10: Site Admin
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Scotty last won the day on February 20

Scotty had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,427 Excellent

About Scotty

  • Rank
    Site Founder
  • Birthday September 15

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Contact Methods

  • Website
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Recent Profile Visitors

25,246 profile views
  1. There is a hole in our stats but only in the early years ... Before today Aaron Doran has made 273 appearances and scored, 46 goals
  2. Scotty HT: 0-1 FT: 0-2 1st ICT: Keatings 1st Opp: Dow Crowd: 2665 CDN Girl HT: 0-0 FT: 0-1 1st ICT: Doran 1st Opp: Paton Crowd: 2552 SOS HT: 1-0 FT: 1-1 1st ICT: White 1st Opp: Nisbet Crowd: 2701
  3. Scotty : Dumbarton @ 2.25 CDN Girl : Peterhead @ 2.00 SOS : Montrose @ 2.00
  4. THE MATCHDAY THREAD Discuss ICT & other games in this thread as they happen Dunfermline -V- Inverness CT PREVIEW 25th February @ 7:45PM, East End Park, Dunfermline Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook Media Coverage AUDIO COVERAGE BBC Sportsound BBC Sportsound [UK Only] LIVE TEXT (ONLINE) Sporting Life BBC VIDEO SPFL YouTube Channel ICT Official YouTube Channel TEAM LINEUPS TO FOLLOW Tweets by @ICTFC Tweets by @ICTFC
  5. Precisely zero I would think. The anonymous figure who fell on their anonymous sword and will never appear on the list for future anonymous panels will remain anonymous .... nothing to stop them from being selected for an anonymous role in future if no-one knows or admits to who they are. The whole thing stinks and needs to be reformed regardless of the fact that ICT will hopefully get the correct result here.
  6. The panel have decided to not be anonymous this time and one of the members has already denied his allegiance to a certain team from Glasgow.
  7. If the referee has acknowledged he is wrong - in the end - then fair enough but he too has been on the end of pressure to change his mind because - if the papers are to be believed - he maintained his position until after the outcry at the review panel decision had gathered speed. I actually feel for referees who are on a hiding to nothing during a game. In many cases they are unsighted, or the action is moving too quickly for them to get everything right but they are expected, without technology, to come to the same conclusion as we do or as commentators do when watching on TV or from a far better vantage point. That's why we got VAR and that's why it can work well when the referee sees it as a valuable tool. MLS referees are the same as Scottish referees and no doubt countless other countries. We have good ones, we have bad ones, we have ones who admit mistakes and still others who cling onto the belief they can do nothing wrong as they are in charge. We have those who let the game flow and those who want to make it all about them. MLS implemented VAR 3 years ago now I think and for the most part it seems to work well. It is used not for every decision but for 'game-changing' events such as goals, penalties, offsides, red card offenses, or where the 5th official (VAR referee) has indicated something within criteria may need to be looked at. When it works well, and the ref uses it as a useful tool to help him officiate then VAR has seen consistent results, but when you get a ref similar to Aitken then its only as good a tool as the tool using it ! What MLS also does well is to routinely review controversial plays over the next week with its disciplinary committee and hand out fines or additional game bans as well as reducing punishments. This is not a specially convened comitte, it just quietly goes about its business getting stuff done. It publishes the name of the chairman and some members, it routinely posts decisions on the league site and on its twitter feed and does Q&A sessions often .... the SFA could learn a lot from them ! :
  8. so the un-named and anonymous panel member has been forced to fall on their sword so the SFA can say the decision was invalid and reconsider. This un-named and anonymous panel member will no longer be a part of future panels with other un-named and anonymous members (yeah right!) .... spin, whitewash and squirming to what is hopefully the correct result. If you happen to believe the SFA statement (and I take it with a full salt mine) .... If the function was simply to review video and decide if the card was merited, does them not fulfilling the duty mean they didn't watch the video in the conference call ? How else would you not fulfill the obligations of the panel ? Work not done though - these panels have to be reformed and made transparent. They cannot be anonymous and need to be able to explain their decisions . The comment earlier from Radio Scotland I think, that this panel apparently was made up of one ex-ref and two "non footballing" people beggars belief. Why are two non footballing people making a decision about the rules of football ?
  9. Scotty : Morton @ 1.90 CDN Girl : Dumbarton @ 1.90 SOS : Stirling A. @ 1.90
  10. Scotty HT: 1-0 FT: 1-1 1st ICT: White 1st Opp: Shankland Crowd: 7288 CDN Girl HT: 1-1 FT: 1-2 1st ICT: Doran 1st Opp: Shankland Crowd: 7777 SOS HT: 0-1 FT: 1-2 1st ICT: Todorov 1st Opp: Shankland Crowd: 7551
  11. THE MATCHDAY THREAD Discuss ICT & other games in this thread as they happen Dundee Utd -V- Inverness CT PREVIEW 21st February 2020 @ 7:05pm, Tannadice Stadium, Dundee Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook Media Coverage AUDIO COVERAGE BBC Sportsound BBC Sportsound [UK Only] LIVE TEXT (ONLINE) Sporting Life BBC VIDEO LIVE ON BBC SCOTLAND [UK Only] SPFL YouTube Channel ICT Official YouTube Channel TEAM LINEUPS Tweets by @ICTFC Tweets by @ICTFC
  12. For my mind, common sense needs to prevail. They need to reverse this farcical decision. Everyone can see it was wrong but the referee and these anonymous appeal 'judges' persist with the charade. Thats all about ego and having the strength to admit your mistakes! They need to make these tribunals transparent. If you are going to make a decision on someone's career, even if only for a game or two then they should have the stones to be visible and defend or explain their decision. IT should not be some anonymous conference call as has been alluded to. They need to be consistent and unbiased and apply the same logic to each case regardless of the teams involved. If there is a conflict of interest, or a pre-existing knowledge of a panel member's personal leanings they need to be excluded from the panel for that case to preserve their own, and the system's integrity.
  13. I stand corrected 🙂 Gary Warren, what a guy.
  14. A lot is being made of the Rangers kid applauding the decision ... I see it a little differently (although I could be wrong). Look at the kid's face when the whistle is blown. He is thinking 'oh f***' and probably wondering if he is getting a card or if the ref maybe thinks its in the box and is going to give a penalty. The applause is a little self-serving i think and based on relief not on bad sportsmanship. However, knowing the player was going to get a red it may have been more sportsmanlike to say to the ref - 'i did catch him, but it was an accident' but lets face it, no player is going to do that these days. none. regardless of the strip they are wearing. Would be nice if Rangers could say something through the club to side with Keatings but again, cant see that happening. At best the ref is incompetent - something backed up if you search google for his name - but for the panel to uphold the original decision is not incompetent it is something far worse. Who is on these panels? Why cant we know who is on it? If you are going to make a decision that will deprive a player of appearing in a cup final at least have the f***ing balls to stand up and be counted and say why you came to that decision.
  15. signed and shared with my ICT and my TFC accounts