Sao Paulo Posted September 23, 2019 Share Posted September 23, 2019 No when he wis oan. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLClyde Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Danny Lennon 10/1 for the ayr job, think weāll need him to stick a 4th year on his contract just to be sure heās not going there.Ā 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domino the Dug Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 1 hour ago, SLClyde said: Danny Lennon 10/1 for the ayr job, think weāll need him to stick a 4th year on his contract just to be sure heās not going there.Ā Imagine the nervous breakdowns if he did?Ā Ā It might almost be worth that alone!Ā Ā Nah, i jest. Bloody stupid of the bookies to stick him on the odds, tbh. Or maybe just plain ignorance, most likely. I've not looked, i'd expect Hughes to be involved though. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Toboggan Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Goodwillieās appeal being heard tomorrow 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde01 Posted September 24, 2019 Share Posted September 24, 2019 Goodwillieās appeal being heard tomorrow Not like them to react so promptly.I doubt the appeal will be successful sadly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 13 hours ago, Clyde01 said: Not like them to react so promptly. Ā Pretty sure they changed the process a year or two back - it's to stop clubs using the appeal process as a means to allow players to play games whilst the appeal is ongoing.Ā 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Toboggan Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Appeal got dismissed, heās out for the next 2 games 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Highlights now appeared on the official site. I'm surprised we appealed to be honest; he's caught him flush in the face with his forearm. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 30 minutes ago, You Only Live Twice said: Probably didn't anticipate the decision being made so quickly, and hoping that he would therefore be eligible this weekend. A bit silly if they didn't anticipate that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haufdaft Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Not quite as silly as failing to register a player correctly whilst on a title charge to be fair.....Surely the decision to appeal was the managers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLClyde Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Queenās Park played someone who wasnāt on the team lines on Saturday. Will be keeping an eye on that one.Ā 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macclyde+ Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 29 minutes ago, SLClyde said: Queenās Park played someone who wasnāt on the team lines on Saturday. Will be keeping an eye on that one.Ā Did they not lose 3-0 ? Maybe they had already anticipated the consequencesĀ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Clyde FC Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 3 hours ago, David W said: Highlights now appeared on the official site. I'm surprised we appealed to be honest; he's caught him flush in the face with his forearm. We're each entitled to an opinion but I'm not sure it's an open and shut case. The ball was in the air, DGW is following the flight and is going for the ball he then holds back...by that time he is already committed and makes contact. He immediately holds his hand up.Ā If violent conduct is about intent, then only 1 person knows the intent; the rest of us have to guess.Ā The Ā£250 is to dissuade clubs from appealing in general rather than punishing them for speculative or spurious requests. Worth amount in my view. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Clyde Man Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Highlights now appeared on the official site. I'm surprised we appealed to be honest; he's caught him flush in the face with his forearm.I would have to agree with you. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyde4ever Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 46 minutes ago, The Clyde Man said: I would have to agree with you. I totally disagree with both of you. IMO both players started out going for the ball. On his way to challenge for the ballĀ Goody realised the Peterhead player was getting there first, and put his arms up to protect himself. No way was it "violent conduct". I can accept how it could be seen as endangering an opponentĀ by the way Goody protected himself, and a definite yellow - or even a soft red, but in no way was it "violent conduct" , which as far as I'm aware involves intent to injure anĀ opponent. In the report of the game on the Peterhead website, it even mentions that some Peterhead playersĀ thought it was an accident. If it had been a red for "dangerous play" would it only have been a 1 game suspension? If so I think it was a reasonable call to appeal, but can't say I'm surprised we gotĀ SFA .Ā 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only one David Marsh Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Just watched it certainly no intent just an automatic reaction to throw your arms up 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBR Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Agree with the above. Ā Thereās no way thatās violent conduct with intent to injure an opponent. Ā Maybe you canāt change the reason for the red card - only whether it should have been shown andĀ Clyde failed to argue that. Ā Wrongful dismissal, not wrong reason for dismissal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 Ā 18 minutes ago, clyde4ever said: I totally disagree with both of you. IMO both players started out going for the ball. On his way to challenge for the ballĀ Goody realised the Peterhead player was getting there first, and put his arms up to protect himself. No way was it "violent conduct". I can accept how it could be seen as endangering an opponentĀ by the way Goody protected himself, and a definite yellow - or even a soft red, but in no way was it "violent conduct" , which as far as I'm aware involves intent to injure anĀ opponent. In the report of the game on the Peterhead website, it even mentions that some Peterhead playersĀ thought it was an accident. If it had been a red for "dangerous play" would it only have been a 1 game suspension? If so I think it was a reasonable call to appeal, but can't say I'm surprised we gotĀ SFA .Ā 1 match bans can only be for 2 yellow cards, denying a goalscoring opportunity or offensive language. Serious foul play or violent conduct are the only two "straight red card" options that can apply here. I'd argue this incident is more serious foul play to be honest, but it's the same punishment regardless. Ā 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 3 minutes ago, WBR said: Agree with the above. Ā Thereās no way thatās violent conduct with intent to injure an opponent. Ā Maybe you canāt change the reason for the red card - only whether it should have been shown andĀ Clyde failed to argue that. Ā Wrongful dismissal, not wrong reason for dismissal. Violent conduct is defined as using excessive force against an opponent, when not challenging for the ball.Ā Ā "Intent to injure" isn't a factor. I can see why they would describe that as excessive force (he doesn't need to have his arm like that; in protecting himself, he's endangering the Peterhead player) and I can also see why they would say he isn't challenging for the ball. Ā 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBR Posted September 25, 2019 Share Posted September 25, 2019 But apart from that Iām right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.