http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...v-4GiBZUYWcTMw
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...llennon203.jpg
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...sonbutt203.jpg
Printable View
don't think lennon will change always seemed to be a person who reacted without thinking at times same when he played he was always in the middle of rows or mouthing off at players just think it is part of his passion for celtic and lets not forget some of the horrible threats etc aimed his way over the years ...so it may be his way at giving something back .. easy in hindsight not to get involved as we dont know what comments were passed between individuals but last night with celtic winning he should have kept his head down and walked away a happy manQuote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
I agree. That seems to be his personality but as a manager now, especially of a club like Celtic where there are undercurrents in society that are hostile, he needs to control himself and not be provoked. Anger management counselling perhaps? Elements in Celtic also, it has to be said, have tried to provoke Diouf since the first day of his arrival which does the club no credit.
agree to an extent .. diouf is no angel either and did not help his case writting articles in paper after his first old firm game .. i also think it is part of the modern game now to try and provoke opposition players ... biggest letdown was chairman of sfa issuing statement after recent game blaming both sets of players clubs for improper behaviour on & off the pitch.. watched match and cannot see how they can blame any celtic players for what happened on & off the pitch .. blame here lies totally with rangers .. players reacted badly to sending offs , put serious pressure on ref / diouf walks half length of pitch at end of game to throw his top to rangers fans after being sent off . !! looks like sfa looking for another excuse to have a go at celtic.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
No as blatantly as Brown tried to provoke Diouf. Everyone knows Diouf is a headbanger but the attempts to get under his skin were SO obvious and without any subtlety.Quote:
Originally Posted by old git
I'd love to know what McLeish whispered in Lennon's ear that made him go ballistic while giving him a hug at the same time.
That almost total nonsense Owls.
With 3 Celtic players booked, generally their behaviour was impeccable in the game. In contrast Rangers foul and card count hit the roof.
Walter knows Celtic have the beating of Rangers and has reverted to a dirty physical game complete with wind up tactics. Why else would they sign that waster Diouf, except for the wind up value? Lennon took the bait for sure but why would McCoist wind him up like that? Look for the motive.
Anyway if you turned down the sound of the commentator going into hysterics, what you actually saw hardly merited a handbag label.
McCoist told him to "stay away from my players".
Love Lennon's passion, predictably, but the man sadly has substantial personality flaws (Partially chronicled in his ghosted autobiography) which I'm coming round to believe, mean he is inherently unsuitable to manage one of the best-supported clubs in Europe.
However, he does have a chance to change and should try to take it....
its a shame after 3 rangers players get sent off / mc coist & lennon clash at final whistle everybody seems to be only having a go at lennons behaviour !! oh i would find it hard to believe thats all mc coist said to lennon .. martin o neill was just as fiery & passionate and got into a few arguements in his succesfull time at celtic,Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Good to see Celtic pick up the win today.
The SFA comment is ridiculous. Celtic players played the game.
Excellent PR offensive by Rangers and their entourage. They sign the biggest scumbag ever to grace British football who already has history in Glasgow (spitting at a Celtic fan). They have 3 players sent off in a not even remotely controversial manner (other than the context). The reaction in the media and the political establishment is to criticise the Old Firm collectively. What exactly did Celtic do other than be there when Rangers lost the plot? When Celtic lose the plot it's seen as just that.
A compliant media is one reason.
Just look at the BBC leading with the report that the police have received a complaint about racial abuse Lennon was supposed to have directed at Diouf. There was a complete and utter lack of one iota of substantiation to support the claim, either from visual observance or from Diouf himself. Why on earth would the BBC lead with such an article? Not only did they suspend standards of journalism but they chose to pour petrol on the smoldering fires of bigotry by falling for an obvious ploy by Ranger's fans.
Two sides of the same coin. Why, didn't you know?
There's a lot of ignorance, wilful or otherwise, masquerading as 'balance' in reporting events concerning Celtic and Rangers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior
At last week's fixture between the clubs, one team had three players sent off, one of them receiving two red cards, and eight booked. Further, one set of supporters spent ninety minutes singing songs about being "up to [their] necks in Fenian blood". Which club did they represent? Rangers. *Not* Celtic.
Indeed, the neutral reading the press after the game would think the only incident of note was Lennon losing the head, not McCoist's goading nor EHD's running halfway across the pitch to have a pop. But then Lennon represents Celtic, not Rangers.
Prior to the game, one manager and two players have received death threats, including bullets in the post, in the last six months. Which club do they represent? That's right. Celtic. Not Rangers.
Both teams have reached and lost UEFA Cup finals in the last eight years. One set of fans went on the rampage. Which club do they represent? Rangers. *Not* Celtic. The other set of fans won a UEFA Fair Play award for their behaviour before and after the game. Which club do they represent? Yes, Celtic.
Collectively ignorant at best, mendacious dissemblers at worst, the print and broadcast media are legitimising the real problem. And it's *not* Celtic.
:ball: PP
Finally someone speaks out regarding the shameful treatment endured by Neil Lennon just for doing his job. http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com...ask.6733176.jp
:ball: PP
Good link there, PP.
Unfortunately it's not fashionable to take a more rational view as too many people like to take the uninformed stance, that "they're both to blame".
Almost as farcical as the label, 'Old Firm'.
On the pitch earlier, the team from Govan closed the gap to 2 points earlier, relying on an og. as their winner.
And Celtic's postponement of their SC tie earlier means they now have to re-schedule their game v. Hibs, due on Weds.
So all still very much to play for, after next Sun's Lge. Cup Final.
Am very much expecting the refs issue to reappear either then or in the last SPL game versus the same opposition.
Their manager got in to a spat with one of the Rangers players (albeit an unsavoury character) and their manager had to be dragged away from the Rangers' manager. Lennon let his club down. I like Lennon but that can't be papered over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
And the relevance of that picture is?
For the love of God Owls - These little handbag sessions happen up and down the country week in week out. You're not happy with players 'winding' each other up let alone raising their voices and wagging fingers - God forbid.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
The only justification for any of this reporting is down to the fact that Rangers received 3 red cards and 8 bookings on the night. They lost all discipline.
One other interesting stat, there were 30 arrests at the game itself. The number of Celtic fans arrested equated to the same number of Rangers players that received a booking on the night!
Just as fans of the Ibrox club, for the first season in many years - appearing to take their lead from the Papal visit - have started giving lusty renditions of their No Pope of Rome ditty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Plastic Paddy
Though he obviously has some hearing difficulties or has done in recent years at least.......
Fair enough article. It says it all when we need to highlight this type of journalism as being decent when it only says what any rightminded individual would see as very normal and decent.
jesus is this the first time a manager got involved in a spat with an opposition player and had to be dragged away from the rangers manager what i saw of incident both lennon & mc cost were pulled apart and so called dragged away why dont you make such a big issue about mc coist getting dragged away and letting down his club :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
Because the argument on this thread is that Celtic did nothing wrong while Rangers 'lost it.' His point is that Lennon clearly lost it too. And while it isn't the first time a manager got in a spat with an opposition player, it's not the first time a team has had three red cards in a game either. If one is worthy of mention (and condemnation), so is the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by old git
Is it a balanced view to suggest that the evenings events were down to both sides, equally? 'The Old Firm', Tit for Tat, Two sides of the same coin, Ying & Yang, yadda yadda yadda - Quite clearly not.
I am not saying that you are saying that osarusan but that is how it has been portrayed in the media, by Alex Salmond, posters on here.
Well, like I said up thread, that's down to pure ignorance on their part.
The issue isn't one evening's events (where, quite clearly Rangers were more ill-disciplined on-field than Celtic). It's how both sets of fans have behaved over decades. They've long been called the 'Old Firm' (ie, mutually dependent to create and encourage rivalry/ tension etc.) because they've been behaving thus for decades. It's hard to avoid the whataboutery- it's basically self-evident to fans of all other Scottish clubs, local residents on matchdays etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Junior
Who might just be better-informed than the occasional tourist up from London.
Except those people who aren't fans suffer from their own misinformed prejudices and have based their position, often from warped media coverage.
And the 'Old Firm' concept is an outdated fallacy at least half-a-century out of date, FFS.
Celtic fans/players aren't saints but they have won awards for good behaviour and charitable works from UEFA & other organizations, a compliment not generally extended to those associated with a certain team from Govan!
Don't be silly. Winning UEFA awards doesn't mean that there isn't a substantial minority of ********s regularly embarrassing the team, as NI fans know too well.
They're called the Old Firm because they've used their religious/ sectarian rivalry to dominate the game locally, for about a century. Their relationship today ain't that different from the Billy Boys/ Tim Malloys era.
What have Celtic fans got to do with the North especially, except when they riot in the Ardoyne, or being subject to sectarian attacks from the usual uber-Unionists.....
And most Tims/Gers know the meaning of the 'Old Firm', but even the media who use it now are uninformed morons indulging in lazy cliches.
Which in the instances you cite, are more than a century out-of-date!
It's nothing to do with them becoming the two most popular and successful clubs in Scotland.
Both have support from all over Scotland and their respective Diaspora(s) which has allowed them to continue this.
Er, many of them live there? My point was that receipt of UEFA awards and having a minority sectarian following are not incompatible.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
So does anyone else with a passing interest in football rivalry, or who lives in Scotland and has to put up with their antics.Quote:
And most Tims/Gers know the meaning of the 'Old Firm', but even the media who use it now are uninformed morons indulging in lazy cliches
Just to clarify: 'Old Firm' means that it's existed for a long time, NOT that it stopped existing a long time ago. Clear now?
And?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
A bit harsh to imply they're all 'uninformed morons', though to be fair, as highlighted here and elsewhere certain aspects of the media like to sensationalize the rivalry regardless of the facts or context.Quote:
So does anyone else with a passing interest in football rivalry, or who lives in Scotland and has to put up with their antics.
Just to clarify: 'Old Firm' means that it's existed for a long time, NOT that it stopped existing a long time ago. Clear now?
And the cited definition of the 'Old Firm' is outdated and wrong. So no, not remotely clear, unless relying on the usual cliches....
Try going to a few games at both grounds and find out for yourself!!
I mentioned that receiving UEFA awards doesn't contradict a minority of sectarian bigots in the fanbase, to answer your implication that it does.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
I repeated the point because you ignored (or possibly didn't understand) it.
Indeed. Well done for withdrawing it.Quote:
A bit harsh to imply they're all 'uninformed morons'
Well, again to be fair, a game between the two leading teams where one team has three players sent off and the opposing coaches start a punch-up is pretty worthy of note.Quote:
though to be fair, as highlighted here and elsewhere certain aspects of the media like to sensationalize the rivalry regardless of the facts or context
Sorry, lost you now. Explain just how the Old Firm aren't an old firm any more?Quote:
And the cited definition of the 'Old Firm' is outdated and wrong. So no, not remotely clear, unless relying on the usual cliches....
Thanks but no thanks. You don't seriously think that only people who attend their games know how Old Firm fans behave?Quote:
Try going to a few games at both grounds and find out for yourself!!
It was no less ignored than the other point which was to be addressed, in the usual 'balanced' manner!
Punch-ups and spats happen often between rival teams, but it doesn't usually lead, even now, to such disproportionate and uninformed negative coverage of both. Hence the objection to the antiquated 'OF' label. By both sides.
As for how the fans 'behave', given such a supposed fascination, surely the fans of the clubs involved know more or are you seriously suggesting collective ignoramuses would know better......
;)
Also, just a thought GR.
Why not stick to subjects you actually know something about??
Crossword clues and cr*p music from the '70's spring to mind!
:eek:
They've been called the Old Firm for a century not because their players/ coaches/ fans occasionally enjoy a rammy, nor even because they've long been the dominant teams in their league. But because their rivalry has been deliberately, cynically and mutually encouraged along largely sectarian lines. That doesn't just give them a playing advantage over other teams, it's a longstanding pain in the hole to the rest of the Glaswegian and wider population. Who you- like me- only know as a tourist, so less of the rank-pulling please.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
They're a firm because they're two halves of the same malign whole. And always have been. Even you must realise that's how fans of pretty much every other Scottish club sees them.
Except you're so wrong it's not true!
Great comeback, Einstein.
Worthy of the misinformed drivel which was in the preceding post....
I asked you to explain why/how the Old Firm wasn't an old firm any more. You have declined. Either you know it still is and won't admit it, or you don't understand what the name means, despite me explaining repeatedly above.
Except it's been done various times above, elsewhere on this MB. & all over the web.
How much information does a person, well you, need??
Oh and the 'explanation' is still wrong!
;)