eyeswideopen15 Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 3-2 to SSMAFLThanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leftfootwand Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 If true this is stinking! How have they got away with it if it was so obvious though?Basically if you dont have DNA to prove then your fcuked ,Southside accepted defeat should have won game out the park first half if took chances ,but to be cheated is a different view a hope Hurlford skelp them on the 9th CHEATS DON'T DESERVE TO WIN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingwaa Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 4 hours ago, Stucafu said: If it was a Scottish tie then it will have nothing to do with League, so don't think that is an issue. Poor show from them if they have done so, but they will get fired out on Saturday from Hurlford and all will be forgotten. Would be interesting to hear Southsides version of events. Alba, Eastfield, Colville and Hurlford. If draw is kind to them, then I'm going for an all CSAFL final. Fired out by another set of cheats u mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzah Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 Unbelievable if what has been posted here is true and needs taken to the highest level. Time for photo id to be brought in across the board like the Glasgow Sunday leagues do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny86 Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 Do southside believe they would have won the tie if this 1 player never came on?? I know if the facts are true it’s a joke but surely they would’ve lost regardless as 1 player can’t make that much difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bawsoot Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 How can 1 player not make much of a difference what a load of rubbish doesn't really matter they have cheated end of the guy should not have played and by the sounds of this they knew what they were doing so they should be punished accordingly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny86 Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 There’s no guarantee they knew what they were doing!! What a load of rubbish? If a centre half comes on an wins them the game I’d be more worried bout my own team rather than trying to find excuses as to why we got beat. Obviously not good enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auld yin wae knowledge Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 7 hours ago, Stucafu said: Shat the bed more like. Powers above have nothing to do with the public forum. Oh yes they have...………. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacko Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 36 minutes ago, Danny86 said: There’s no guarantee they knew what they were doing!! What a load of rubbish? If a centre half comes on an wins them the game I’d be more worried bout my own team rather than trying to find excuses as to why we got beat. Obviously not good enough Going by reports he came on and was different class that could well have been the difference between the other team scoring and taking control of the game. Also the fact its been said they were calling him a different name and when someone reffered to him as his actual name they said don't call him that.. would show that they knew exactly what they were up to take your blinkers off man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The riddler Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 Craigshill , sneeky little cheats, playing a move like that and risking the possibility of being terminated from competition at this stage of the biggest cup in amateur football , beggars belief , unless they knew they could get away with it , and if so, then their is serious questions to be asked of the powers above who have made this decision to do nothing about it , shocking imo, regardless of whether One man makes a difference or not , HE WAS MEANT TO BE BANNED , end of story . Their victory was false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hands_Free Posted February 26, 2019 Share Posted February 26, 2019 3 hours ago, Danny86 said: Do southside believe they would have won the tie if this 1 player never came on?? I know if the facts are true it’s a joke but surely they would’ve lost regardless as 1 player can’t make that much difference Talking mince mate and judging by the fact you joined only a few hours ago it's probably fair guess to say you aren't giving a neutral view to this. Why not everyone just bring a ringer in every week, of course one player can make a difference. Regardless,if truth to this it ruins any respect said club may have built up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CFCbhoy Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 7 hours ago, leftfootwand said: 11 hours ago, RPHG said: If true this is stinking! How have they got away with it if it was so obvious though? Basically if you dont have DNA to prove then your fcuked ,Southside accepted defeat should have won game out the park first half if took chances ,but to be cheated is a different view a hope Hurlford skelp them on the 9th CHEATS DON'T DESERVE TO WIN In all the years of this forum is the first I have heard anyone say they hope Hurlford thistle beat cheats considering that's what they have been accused off for years. Times must be changing lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPHG Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 It doesn't matter if he made the difference or not! If he was banned he shouldn't have been on the park, that's honkin! Also if anyone involved in football thinks a teams best centre half playing/not playing doesn't make a difference you don't know what yer talking about. Especially at amateur when the back up is rarely of the same level (if he was he'd be off playing every week and not back up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepunisher Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 took this game in as a neutral it’s crazy hearing this surely this can’t be true ?? . southside edged the first half but craigshill came out and dominated the second half and overall better team and southside very lucky not to see 2 players sent of for the tackles on the young winger 3/4 tackles ! Then southside with about 5 mins of pressure at the end . Craigshill by far the better team in my opinion and don’t see how the centre half played a blinder didn’t look like had much to deal with . Amateur football is dieing slowly now . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matchstick Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 3 hours ago, thepunisher said: took this game in as a neutral it’s crazy hearing this surely this can’t be true ?? . southside edged the first half but craigshill came out and dominated the second half and overall better team and southside very lucky not to see 2 players sent of for the tackles on the young winger 3/4 tackles ! Then southside with about 5 mins of pressure at the end . Craigshill by far the better team in my opinion and don’t see how the centre half played a blinder didn’t look like had much to deal with . Amateur football is dieing slowly now . It certainly is if they played a banned player.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craigyod Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 3 hours ago, thepunisher said: took this game in as a neutral it’s crazy hearing this surely this can’t be true ?? . southside edged the first half but craigshill came out and dominated the second half and overall better team and southside very lucky not to see 2 players sent of for the tackles on the young winger 3/4 tackles ! Then southside with about 5 mins of pressure at the end . Craigshill by far the better team in my opinion and don’t see how the centre half played a blinder didn’t look like had much to deal with . Amateur football is dieing slowly now . Southside had 2 one on ones in first half and hit the post. Craigshill scored from a cross. South side bossed first half and looked like scoring every attack. 2nd half craigshill were better team I agree but only marginally. Craigshill defo defended well in second half and were more a threat going forward. As for tackles was hardly a booking in the game and was a clean hard battled game. Was never a red card shout at any point in game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CFCbhoy Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 I'm struggling to see the point of discussing how game played out? It does not matter who the better team was or how the game did or did not change when the player in question came on! If he was suspended and the club were fully aware he was suspended then nothing else matters. It's cheating, against the rules and they should be thrown out of the cup. There isn't an argument too that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveFitbaw Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 If they played a suspended player intentionally or not then I’m sure the rules must be they are chucked out the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dinsey Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 Being told now Craigshill won’t be in the next round, not sure if Southside will be awarded the tie or a walkover for Hurlford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matchstick Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 36 minutes ago, Dinsey said: Being told now Craigshill won’t be in the next round, not sure if Southside will be awarded the tie or a walkover for Hurlford If that is the case Craigshill cheated and Southside have played the match fair and square then Southside should progress to next round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.