Jump to content

The Falkirk FC Thread


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I'm going to guess that McKee knows.

Putting your neck on the block there... :rolleyes:

In reality, apart from a still photo which doesn't prove much nobody has any idea what O'Hara said either but that hasn't stopped everyone from passing judgement. The punishment is at the high end of the suspension spectrum. I think we can safely presume it wasn't a minor offence. I remain far more interested, given it was perceived as so serious, in why it took 5 weeks to come to light and wasn't dealt with either immediately on the pitch or in the week following the game. O'Hara has been able to play for a month and affect games, including another one against Dunfermline, when he shouldn't have been. McKee, if he's found guilty, will be in the same position.

Your second paragraph is spot on. We already know from innumerable cock ups from disciplinary proceedings that they are, shall we say, "unpredictable" in their findings.

The fact it appears McLean and Shiels made note of it at the game, and it's taken all this time to bring to "justice" is disgraceful. What if he'd scored the winner in our last three games? (Getting into fantasy land now, I know).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Skyline Drifter said:

I'm going to guess that McKee knows.

In reality, apart from a still photo which doesn't prove much nobody has any idea what O'Hara said either but that hasn't stopped everyone from passing judgement. The punishment is at the high end of the suspension spectrum. I think we can safely presume it wasn't a minor offence. I remain far more interested, given it was perceived as so serious, in why it took 5 weeks to come to light and wasn't dealt with either immediately on the pitch or in the week following the game. O'Hara has been able to play for a month and affect games, including another one against Dunfermline, when he shouldn't have been. McKee, if he's found guilty, will be in the same position.

Took them over a season to ban Jamie Insall after failing a drugs test last March, this has been dealt with rather quickly in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took them over a season to ban Jamie Insall after failing a drugs test last March, this has been dealt with rather quickly in comparison.


I'm sure Insall wasn't allowed to play after he was caught though?

The hearing took a while to come around but the news came out fairly soon after the test from what I remember. I'm fairly certain it was the same with Jordan McMillan.

I may well be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Bobby "Three Penalties" Madden, Hippolyte the only player done retrospectively for diving, now this - absolutely no question that Falkirk are being held to  a different standard from every other team in the league. 

You have a assume the compliance officer has some Dunfermline connection.

Old Firm levels of paranoia here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Believe The Hype said:

Like SD has said, if an incident had such severity that it would carry an 8 game ban why has it taken so long to address and why has he been allowed to be available for selection in the meantime ? Quite bizarre how this has been handled.

Yes, McKee for instance was able to score against us last week when, if found guilty, he potentially shouldn't have been playing. As it happens we won the game anyway but he's been able to materially affect games in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 Games? Wow that seems excessive considering a straight red tackle is usually a lot less and could have worse implications.
 
I assume the SFA are taking a hard line on mocking disability which is why they have given a pretty severe punishment
 
 


I'd imagine it would be a similar ban for racism (pretty sure that's what Tonev got when he recially abused Logan) and this could be classed as a similar sort incident. As you say, it's ultimately mocking a disability.

What SD says is absolutely bang on regarding the length of time it has taken. Absolute shambles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He isn’t classified as disabled, he can drive, wouldn’t be eligible for benefits. He’s missing an eye, some people are missing hair or teeth.

Is calling someone a baldy X or a gapped tooth Y mocking the disabled? 

Edited by Andreas Kelevra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...