A one line explanation or link would be fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Printable View
A one line explanation or link would be fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Ok, read this thread/MB for a start....
;)
It's not much to ask, is it? Just one little line or link. And you can't even manage that. Ask a more with-it Celtic fan to help, if you like?
Huh??
Is not reading this esteemed MB not enough of a clue??
All I'm asking you to do is give a one-line explanation (or link to one) of why Celtic and Rangers are not an old firm, and why that name pretty much invariably used by football fans in Glasgow and beyond for a century is unfair/ wrong. And you can't do it.
Le me put it a bit differently. You (the more obsessive Celtic fans) justify pretty much everything- playing badly, brawling managers, paramilitary songfests, widespread arrests- as a response to 'themmuns' doing it worse/ first. And so do they (more obsessive Rangers fans). It's self-perpetuating.
Except, as ever, that warped conclusion is wrong.
Thanks PP.
In addition to the above, might I recommend 'the two 'Celtic Minded' books by Professor Joe.Bradley of Stirling University, who despite his heritage and location is not a Tim.
But wrote two excellent tomes on the subject and why were're not generally like the worst excesses of der Hun.
And speak as someone who knows 5 Rangers fans!! And none of them believe in the 'Old Firm' label either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plastic Paddy
This is simply wrong. Celtic are not second-class or underclass; along with Rangers they have dominated Scottish football for almost a century. Neither they as a club nor their supporters as individuals or group (Catholic or otherwise) have been discriminated against for decades.Quote:
Originally Posted by 200%
That refusal ended decades ago. So it's er, ancient historical. Whataboutery, eh?Quote:
Rangers’ decades-long refusal to field Catholic players, which might, you’d have thought been a key component of that historical context
Again, this is simply not so. Rangers have been widely reported and criticised for their indiscipline, both on-field and off. Celtic have also, entirely reasonably, been criticised for the latter. Hardly surprising when their manager squares up to Rangers' assistant.Quote:
There was no good behaviour at Parkhead last week...and there was plain stupidity in both blue and green. It’s just that most of it came from Rangers, while most of the criticism has been directed at Celtic. And that is just plain wrong
http://celticparanoia.blogspot.com/2...-universe.html
Alternatively, Scottish viewers may just be intelligent enough to blame Neil Lennon for his behavior on the night, and Rangers' staff and players for theirs. Even if they don't necessarily draw a labored and largely irrelevant parallel with 1984 (the book, not the Old Firm riot of that year).Quote:
Originally Posted by Wannabe Orwell
Do you really only know five Rangers fans?Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Having grown up in Belfast, I knew far more than that at school, among family etc. I've never heard one of them either a) claim that the Old Firm label is unfair/wrong, or b) deny that both sides have a minority of bigoted/sectarian/violent fans who have matched each other in mutual winding-up throughout their time of supporting the club.
Complete and utter nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
As well documented in just about any reasonable book on Glasgow/West Of Scotland, especially those that mention the two football clubs.
Around 20 or years ago. Is that really so 'ancient'??Quote:
That refusal ended decades ago. So it's er, ancient historical. Whataboutery, eh?
However the prevailing views of their more diehard fans, like one recent contributor, is rooted not even in this century!!
The cards count v. them to date in Celtic games (& generally) this season (& many others) has surpassed that of the opposition or were they also all wrong??Quote:
Rangers have been widely reported and criticised for their indiscipline, both on-field and off.
Besides the usual spelling issues(!!), Lennon's behaviour was entirely in context, given the provocation....Quote:
Alternatively, Scottish viewers may just be intelligent enough to blame Neil Lennon for his behaviour on the night, and Rangers' staff and players for theirs. Even if they don't necessarily draw a laboured and largely irrelevant parallel with 1984 (the book, not the Old Firm riot of that year).
Whilst the bizarre analogy struggles to carry as much weight, as the, er, author!
;)
Play the ball, AB, not the man.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
:ball: PP
You're hysterical. Celtic clearly aren't discriminated against as an organisation- they dominate most of the domestic games they play. Their fans- particularly those who are Roman Catholics/ Irish ancestry haven't been systematically discriminated against in employment/education/ access to social services etc. for decades, as I said.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
Yup, particularly when your argument that Rangers are so much worse than Celtic relies on events in one game earlier this month. You can't have it both ways.Quote:
Around 20 or years ago. Is that really so 'ancient'??
Cards in competitive games this season:Quote:
The cards count v. them to date in Celtic games (& generally) this season (& many others) has surpassed that of the opposition or were they also all wrong??
Rangers 77 yellow + 4 red
Celtic 73 yellow + 5 red
(source: BBC)
The stats are clear enough. It's your interpretation of them that's wrong.
There are no issues, at least not for me. I didn't misspell the words you indicated. So apart from being absurdly pedantic, you are simply wrong.Quote:
Besides the usual spelling issues(!!)
Indeed. The "context" being that he acted the dick at a high profile game (not for the first time), got rightly criticised and punished for it, but is now being uncritically defended by you. Why don't you just admit what everyone bar the most blinkered Tims can see- he just doesn't cope that well in the spotlight nd might be better suited to a lower-profile job.Quote:
Lennon's behaviour was entirely in context, given the provocation....
The fat fool might have done, had he got there in time ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Plastic Paddy
On considered reflection, post #1773 is the biggest load of complete nonsense I have read online in many a long day.
A simple search of Google or similar regarding the poster's opening statement would show it to be as far-fetched as any Fox News report in terms of balance.
Perhaps he can show instead evidence of the equality claimed....
Add another red for Celtic to that list!
League Cup Final: Pretty poor game on an ever poorer surface won by the team which wanted it the most.
Do I have to give you a cyberslap too? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gather round
Unfortunately I can only agree. Celtic keep giving a dead club a lifeline.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
:ball: PP
Redder faces than usual at the SFA. They backed down from the Celtic lawyer's threat to take the SFA to court, unless they refrained from circumventing the rules in order to punish Neil Lennon.
Last month the Celtic lawyer was asked to comment by the BBC about this issue, he replied "the SFA appears to be institutionally dysfunctional" "I wish the SFA would start to grow up and behave responsibly"
"Nothing the SFA do surprise me any more. I thought it was a simple matter to confirm whether it is a four-match ban or an eight-match ban.
"But, as a matter of law, there is no question in my mind at all, it is a four-match ban."
Rangers, in 1997, refused to fly the Irish flag when Shelbourne came to town. Have they changed that policy? They're still an anti-Irish bigoted club, nothing has changed in that regard.Quote:
That refusal ended decades ago. So it's er, ancient historical. Whataboutery, eh?
Oh and look today.....
RANGERS fans are set to be hammered with a three-match Euro ban for singing sectarian songs.
Last night Ibrox chiefs were also bracing themselves for a "heavy" fine which could be as much as £100,000.
And there are now also fears that UEFA's determination to clamp down on ' bigots could further delay, if not derail entirely, Craig Whyte's £25 million buy-out.
UEFA have told to expect the penalties because of sectarian songs and chants which the governing body claim were belted out during the Europa League match against PSV in Eindhoven on March 10.
The Ibrox club have until next Thursday to submit their defence - the hearing will be held in Nyon two weeks later - if they are to have any chance of avoiding a FOURTH European sanction.
But a UEFA source, who confirmed Gers had been pulled up again, also said it was unlikely the club could escape punishment.
only discovered they were in trouble yesterday and when contacted by Record Sport, beleaguered chief executive Martin Bain spoke of his "utter dismay".
But he stressed the Ibrox club would be defending their position "vigorously".
will try once again to convince UEFA they have done all they can to rid themselves of the bigots but it is almost certain all their fans will be banned from the next three away matches in Europe.
The club were fined £13,000 for discriminatory chanting and £9,000 for an attack on Villarreal's team bus in 2006.
UEFA also demanded they pay £8,280 after a UEFA Cup tie against Osasuna in March 2007 with the Spanish club receiving a £31,000 fine because of poor organisation.
Then, in November 2009, the club were fined £18,000 after a Champions League match against Unirea Urziceni in Romania. Again the home side were also fined (£7,200) for poor organisation.
A UEFA spokesman said last night: "For this kind of behaviour and the number of offences which is repeated the fine could be heavy - as much as 150,000 Swiss francs."
Bain said: "We are utterly dismayed to be informed by UEFA that they are to take disciplinary action. We will defend the club's position vigorously.
"UEFA have made clear in any previous disciplinary hearings that sanctions have been mitigated by the extensive work the club does to tackle sectarianism.
"We are not saying there is not a problem but we are saying that for many years we have made strenuous attempts to address it. We do, however, believe it is absurd to think only supporters sing offensive or sectarian songs. We are left to conclude there is a disproportionate focus on us.
"It has also become clear there are people who have been determined to undermine our club at any cost and have constantly lobbied for action against ."
can point to their Euro record this season which will show five trips with no arrests for sectarian or discriminatory behaviour. They will also point out that they've been given a clean bill of health all season from delegates and security officers who have been specifically briefed by UEFA to look out for sectarian singing.
It is also believed they have letters from Greater Manchester Police and the British Vice Consul in Valencia praising behaviour.
The club will also question UEFA over whether or not they act on reports submitted by people other than official delegates and police but stress they won't be attempting to say they aren't tracked around Europe by morons.
This deranged and also dangerous element have refused to believe UEFA were prepared to take more serious action but they are now about to experience that reality.
The man trying to buy from David Murray will also have been given a reality check. Last week Whyte discovered there was an outstanding tax bill of almost £3m and now he finds the club he wants to own is in big bother with UEFA.
I find it mildly amusing that it could well be Her Majestys Revenue & Customs that could take Rangers down - Mr. Stokes may well have to rethink his ban!
I wonder where they got that argument from :rolleyes:Quote:
The club (Rangers fc) will also question UEFA over whether or not they act on reports submitted by people other than official delegates and police
That was a tactic used by Rangers fans a year or so ago. A few of them send a letter to UEFA, complaining about Celtic fans behaviour at some game in Europe. Then they informed the news services that UEFA have started an investigation into complaints against Celtic fans. The BBC website even carried such a headline on a news report.
When you read the BBC news report, getting past the headline 'UEFA investigates Celtic fan's conduct' , yes UEFA received the letter and they had opened it before filing. Apparently, the UEFA action of opening the letter, satisfied the BBC definition of "investigation".
this gave me a chuckle (from tonights game Celtic v. St. Johnstone)
Quote:
1802: An early interruption to play with several footballs kicked onto the field from outside the stadium. A bizarre opening in Perth.
1801: The match starts with Celtic kicking off.
In the St.Johnstone V Celtic game, the ref had a total brain fárt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=V9XBBK6C_-U
Please excuse the profane title.
It was a mini demonstration against the early kick off 6pm because the game was televised and you can't televise a game at the same time as a uefa cl televised match, which was news to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Brines the ref had a shocker right enough.
Murphy played a full 90 with Stokes dropped to the bench and I was pleasantly surprised by his performance, nothing outstanding but showed a lotmore than I thought him capable of. Reminded me of Quinner in his heyday....
http://i54.tinypic.com/34gpx8i.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Junior
"Balls to 6pm"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzK1sdVFlQY&feature=player_embedded
Does it show the push on the back of Duberry by the headless chicken Samaras when he fell on the ball? Strange ok that neither decision was given :)Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
You know what they say about owls and sight :rolleyes:
I seriously doubt your ability to analyse a simple bit of video as it presents itself:D
Samaras might be headless but he is no chicken and anyway that has no bearing on this case. He did not push Duberry in the back. He placed his hand gently against Duberry's shirt. There is no pushing action.
It was not strange that the ref did not blow for that as there was no foul, it was a blatant dive by Duberry.
It was more than strange that the ref did not blow for the hand ball. It was a brain fárt. What you don't see was Samaras repeatedly pleading with the ref for the handball. The ref had not blown for a foul on Duberry and had waved play on, at the same time as witnessing him handle the ball twice on the ground.
The storm in the administration of scottish football has been well and truly stirred by the lawyer Paul McBride who had represented Neil Lennon at the SFA disciplinary hearings.
The SFA is now considering, with the benefit of legal advice, whether to sue just Paul McBride for damages or whether to also sue other parties.
After the SFA let McCoist off on appeal, McBride said
"The SFA are tonight officially the laughing stock of world football and they have been shown to be not merely dysfunctional and not merely dishonest but biased because McCoist, who undoubtedly said something that provoked a reaction from Neil Lennon that caused a four-match ban for him, has received no punishment at all."
Bougherra and Diouf - both shown red cards that night - escaped with fines and a warning about their future conduct after facing the SFA's disciplinary committee to answer a case of "misconduct of a significantly serious nature".
Retired Grade One referee Kenny Clark
"I suspect most referees will be shaking their heads in disbelief. I think they'll be wondering if people have very short memories in relation to what happened earlier this season and their withdrawal of services."
"It's an extraordinary decision, particularly in relation to Madjid Bougherra, that's the aspect that worries me most."
"Players must know that it is entirely unacceptable to lay hands upon match officials. This decision from the SFA disciplinary committee sends out the wrong message to players at every level."
"If the disciplinary committee had applied common sense to this situation, they would have recognised that everybody regarded the conduct of both Madjid Bougherra and El-Hadji Diouf as extraordinary - and I mean that in a bad sense."
"The SFA labelled it serious misconduct, but the punishments meted out don't seem to me to treat it that way."
"I would say the disciplinary committee are not living up to their name and have conducted themselves in an incompetent manner on this particular occasion, especially in regard to Madjid Bougherra.
6 months or so ago Chairman Reid came out with the following statement directed at the footballing authorities in Scotland.
"We will not be treated as less than anyone else...those days are gone."
Now Paul McBride, Celtics Legal Counsel has had the SFA by the balls on a number of issues of late and he is not for letting go. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbYiA2OX4hQ
The best bit is that he hammers the SFA and the SFA have nothing to use against Celtic. And to all and sundry, it is just as if he is speaking on behalf of Celtic.
As pr goes, it is a piece of art, priceless.
In the recent embarassment of the SFA - They claimed to be unable/unwilling to waste money on futile legal battles or words to that effect. In other words they had fecked up massively and had to go back and revisit their own law book and re-write accordingly.
What has changed in the last couple of weeks? Is it possible to make the same sort of clanger with the last one so fresh in the mind? Idiots.
Looks like McBride and the SFA have kissed and made up.......
McBride, who was the target of a parcel bomb found in a Kilwinning postbox on Friday, released a statement saying:
"In the course of an interview given to BBC Scotland on April 12, 2011, I made a number of remarks which followed the decision made at the disciplinary hearing involving Rangers FC players and their assistant manager.
"Following discussions with the Scottish Football Association, I recognise that offence has been taken to my remarks by the Scottish Football Association as an organisation, its council and its staff, and for that I express regret.
"I have a lot of respect for many individuals within the SFA, not least Stewart Regan.
"Under his leadership, I anticipate many reforms which will be welcomed across Scotland."
As a result the SFA have had an errrr rethink on their legal case against McBride
Regan, who will put his major overhaul of the SFA's disciplinary procedures to clubs at the organisation's AGM next month, welcomed the statement.
He said: "Following constructive discussions with Paul McBride, I can confirm that the Scottish FA will not proceed with either a defamation case against him or a complaint to the Faculty of Advocates.
"Whilst anyone is entitled to criticise the Scottish FA, we cannot allow our integrity to be challenged.
"Now that this issue is behind us, we can concentrate on the internal and constitutional reforms which will benefit Scottish football going forward."
They can see in the dark?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
A lot of channel hopping last night. Kilmarnock vs Celtic, Spurs vs Arsenal and Madrid vs Barca. Celtic got their tactics right last night. Kilmarnock like to play from the back so Celtic pressed right up on them, caused them to give the ball away in dangerous parts of the pitch and thus conceded soft goals. Job well done by Celtic.
Looking forward to the Old Firm game on Sunday. Rangers are much improved from the team Celtic beat at Ibrox. All to play for.
Powerful tribute paid by the Celtic fans to Neil Lennon last night, during and after the game at Kilmarnock. The result, important as it was, paled into the significance at the end when Lennon went on to the pitch.
Why give the penalty to Samaras? 3 goals in 30 games or something like that. Stokes bottled it because he had missed a peno recently I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
Lennon is his own worst enemy reacting to the boos of the Rangers' fans as he left the pitch. Ignore it like all professionals do when being booed.
Old Firm games are almost as exciting as Steel City derbies :)
You are a real moaner Owls, Lennon has to dismantle a bomb before breakfast every morning and you moan about his sense of professionalism in front of the manic hordes. Next you'll be saying that Celtic should not win in Ibrox because of the effect it would have on the Ranger's fans :)
Samaras has scored 6 this season. He is the a player who gets the 'penalty taker appointment'. He has taken them for Greece and even scored one at Ibrox in January.
If Carling had sponsored that Glasgow Derby, Samaras would have converted the late penalty. And after the game, Lennon would have strolled over to the centre circle and stuck a small tricolour in there.
Cupping your hands to chants of "What's it like to live in fear....", is now a 'crime' ??
Obviously what the rangers fans were chanting is wrong and what happened to lennon recently is very wrong. But the man really really does not help himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy
His reaction after the match was stupid, just stupid. And his reaction in the press conference after was equally as bad. The man has no sense. He is well paid in a high profile influential role. He needs to set an example and not in the manner that it has in two recent old firm games.
It's not about setting an example, I think. He just really shouldn't be bating them when his life is in very genuine danger :/
Someone sent me a link for this. At least it cracked me up.
Sammy the Tammy blows Raith away
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZSrd4y1c-E&feature=player_embedded#at=37