Antony

Wonder if you would go online and say that about any other minority group in Scotland. Probably not. Celtic should win hopefully with Kyogo back, but we do drop points at home to bottom 6 teams a few times a season.

No I was talking about the Irish flag and why the colours were chosen and what the flag represents. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Ireland No idea about Russia as I'm not Russian but I would guess white on a flag would often represent peace just like red would often be to represent blood of people who fought for the country.

Green is for Ireland/Catholic, white is for peace and Orange is for unionism (protestants).

You keep repeating yourself and I'm not disagreeing with you. But you don't realise you are proving the point being made by other posters. You are making it abundantly clear that expressions of Irishness in Scotland are seen as an "issue". That's the view taken in Scotland but from an outsider's perspective its not really a great reflection on your country. If waving an Irish flag stirs up feelings of hatred and anger maybe they are the issue rather than a flag that represents peace.

Yeah that's what i said, you see having an Irish flag as an issue. The flag literally represents peace between Catholics and protestants hence the green and orange. The flag of the Irish nation isn't sectarian and it does not promote anti-protestantism. If the Irish flag causes sectarian problems or some sort of rivalry it's probably because your country has an issue with anti-Irish racism. Maybe you can should have a look at that before claiming what the Irish flag or Irish identity represents. Someone waving an Irish flag doesn't give Scottish people the right to abuse them for their nationality or religion.

Someone on this thread said Celtic putting a tricolour on the Celtic strip is an issue or is anti-protestant. Celebrating Irish heritage is clearly an issue for some people.

The post I quoted kind of proves the issue and is why a lot of Irish people have reservations about Scotland despite the 2 having similar histories. Celtic celebrating their Irish heritage with a tricolour on a strip is not in any way negative to me. But seeing people say that the flag of the Irish nation is promoting anti-protestantism is just bizarre, but that's obviously a useful narrative to push. No one fought for civil rights, they fought because they hate protestants and the British way of life. Couldn't be further from the truth but that's obviously the view over in Scotland.

Ok well how should they focus on Scotland's role in slavery and Ireland's role in the Empire. The writing on that banner would be too small I think. Also the Green Brigade did recently highlight Glasgow's role in slavery by renaming Street names in Glasgow City Centre. But you win that argument, I don't get the relevance sorry.

I didn't understand your point sorry. They celebrate Irish independence which is obviously a bit of a no no in Scotland as it involved booting the British Empire out of Ireland. Maybe if they wrote a thesis on the issue they could highlight each country's individual role. But I was just talking about them waving a tricolour or singing the Soldier Song.

That's what the problem is imo. You say putting a tricolour on a strip is in the same category as orangism. That's why you can't ban Rangers from encouraging orangism because you would have to be even handed and ban the "Irishism" at Celtic. And to people not from Scotland that would obviously make it seem like it has serious anti-Irish issues. If you accept they're 2 different issues then you can tackle them in different ways. Pretending they are the same prevents anything being done. Putting an Irish tricolour or a Harp on a football strip is no more anti-protestant than St Johnstone's badge being anti-Catholic. Being Irish/Catholic doesn't make you anti-protestant but of course it suits the British media to push the narrative that resistance to their occupation was because the Irish hate protestants. I would disagree that "this is our city" is anti-protestant but maybe because I'm biased i don't see it. Another of the club's taglines is "open to all" which has as much relevance to reality. But yes I take your point on the roaming in the gloaming song, anyone singing it should be banned and if it continues the club cannot keep turning a blind eye. But I didn't try and say it's a one way street, all I'm saying is that it's not 2 equal and opposite things. Of course in the UK, the media will be happy to peddle the idea that Irish Republicanism was anti-protestant, which is fine, but if you want to actually tackle the issue then you would have to be more clever about it but yeah that's probably a long way away

How do Celtic FC encourage anti-protestant bigotry?There's a number of Celtic fans who have outed themselves as being as bad as anyone over the years but constantly refusing to separate anti-catholicism from Irish republicanism/anti imperialism is a big problem in Scotland and arguably one of the reasons why the 2 won't be tackled. The two things may not be needed in 21st century Scotland but they are 2 different issues with different histories. I can see why "ugly sisters" and "arse cheeks" resonates with a lot of people but when it comes to addressing the issues we can't just say "one is as bad as the other, throw them in the sea". This attitude means everything needs to be done even handedly. It's why the word to describe Rangers fans is being deemed as sectarian, so that it's not seen as biased when anti-Catholic slurs are clamped down on. And it's maybe why harsher punishments haven't been looked at for some of Rangers chanting because they would need to do the same for Celtic's Republican songs which would be a more complex issue. If people want to say the 2 clubs are as bad as each other from a football point of view then that's fine but in terms of the 2 societal issues it's not really 2 sides of the same coin. What's worse comes down to your own morals but they are very different issues that need handled differently.

Obviously it would be better if it wasn't sung but it's difficult to make a case for it being anti-protestant when protestants say it. Cheer up Steven Gerrard was a song I heard mostly from Aberdeen fans. I suppose you could say its sectarian but I think you would then have to admit the Orange Order is also sectarian because you can't join if you are Catholic or have Catholic parents.

Tight but he's ahead of the ball so offside.

Hibs fans will sell out the extra 2000 in a couple of days. The very worst the spfl could do next time Hibs are in a final is give Hibs 20,000 to start with as they've proved they can sell out comfortably. And then once that's sold out give Hibs the last 3,000 or whatever takes it up 50-50. Hopefully it will just be split 50-50 to start with but knowing the spfl it probably won't happen.

Celtic and Rangers will make the group stages most seasons anyway, regardless of the coefficient or what qualifying round they start in. Other clubs in Scotland won't. But if the coefficient can stay where it is, then it means the third place teams will also be guaranteed group stage football and the money it brings. I don't know the exact figures but I think the Europa League and Conference League prize money is fairly similar. With a bad coefficient, Celtic and Rangers get to the groups anyway and no one else does. With a good coefficient Celtic, Rangers and one other team get to the groups and get similar prize money. So having a bad coefficient could actually widen the gap more than a good coefficient. If we were in this coefficient position this time last season, then Ali McCann or Jason Kerr might still be at St Johnstone today, as they'd have an extra 3 or 4 million pounds in the bank from playing in the Conference League groups.

Each to their own, but songs about Irish independence aren't really the same as singing about a dead football player in my book.

Might have been "Bobby Sands MP" maybe. Anyway great goal.

There wasn't one. IRA yes, Davie Cooper no.

East Kilbride will fill the extra spot after lots were drawn between EK and Fraserburgh as tier 5 runners up. Group stage draw on Friday.

If Hibs win the cup it might look a bit daft to make your third place team play in the groups while 4th and 5th get a bye. If its any of the other 3 I think that's the best solution to give them preparation for the Europa. The 5th European spot could be with us for 3 or 4 years though, so they might look at a more permanent solution.

Out of the 10 West Lothian juniors known to have applied only Stoneyburn and Pumpherston haven't confirmed they've been accepted.

Aberdeen did another cup double a few years before. Aberdeen and Hearts have both done a league and Cup double but that's it.

If the Premier League were to lose these 6 teams it either runs with a 14 team league or more likely promotes from within to keep the same structure for the top 4 leagues (ie 6 teams in each division promoted to a higher tier). I just named the top 6 clubs in the English National League which will be the new entrants into the EFL to keep the structure the same. If they did happen to lose 6 of their top clubs that all get crowds of 50,000 plus, they will either shrug their shoulders and get on with it or look at some other more radical ways of compensating. I don't think it will happen, but inviting some Scottish clubs that could potentially attract 25,000 to 60,000 fans and are Championship/Premier League level sized clubs wouldn't seem a dreadful idea to me. It is obviously far fetched but the 6 Nationql League clubs I named only get crowds of a couple of thousand and will likely just hang about League Two.

If they are moaning about too many games and injuries then they should start resting players now. If they lose tonight they will be 11 points adrift with 12 points left to play for. They could give their players 3 weeks off from now until the playoff if they want. They have 4 meaningless games that they can use however they like to prepare.

That's kind of a simplistic way to look at it. While the top clubs in the new Premier League could still pay more money I'm more looking at the bigger picture, and clubs further down the pecking order. Maybe Championship clubs will no longer be able to spend more money than Celtic and Rangers and maybe League Two clubs won't pay better wages than some Scottish Premiership clubs. Midtable English clubs will no longer be as likely to fork out huge sums on an 18 year old from Palmeiras or Santos that will only be a squad player. The player will stay put for another couple of years benefitting that club and competition. Like I said less money doesn't mean there is less talent but it could mean the talent is more evenly spread out. Yes Everton and Villa will still play their top earners more than Celtic or Rangers but maybe sitting on a bench at Southampton or Leicester becomes less ludicrous than staying at Celtic or Rangers a few years longer as one of the top earners. If English football existed in isolation then yes, less money would make no difference as the footballers aren't going to change jobs. But English football doesn't exist in isolation. There is Brazilian, Ukrainian, Turkish clubs out there which pay a certain amount. Maybe now instead of Besiktas paying similar money to a midtable Championship club, they pay similar money to a midtable Premier League club. This would be obviously weaken English football. Instead of Ajax or Benfica paying similar wages to a Championship club they now will pay similar wages to a midtable Premier League club if England is no longer getting huge TV and sponsorship deals on the same scale as they did before. Less money in the game is a good thing in many ways in my opinion. As you rightly pointed out the Super League clubs will absorb more cash but they won't be absorbing anymore players.