellow card or a foul was given. If he didn't award anything then he can just claim he didn't see it. Ref saw it, gave a free kick and deemed it not worthy of a booking. Seems to me it was dealt with. If it was dealt with then how did it get referred? It is this process we want to know; once we do we can happily go about referring half the hun team for their shockers this year, dont think there's a time limit on it is there? If RaRa is cited we should refuse to acknowledge any outcome until the process whereby he came to be cited, how the panel is chosen, what punishment is available to them and what right of appeal, if any, are available!



JiminyCricket	16 Mar 2010, 06:25 PM Post #27
Hooray Posts: 3,853 Group: Snr. Member Member #6,805 Joined: 1 February 2007	Tha English FA seem to have the same rules as the SFAon this, but Gerrard is not being referred to their review panel for his elbow last night because the referee spoke to him about it, even though the ref didn't book him. on paper at least Edited by JiminyCricket, 16 Mar 2010, 06:26 PM.



Auldyin	16 Mar 2010, 07:33 PM Post #28
Getting on a bit Posts: 4,591 Group: Snr. Member Member #9,220 Joined: 2 July 2007	joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 04:29 PM CJThunderbird 16 Mar 2010, 03:18 PM joe the baker 16 Mar 2010, 01:12 PM Quoting limited to 3 levels deep Was it dealt with? I thought "dealt with" had to mean something like a yellow card or a foul was given. If he didn't award anything then he can just claim he didn't see it. Ref saw it, gave a free kick and deemed it not worthy of a booking. Seems to me it was dealt with. The incident is covered with others in the article at http://www.etims.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2748&Itemid=29 The letter at the start has still to be answered over two months later. The process is unworkable as written. It lack transparency and is capable of being interpreted any way that suits. It is a good example of SFA "incompetency". They frame unworkable rules, then fail to respond to questions about them. They also frame other rules for clubs to follow, like unacceptable behaviour at games, but when presented with evidence of such LAST February by their OWN match delegate after a game v Rangers at CP they fail to act on their own procedures. Their administration of the game is opaque, arbitrary and they are not fit for purpose - assuming that purpose to be the promotion of all forms of football in Scotland for EVERYONE taking part in the game. Edited by Auldyin, 16 Mar 2010, 08:06 PM.



BombJack	16 Mar 2010, 07:58 PM Post #29
He twists, he turns, Tommy Burns... Posts: 6,193 Group: Snr. Member Member #1,468 Joined: 7 July 2005	"Their administration of the game is opaque, arbitrary and they are not for purpose - assuming that purpose to be the promotion of all forms of football in Scotland for EVERYONE taking part in the game." Pretty much sums up my opinions on the way the game is run here. I'm not sure that the "traditional media" are running scared though as per the OP. There may be a wee bit of that, but Dougal has made a major faux pas if he suggests that internet forums maybe have been the initial source of any of these previous issues previously, rather than say a club approaching the SFA directly over an alleged indiscretion. (I haven't read the article so can't comment on whether that is what he suggests or not). If for argument sake someone from the SFA trawls through FF and finds people up in arms over certain incidents that were undealt with, and as a result acts on it, that's bonkers, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happened. All in all, we want transparency. Transparency means that any pockling (or even unintentional bias) doesn't have a place to hide. Any incidents that the video review panel scrutinise should be held for posterity as a reference point for how subsequent offences are treated. The stats for yellow cards, nature of offence, red cards, penalties, even throw ins and freekicks, and offenders should be recorded, and put online somewhere for anyone to access. Same goes for the constitution of the SFA, and the assorted guidelines they no doubt issue to their member clubs, as well as protocols they follow to administer our game. At present I think there's little transparency in the key week to week stuff. I haven't tried to find out yet how easy it is to get the constitution and other assorted bits and bobs.



marlowbhoy	16 Mar 2010, 08:30 PM Post #30
First team training Posts: 263 Group: Members Member #3,394 Joined: 17 March 2006	BombJack 16 Mar 2010, 07:58 PM "Their administration of the game is opaque, arbitrary and they are not for purpose - assuming that purpose to be the promotion of all forms of football in Scotland for EVERYONE taking part in the game." Pretty much sums up my opinions on the way the game is run here. I'm not sure that the "traditional media" are running scared though as per the OP. There may be a wee bit of that, but Dougal has made a major faux pas if he suggests that internet forums maybe have been the initial source of any of these previous issues previously, rather than say a club approaching the SFA directly over an alleged indiscretion. (I haven't read the article so can't comment on whether that is what he suggests or not). If for argument sake someone from the SFA trawls through FF and finds people up in arms over certain incidents that were undealt with, and as a result acts on it, that's bonkers, but I wouldn't be surprised if it happened. All in all, we want transparency. Transparency means that any pockling (or even unintentional bias) doesn't have a place to hide. Any incidents that the video review panel scrutinise should be held for posterity as a reference point for how subsequent offences are treated. The stats for yellow cards, nature of offence, red cards, penalties, even throw ins and freekicks, and offenders should be recorded, and put online somewhere for anyone to access. Same goes for the constitution of the SFA, and the assorted guidelines they no doubt issue to their member clubs, as well as protocols they follow to administer our game. At present I think there's little transparency in the key week to week stuff. I haven't tried to find out yet how easy it is to get the constitution and other assorted bits and bobs. S.F.A.......secret football association.



McAvennie	16 Mar 2010, 08:40 PM Post #31
セルティック Posts: 163 Group: Members Member #24,996 Joined: 23 December 2009 Favourite all-time player Frank McAvennie	If Rasmussen gets referred - although what he did was wrong - then surely just turning up with a video tape of McCulloch's elbow on the Aberdeen lad as the precedent gets him off. They have to push that angle and either get him off - which he shouldn't do in honesty - in the way McCulloch was or let them explain the difference. As for the papers, their influence won't wane because at the end of the day it is too easy to dismiss message board ranting as unofficial, even though the Daily Ranger scum like Keevins are effectively just printing message board standard bias drivel it is done officially.



Alvy Singer	16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Post #32
Don't knock masturbation. It's sex with someone I love. Posts: 1,142 Group: Members Member #23,119 Joined: 8 March 2009	Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred?



aboutabhoy	16 Mar 2010, 09:46 PM Post #33
First-team captain Posts: 2,977 Group: Snr. Member Member #6,024 Joined: 16 December 2006	any highlights of the the kille game seen the goals but not seen anything else



aldo	16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Post #34
And that's the way we like it... Posts: 8,876 Group: Senior Member Member #211 Joined: 13 September 2004	Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players.



remy mcswain	16 Mar 2010, 09:50 PM Post #35
From invisibility to dominance Posts: 28,106 Group: Snr. Member Member #74 Joined: 1 September 2004 Favourite all-time player Celticsean	aldo 16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players. Amateurish that both players might still possibly get called up from a game on Saturday at lunchtime. Gerrard elbowed a guy in the Liverpool game last night and has already been told he will not be facing a video review.



Mickeybhoy84	16 Mar 2010, 09:53 PM Post #36
Living the dream Posts: 4,967 Group: Snr. Member Member #6,785 Joined: 31 January 2007	remy mcswain 16 Mar 2010, 09:50 PM aldo 16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players. Amateurish that both players might still possibly get called up from a game on Saturday at lunchtime. Gerrard elbowed a guy in the Liverpool game last night and has already been told he will not be facing a video review. Look how long it took for them to hear Loovens appeal from last season. They are a joke organisation and something needs to be done about them.



Alvy Singer	16 Mar 2010, 09:55 PM Post #37
Don't knock masturbation. It's sex with someone I love. Posts: 1,142 Group: Members Member #23,119 Joined: 8 March 2009	aldo 16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players. Thanks. Just found this incredibly balanced article on the Daily Record website. Link It includes this paragraph (spot the difference in the descriptions!) "In a bad-tempered first half Clancy appeared to stamp on Hoops hitman Rasmussen with the Dane later elbowing Kilmarnock defender Frazer Wright off the ball, amazingly escaping punishment." The last 11 paragraphs are all about how Frazer Wright thinks the SFA should throw the book at Rasmussen. Hunbelievable stuff!!



wigwam	16 Mar 2010, 10:00 PM Post #38
Getting on a bit Posts: 5,196 Group: Snr. Member Member #173 Joined: 5 September 2004	We need to keep at them, fergus style. It took him years to get Farry, but by god , he got him. We need that kind of tenacity, allied to the skin of a rhino the wee man had when the lickspittles were sent to get him. Shame on the celtic fans who bought into their nonsense.



AndrewMgan1976	16 Mar 2010, 10:43 PM Post #39
Occasional Substitute Posts: 335 Group: Members Member #23,836 Joined: 14 June 2009	Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:55 PM aldo 16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players. Thanks. Just found this incredibly balanced article on the Daily Record website. Link It includes this paragraph (spot the difference in the descriptions!) "In a bad-tempered first half Clancy appeared to stamp on Hoops hitman Rasmussen with the Dane later elbowing Kilmarnock defender Frazer Wright off the ball, amazingly escaping punishment." The last 11 paragraphs are all about how Frazer Wright thinks the SFA should throw the book at Rasmussen. Hunbelievable stuff!! This will be the same Frazer Wright who assaulted Nakamura in the box and got away scot free with it!!!!!!!!!!



AndrewMgan1976	16 Mar 2010, 10:44 PM Post #40
Occasional Substitute Posts: 335 Group: Members Member #23,836 Joined: 14 June 2009	aldo 16 Mar 2010, 09:47 PM Alvy Singer 16 Mar 2010, 09:37 PM Has there been any talk of Clancy's "tackle" on Rasmussen being referred? I think the tabloid coverage has cited both players. Because neither of them plays for the huns!!!!!!!



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3