05: Full Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

106 Excellent

About Rasczak

  • Rank
    First Team Squad

Profile Information

  • Gender

Contact Methods

  • Website

Recent Profile Visitors

1,762 profile views
  1. That by referring to tempering language means that using any swearing at all will treated as if you had carried out a deliberate criminal act. Of course there are cases where swearing can be an integral part of a criminal act, but a single utterance would not be the case, which should be abundantly clear without it having to be spelt out, although it seems I just had to. From reading further in the thread it seems like I am in a minority who sees the statement for what it is and that the club is being seen to take action. If others want to complain more vocally about this being dealt with correctly, than it that it happened, then there doesn't seem any point in debating any further. I'll know how I stand.
  2. Because PumpFake has completely misunderstood, as it appears have you, the point made in the statement.
  3. Yes, I also understood it.
  4. ^^^^^^^^^ Thinks F-Bomb is exactly the same as a Smoke Bomb.
  5. They are awful, awful that they have to be made due to the criminal behaviour of these 'supporters'. I would hope that these consequences will make it clear to others that may have thought about such behaviour that it will not be tolerated, prevents it happening again and so helps improve the atmosphere.
  6. It doesn't seem from your previous posts that you respect all laws. The point here is though, that the first time a smoke bomb was let off, a talking to was quite right. Even the second or third time I could understand, but the sheer number of incidents, from the smoke bombs to the chasing after other teams fans in Elgin looking for a fight, means it has now got beyond that and as those behaving in this manner don't seem to pay attention to the gentle advise, then what else is left? As is clear from their own statement, the wider group don't seem to think that any of their number have done anything that could be remotely considered wrong I think we both agree it is wrong, though disagree on how wrong, so if the wider group don't accept that when given the facts and asked to modify their behaviour, further action is required. Added to this, as others have reminded us, the SPFL have raised it with the club officially, if the club aren't seen to act beyond what has already been done, then sanctions directly against the club could be possible.
  7. Just because in one you are the victim and in another support and condone the perpetrator, does not make them incomparable. Letting off pryotechnics at football IS proper criminal action, covered under The Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985. If you feel strongly enough that such behaviour should not be criminalised, by all means lobby your MP and others to have the act changed, if the desire is there to allow this then get it permitted in the right way.
  8. I have posted elsewhere, it appears that instead of accepting that they have a, possibly very small, element that has been taking it too far, and working to help weed it out s that both they and the club benefit, they are blaming others for a perceived witch-hunt for them just trying to create a little atmosphere. If they can't see what is wrong, what hope is there?
  9. So your reaction to criminal behaviour is to not involve the police and just sweep it under the carpet. So if your car is stolen you won't bother with the police and just ask those who did it to calm their exuberance and not do it again?
  10. Worst summer in the clubs history

    Maybe they did.
  11. Inverness CT -V- Dundee Utd

    The online seemed to go straight to the commentary, but I switched between the two options for Sportsound and got OAM.
  12. Thanks again Scotty.
  13. Thanks Scotty, If others are happy and find it useful then far be it from me to say get rid.
  14. Is there any way to switch off the Our Picks down the right hand side when reading threads? I find it really distracting and in the way of reading the content. Having it at the top of the list of new posts is OK, just not at the side when trying to read the threads.
  15. Potential Rule Changes

    Just read a story on the BBC site about some potential rule changes being discussed by IFAB, and wondered what people thought of them. Some of the big headlines are changing to 30 minute halves, with the clock stopping when the ball is out of play, stopping rebounds from penalties, ie make it the same as a penalty shoot out, and it must go in from the first strike, and allowing the ref to award a goal if one is clearly prevented by a handball. There is a PDF document, also linked in the article, showing the full proposals and whether the could be implemented straight away, just issuing guidance on protocols, could be experimented with, or would need rule changes. The ones that I like, they are both pet peeves for me anyway, are the proposal to make goal kicks be taken from the side the ball went out, (I am sure that it was that way years ago anyway), and that a half can only be ended when the ball is out of play. Means that as long as you keep the ball live you can keep attacking to get the equaliser or winner, and no worries about the whistle blowing as the cross is delivered. Not so sure on the penalty one, it stops imaginative penalty taking.