GordonD Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 On 04/08/2020 at 10:43, Ric said: On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers. At the 1972 Cup-Winners' Cup final, the pitchside scoreboard said RFC Glasgow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 Presumably all the protestant players were fighting in the war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 (edited) On 04/08/2020 at 10:43, Ric said: On a side note to that list, is it just me that cringes a bit when people use "Glasgow Celtic" and "Glasgow Rangers", it's not like we say "Liverpool Everton", "London Arsenal" or "Belfast Linfield". We know who these teams are, there is no need for the prefix. In fact the only time you ever need clarification is when some Southerner gets QPR and Rangers mixed up, but I know of nobody that calls QPR just Rangers. Everton is a placename. It used to be a seperate town council a long time ago. to that would be like "Partick Glasgow Thistle" "Rangers" would technically have been "Govan Rangers" as opposed to "Glasgow Rangers" back in the day Edited August 5, 2020 by topcat(The most tip top) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raidernation Posted August 5, 2020 Share Posted August 5, 2020 ^^^ Wrong.c***s then, c***s now, c***s forever! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishtergrolsch Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 8 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: Everton is a placename. It used to be a seperate town council a long time ago. to that would be like "Partick Glasgow Thistle" "Rangers" would technically have been "Govan Rangers" as opposed to "Glasgow Rangers" back in the day But they died and are irrelevant now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, Raidernation said: ^^^ Wrong. c***s then, c***s now, c***s forever! What did you think the "FC" bit stood for in "Rangers FC"? Edited August 6, 2020 by topcat(The most tip top) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fillin Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 SFA hearing today for the charges put against Hearts and Partick - "Disciplinary Rule 78 - No member or Associated Person shall take a dispute which is referable to arbitration in terms of Article 99 to a court of law except as expressly permitted by the terms of Article 99. " 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluearmyfaction Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 On 04/08/2020 at 11:39, craigkillie said: The point is that in a bigger league there are fewer meaningful positions. In the current set-up, the meaningful positions are 1-5 and 11-12 in the Premiership, 1-4 and 9-10 in the Championship and League 1 and 1-4 and 10 in League 2. That gives you a total of 24 out of the 42 places in the SPFL which count for something, which means the vast majority of clubs have something to play for until very close to the end of the season (with the split in the Premiership also contributing to this). If you have something to play for EVERY year, though, it goes full circle and becomes meaningless again. Going up or down in the non-top flight can be an annual occurrence. So just missing out or sneaking through is not special. It's more special with the top flight because it is so much more restricted. Anyhoo, you could have a meaningful 2 division league, just have 4 up 4 down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DumbartonBud Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 Sorry if I missed this was there any info released on the decision on costs for the Arbitration? Last I had heard the panel were taking submissions on this after the decision was made. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locheedee Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 29 minutes ago, DumbartonBud said: Sorry if I missed this was there any info released on the decision on costs for the Arbitration? Last I had heard the panel were taking submissions on this after the decision was made. Still ongoing according to the BBC... We might get news today on their punishment for going to court but no word on when the arbitration is due to finish. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53677459 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coventry Saint Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 (edited) Their entire case was laughable, and they clearly didn't have a leg to stand on. However, I'd defend their right to stand up for their interests, in the courts if required, and if they're happy to run the risk of being stuck paying costs. I really don't think any further punishment would be appropriate*. * Though it would be hilarious. Inappropriate, but hilarious. Edited August 6, 2020 by Coventry Saint 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 1 minute ago, Coventry Saint said: Their entire case was laughable, and they clearly didn't have a leg to stand on. However, I'd defend their right to stand up for their interests, in the courts if required, and if they're happy to run the risk of being stuck paying costs. I really don't think any further punishment would be appropriate*. * Though it would be hilarious. Inappropriate, but hilarious. They did break the rules, though, and not only forced the SPFL's legal team to take steps to make them comply, but actively opposed those steps. It would warrant some kind of punishment just to set the precedent that the SFA won't let future teams get away with it. Because there's no lasting harm done (costs got awarded and the case did end up in the right venue), it can be just a slap on the wrist, but it should still be there. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locheedee Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 4 minutes ago, Coventry Saint said: Their entire case was laughable, and they clearly didn't have a leg to stand on. However, I'd defend their right to stand up for their interests, in the courts if required, and if they're happy to run the risk of being stuck paying costs. I really don't think any further punishment would be appropriate*. * Though it would be hilarious. Inappropriate, but hilarious. Yeah expected the costs decision to come out first tbh then possibly a small slap on the wrist fine from the SFA if the arbitration had already made them pay up. Hopefully it's a hilarious and inappropriate reaming from both cases just for the lol's at the meltdowns! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Onion Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 4 minutes ago, locheedee said: Yeah expected the costs decision to come out first tbh then possibly a small slap on the wrist fine from the SFA if the arbitration had already made them pay up. Hopefully it's a hilarious and inappropriate reaming from both cases just for the lol's at the meltdowns! I thought I read that the arbitration panel will sort out costs next week. The SFA will decide today what punishment the teary eyed two get. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
locheedee Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 Just now, Spring Onion said: I thought I read that the arbitration panel will sort out costs next week. The SFA will decide today what punishment the teary eyed two get. Ahh cool, I hadn't seen anything about the cost decision. I guess it leaves the SFA clear to be suitably brutal without coming across as doubling down on them having to pay the costs of arbitration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossBFaeDundee Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 (edited) If they're made to pay full court costs and at least a £100k fine, that'll do me personally. It's not what I'd really like to see happen though. It'll be a slap on the wrist though, let's be honest. Edited August 6, 2020 by RossBFaeDundee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 (edited) They will most likely get a small fine - say £5k that is around standard for such an offence. Edited August 6, 2020 by Cowden Cowboy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pull My Strings Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 14 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said: They will most likely get a small fine - say £5k that is around standard for such an offence. Is there a "standard" punishment for such an offence. What are you basing that on? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofarl Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 I still say fine Hearts then boot Craig Levein in the balls. Everyone’s happy at that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishtergrolsch Posted August 6, 2020 Share Posted August 6, 2020 19 minutes ago, Lofarl said: I still say fine Hearts then boot Craig Levein in the balls. Everyone’s happy at that. English, Budge, McCann, Pressley and Neilson get off scott free? Nah. Boot in the baws etc for all of them. 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.