DoofersDad

I think you can take Yogi's comments to mean that had the hand ball been given we would not have appealed a red card despite the fact that it was not deliberate. The fact is that handballs are routinely given in these sort of ball to hand situations and whether the decision was correct in terms of the letter of law it would have been accepted because we are reasonable people who accept the rough with the smooth.. But the SFA have moved the goals posts. They have now taken the unprecedented step of issuing a Notice of Complaint for handball. In these circumstances it is reasonable to insist that the case is judged against the letter of the law and not on the usually accepted and incorrect interpretation that referees often apply. I take it Yogi has not said anywhere that he thought Josh handled it deliberately?

That's not correct. The interpretation of the rule is not simply seeing the ball and putting your arm in the way, it is also placing your arm such that you widen your profile and make it more likely that the ball will hit your arm. There is no doubt that Josh is going for the ball with his head but the SFA could argue that he was also deliberately holding his hand in an unnatural position thereby increasing the chance of the ball hitting it. They would need to prove this and I don't think they can. Yes his hand was raised, but I would argue that is just a natural movement of the arm consistent with the rest of the body movement in trying to throw his body in front of the ball. I am not Dundee Utd's lawyer but I would have thought trying to prove intent was far more difficult in Josh's case than in that of Ciftci's off the ball assault on Garry Warren.

I've just had a wee trawl of the SFA website and have come across the Judicial Panel Protocol which is a 212 page document (I haven't read it all!). On page 9 section 9.4 it states "A Notice of Complaint may be initiated by the Compliance Officer in respect of an incident which would generally be the subject of a match official(s) report". There is nothing that I can see which restricts Notices to violent conduct and so the the alleged offence would appear to fall within the remit of the Compliance officer. However, the protocol then goes on to say on page 188 in an appendix section 2.1 on "Reporting of Offences by Match Officials" that "The referee shall administer cautions and sendings-off in accordance with the Laws of the Game and report them to the Scottish FA." Linking this with the section above would suggest that it is not just red card offences but also yellow card offences that the Compliance Officer is empowered to serve Notices of Complaint about. Appendix section 3 on page 191 then goes on to list cautionable offences and section B2 refers to "Dissent by words or action". Was it just me or did anyone else see a number of Celtic players demonstrate dissent at the referee's decision? So why have they not been issued with Notices of Complaint? Others have said that this opens up a can of worms and looking at this document makes clear just what an enormous can this could be. However, some good could come out of all of this. The extent of the powers to issue a Notice of Complaint clearly extends to issues which sully the reputation of the game - all this diving, shirt pulling and holding. These are all cautionable offences and if the SFA had any genuine wish to "protect the integrity and reputation of the game" then it is within their power to serve notice to clubs that the Compliance Officer will be looking for such incidents and will be serving Notices of Complaint when such offences are spotted. In the meantime, whilst it would appear that Josh's incident is an appropriate one to refer to a judicial panel, the fact that there is no precedent for referring such incidents is indicative of poor judgement and vindictiveness. The sensible course of action would be for the SFA to withdraw the Notice but give clubs due warning that next season they will use their powers more extensively. Until they do that it would be fair game for clubs to write to the SFA reporting every incident involving a Celtic player for which a caution should have been given within the laws of the game and request they apply their rules and issue a notice of complaint against the players concerned. If they can't exercise their powers fairly and consistently for the good of the game then others need to disrupt their activities until they get the message that they are ruining the game whose integrity and reputation they have a duty to uphold.

From the BBC website "Celtic - who later had goalkeeper Craig Gordon sent off by referee Steven McLean - wrote to the SFA to ask why Meekings was not dismissed and a penalty awarded. BBC Scotland understands that Celtic will receive a reply acknowledging that the match officials made a mistake." Does this mean they have already decided on the outcome of Thursday's hearing? Just when you think the SFA can't get any more incompetent they somehow manage to plumb even greater depths of ineptitude. This is actually also an unwarranted slur on their own officials. Even if a penalty offence was committed, if the positioning of the officials was such that they could not be certain that the offence was committed then they were quite correct not to award the penalty. There is a difference between not being in position to make the right decision and making a mistake.

If Nicola Sturgeon will pledge to nationalise the SFA I'll promise to vote SNP

Now that I have managed to stop the steam coming out of my ears I can actually write something. Yesterday on the match day thread (post 132) I argued that not to award a penalty was the correct decision for these reasons. "In the incident yesterday what is absolutely as clear as the fact that the ball struck Josh's hand, is the fact that Josh tried to get his head to the ball. Imagine yourself in the position that Josh was standing and imagine trying to head a ball going just below your right shoulder. Try the move yourself! As your head goes down your right arm naturally comes up. I think the ref got it spot on when you consider three crucial factors. 1. Josh was attempting to make contact with the ball with his head. 2. He was not holding his arm deliberately in a position which would make it more likely to block the ball. Instead, the position of his arm was a natural consequence of his genuine attempt to head the ball. 3. The closeness between Griffiths and Josh was such that Josh would have had no time to react to consciously withdraw his arm when he realised he would not make head contact with the ball. Indeed he probably wouldn't have realised that the ball was going to hit his hand until it actually struck. The only conclusion you can draw from these factors is that Josh did not deliberately handle the ball and therefore it was not a penalty." Apart from giving the referee credit for a good decision when he didn't actually see what happened, I think my points are valid. Others have made the good point that Josh couldn't possibly have reacted in time in response to Griffiths' header and pictures posted provide compelling evidence. However, if the case is heard the SFA will probably argue that Josh had moved his arm into an unnatural position and that the action of moving his arm started before the ball was struck in a deliberate attempt to increase the chance of the ball hitting him. That would be consistent with the concept of "unnatural position that McLean talks about in the clip Alex has posted above. This is why my 2nd point above is important. It seems to me absolutely beyond doubt that Josh was, as he says, just trying to get his body in the way. You can see how he lunges across with his right leg and dips his head towards where he expects the ball to go and as I say above, when you do that your right arm naturally comes up and in the circumstances it would be almost impossible to deliberately hold it down to minimise any chance of the ball striking it. The pictures seem to tell a story of a brave young man preparing to take a sore one in the face for his team. Instead, the SFA at Celtic's bidding are branding him a cheat and threatening a punishment in a completely unprecedented way. Yet again, the body that has responsibility for upholding the dignity of the game in Scotland drags the reputation of the game into the gutter. Credit to the club for a prompt and very strongly worded statement in support of Josh.

...but were they all on the same night?

I would hope there is a future for Nick at ICT. I have been one who has been a bit critical of him in the past but I think there has been a very significant improvement in his play in the last year. He has always been a player who has a great touch and rarely gives the ball away but in the past he has been rather weak in the challenge. That is the element to his game that has changed and he is now much more effective in putting pressure on opponents with the ball and nicking the ball off them. As a result, I think he is featuring more and more in Yogi's plans. We have depth in midfield players and whilst he may not be a first choice at the moment, he is improving all the time. He was the one sub used on Sunday and played very well. He certainly gave Scott Brown a run for his money. There is no reason why he shouldn't be able to feature more regularly in the first team next season and he would need to consider where he might fit in with other teams. If he wants to have more regular first team football then he would need a backward move to a team that is either in a lower division or perhaps the wrong end of the SPFL. If he were to stay here, continue to improve and establish a regular first team place, then he would be in a much better place to market himself to broaden his horizons if that's what he wants. If he was able to get regular first team football in Inverness I wonder if that would make him want to stay. I hope it would.

Probably just a reflection of the media central belt bias refering to a Falkirk v Inverness final. Just checked on the SFA site and as always there is SFA there to enlighten us.

Are we not officially the away team for the final?

He scores when he wants, He scores when he wants. He's David Raven He scores when he wants. Some good suggestions above but as long as we get to sing "We are the champions" at the end, I don't really care what folk sing before and during the game.

Simulation is classed as serious foul play Maybe they'll decide Josh only simulated trying to head the ball.

Apart from being unfair on the players it is just another silly rule that favours the bigger clubs with greater squad depths. What is particularly galling is that yellow cards are often dished out for very minor offences whilst more serious offences don't seem to prompt a card. There is also no opportunity to appeal them so players can miss out on what ought to be a career highlight simply on the whim of an incompetent referee or as a result of an opponent who has conned the ref.

Shinnie's performance yesterday was outstanding. Not just was it the best performance of the day it was probably the best performance of an ICT player this season. His workrate was phenomenal and the quality of his play outshone that of his multimillion pound opponents.

Three starts, three goals, two against Celtic. That's some record! I thought his hold up play was pretty decent, apart from that one near the end when he trapped it further than I can pass it. The first half miss looked easier to score (from the other end of the park, admittedly), but all strikers miss them. Should have had a penalty too, but lets not be greedy, eh! Well said both. Actually I don't think his miss in the first half was as bad as it first appeared. From the highlights it is clear that his anticipation of where the ball might fall was good but that when the ball came to him it was quite quick and slightly behind him. It was actually a more difficult chance that it seemed at first. He had to almost scoop the ball out and it only went narrowly wide. He also did very well for his goal. The ball came to him agonisingly slowly with a couple of bounces and it would have been so easy in the circumstances to snatch at it. But he had the composure to wait and then drill it low and hard. There were some other very nice touches to his play and I think he could be a real find.

Leigh Griffiths was a lucky boy to stay on the park yesterday. Deliberately heading the ball against Meekings' hand in an attempt to get a fellow professional sent off is quite shameful Seriously though, the ref got the decision spot on. I accept that 99 times out of 100 the referee would have given a penalty for the handball incident but just because that is the case doesn't mean it would be the correct decision. Remember that the handball law refers to deliberate handling of the ball which is commonly extended to holding your arms in a position which make it more likely that the ball might strike the arm/hand. And yes, we've had these discussions before. In the incident yesterday what is absolutely as clear as the fact that the ball struck Josh's hand, is the fact that Josh tried to get his head to the ball. Imagine yourself in the position that Josh was standing and imagine trying to head a ball going just below your right shoulder. Try the move yourself! As your head goes down your right arm naturally comes up. I think the ref got it spot on when you consider three crucial factors. 1. Josh was attempting to make contact with the ball with his head. 2. He was not holding his arm deliberately in a position which would make it more likely to block the ball. Instead, the position of his arm was a natural consequence of his genuine attempt to head the ball. 3. The closeness between Griffiths and Josh was such that Josh would have had no time to react to consciously withdraw his arm when he realised he would not make head contact with the ball. Indeed he probably wouldn't have realised that the ball was going to hit his hand until it actually struck. The only conclusion you can draw from these factors is that Josh did not deliberately handle the ball and therefore it was not a penalty. This was a correct and courageous bit of refereeing which we should be applauding. Our "luck" yesterday was the fact that the referee got two crucial penalty decisions correct. The fact that he did so meant that his failure to award us an absolutely stonewall penalty late in the game did not affect the outcome of the match.

There is a nightmare scenario here if we slip to 4th in the league and then lose the final. In that case, 4th in the league would not get a Europa League place. But had we lost yesterday with Celtic then going on to win the cup, slipping to fourth would still have given us the Europa place. Best to make sure of the Europa league place by securing 3rd spot and then win the cup. Coming in a round later may well be important because there is precious little time between the cup final and the first European qualifying rounds. The lads need both a holiday and the pre-season training whilst Yogi will need to do a bit of work in reorganising the side after whatever departures there may be.

Celtic wanted a treble - so, how about this one? Success in a semi-final at our third attempt The third time we have beaten Celtic in the Scottish Cup We scored 3 goals. Happy now Ronny?

Never any doubt they would be. As a Villa fan from my years in England it has been a rather good day. Hampden it has to be so let's hope the occasion inspires the folk of both Inverness and Falkirk and encourages neutrals to turn up to a final that epitomises the dreams of smaller clubs in a game dominated by the money that is poured into the big clubs.

Are they sponsored by Guiness? It would explain a lot.

For a mythical being or beings God or God are indeed responsible for a great deal of the world's ills. However, I suspect that if mankind hadn't felt the need to invent deities, such is human nature, that we would have been inclined to find some other philosophical or ideological differences to go to war over. War is probably a small part of it. The power of the church, which quite literally put the fear of God into the hearts and minds of the masses, has been used over the centuries to perpetuate a ruling elite. I like to visit some of the old cathedrals and one can't help but be blown away by the skill and endeavour that went into building these magnificant structures centuries ago. But even more, I am always struck by the comparison between the grandeur and scale of these buildings with the kind of hovels that most of the people lived in in those days. The poor were taxed to the hilt to pay for the churches and failing to pay your due was a seen as a crime against God - and God's punishment was severe. The churches and particularly the grand cathedrals were a potent symbol of God's power. But of course it was the small ruling elite which worked hand in glove with the church to maintain the loyalty and subjugation of the people - the fear of God was exploited to exert political control of the people. Echoes of this God fearing political power still exist today in the UK. More widely you still see as a general rule that those countries where there is greatest disparity between rich and poor is where the dominant religion remains strong.

Religion is probably the root cause of more strife and injustice in the world than anything else and I don't care one whit what the pope says about anything. I would, however have respect for the pope if he came clean and announced that there actually was no God and therefore the vast assets of the Catholic church were to be sold off and distributed among the poor.

I thought that feelings against the England and Wales Cricket Board were finally becoming a little more passionate when I saw a headline saying "Protester attacks ECB boss at press conference". But no. Turns out the conference was being held by the European Central Bank!

HT 0-2 FT 1-4 ICT Ofere Celtic Griffiths Time 9mins 1st Booking - Raven

In truth I think that those citing the 12.15 kick off as the reason for not going are mostly making an excuse. If it was 3.00 they would probably be saying it's too late on a Sunday cos they have to work on Monday. Of course there will be some who can't make it for perfectly good reasons but by and large those that want to be there will be there. I don't think our numbers will be great but as long as those that are there get behind the team then the team will get a lift from that. They will need one too - a Griffiths hat-trick tonight shows that he is a player on form and we will need to be on our very best form to beat Celtic on Sunday.