DoofersDad

Is this him getting his excuses in early for when Auchinleck Talbot dump Hearts out of the cup on Saturday?

I've never used twitter or facebook and don't intend to start now. I don't know their rules and whilst I understand the outrage being expressed here, I imagine the situation is not as straightforward as we might think it ought to be. These international networks are, after all, quite different from CTO. They do not focus on a single topic, they have vastly more members and could not possibly hope to have the same level of moderation as we have here. The rules are different of neccessity. It could be argued that when someone posts something you find offensive and you report it that something should be done about it. In practice, there will not be the resource for that and in any case, just because you may find something offensive does not mean it is not a legitimate point of view. Hence you get the stock reply. Remember, opinions are just that and can change radically over a short period of time. In fact, it is astonishing how quickly attitudes do change and one only has to think about attitudes to race in the USA in particular or to homosexuality in this country to see how attitudes which were openly held by a large minority or even a majority just a few decades ago are now considered so outrageous that we question the right of others to express those views. We may find those view repugnant now but does that give us the right to stop others expressing them? I don't think so. You counter those views by the strength of argument and where such views are voiced just to wind up and offend others then simply ignoring them is the best approach. In that respect, the statement from Twitter is fair enough. You may then say that you should ban folk who break the law or who incite others to. Again, it is not so straightforward as we might like. There are times when breaking the law is entirely appropriate. For instance, you would not ban someone for suggesting that if you were in your car in a 30mph zone and you saw a tsunami in your mirror approaching at 40mph that you should forget the speed limit and put your foot on the gas. And would you ban folk from Twitter for suggesting that the people in Syria should oppose the regime there? I sincerely hope not. These are muddy waters and I think what it boils down to is that folk will have accounts closed when their behaviour is seen to be disruptive rather than when they express views which others may find offensive. Freedom of speech is a precious thing and being offended once in a while is the price we pay for that. So how can you avoid being exposed to these morons and offended by what they say? Simple. Do what I do and stick to CTO.

I trust this forum will not be used again to incite ICT fans to rush down to the stadium and clear the pitch of snow. Such irresponsible action might be interpretted as inciting a mob of young men to intimidate the referee into changing his decision and declaring the pitch playable when before their arrival he considered it unplayable. Such behaviour cannot be tolerated.

It's the referee and not the club that makes the decision. Sounds to me as though the club felt the pitch was playable but the referee had his doubts when he arrived and decided he would do an inspection. There was certainly nothing unexpected with the weather in the intervening period so the question for me is why would the club and referee have such different opinions as to whether the pitch was playable? Surely there are fairly clear criteria for making a decision. It would be good if the club could give a clear explanation as a lot of people have been significantly inconvenienced by this late decision.

Having come off the bench for the Owd Wummin to score "a beauty" but yet end up on the losing side I appreciate I will be a hot target in the transfer window. However, before I get pestered with requests for a transfer let me say I've been signed up to the same owd wumman for 30 years, we make a good team and I'm staying put.

As Davie said on another thread, the only reason Foran does not have a broken leg is that he was not standing on it at the time. This meant that the power from O'Hanlon's lunge was not resisted and therefore it pushed Foran's leg away rather than breaking it. I have to say that my initial reaction had been that O'Hanlon had been trying to trap the ball but that Foran got there first. A closer look shows that is not the case for 2 reasons. Firstly, had Foran's leg not been in the way, the ball would not have been quite where O'Hanlon was aiming for. Secondly, this was a stamp, as evidenced by the damage to Foran's leg, whereas to control the ball with the sole of the boot requires give in the leg to take the pace off the ball. Regardless of intention, it was clearly a bad foul and warranted a yellow at least even if the referee saw it at the time as a genuine attempt to get the ball. But for me the issue is not the referee's failure to make the correct decision at the time, it is a question of what action the authorities decide to take now. The more I look at it the more it seems as though O'Hanlon is deliberately stamping on Foran. Had Foran beeen standing on the leg it could have been a career ending injury. The fact that it wasn't is down to luck and doesn't change the recklessness or intention of the challenge. All too often people are punished for the outcome of the action rather than for the action itself. There is no doubt that had Foran's leg been broken and the referee sent O'Hanlon off, he would have been given a lengthy ban. But would that outcome mean that O'Hanlon's actions were any more reckless. No. Of course not. O'Hanlon made a reckless challenge that could have ended the career of a fellow professional. The SFA have the evidence and should throw the book at him. Will they take action? Probably not. Instead they will hide behind the ineptness of the referee and do nothing.

I'll swap it for my recently recharged sprout horn.

1-1. I suppose it's a sign of how far we've come that an away draw with Hibs seems disappointing. However, whilst a win would have been very nice, it was more important not to lose. On a windy night like tonight not losing has to be a good result.

He was justified in defending himself initially but not in kicking his attacker once he was on the ground - however much we may empathise with him. He should have simply moved away and allowed the stewards and the police to do their job. I believe the ref was wrong to send him off but the police would have been quite entitled to come on to the pitch to arrest him for assault as his actions were beyond what was reasonable to defend himself. Had that happened, do the rules of the game allow for a player who has been arrested but not sent off to be substituted?

I am 100% for standing but would not be keen to be herded into an uncovered corner on the west side of the ground. Given the option I would still sit in the North Stand. Whilst it is good we are now having this debate, political correctness gone mad means we are still a long way from addressing the issue properly. The Hillsborough tragedy was not about terracing vs seating it was about allowing thousands of people into the ground when the ground was already full. There is no reason not to have terracing. There is every reason to have good systems of ticket management and crowd control. The Taylor report, aided and abetted by the TV companies, has ripped the soul out of the game - it is now time to rip the seats out and give the game back to the people.

I have been a bit disappointed that Boyd has not enjoyed success either at Middlesborough or in Turkey. I always rated him as a real quality striker provided that the team played to his strengths. With Boyd you have to accept that others do the work and he scores the goals and with the chances we have created this season he would have scored a hatful for us if he'd been in the side. I don't for a moment think he would come here but I think it would be a great move both for him (to get back in the shop window) and for us if he did sign to the end of the season.

Whilst it is always disappointing to lose any game, I think we should be taking a lot of positives from today's game. After last week with Davis getting the red card and Hogg getting his dreadful season ending injury, I feared for today. I thought we would be very vulnerable at the back and without enough bite in midfield. I feared a gubbing. However, the BBC team were full of praise for the team and said we were unlucky to lose. Listening to the second half on the radio it certainly sounded as though the game could have gone either way and we had the chances to win it. The message I take from this is that we have the depth in the squad to be competetive against anybody and it should be just a matter of time before we put a bit of a run together and pull clear of Dunfermline who really should be heading back down at the end of the season. We will need to look for a central defender in January but we have enough talent in midfield to keep creating enough chances to keep scoring. Aberdeen are beginning to find form and therefore next Saturday is a big game for us. It will not be a disaster if we lose but if we can win it might trigger the start of a good run and set us up nicely for the new year. Let's hope for a big crowd getting behind the team.

I'll give you a green one whilst I still can.

Or alternatively you can just watch Strictly Come Dancing instead

It must have been whiplash from his hair that felled him.

Barrowman for the Pars against Celtic ffs.:irritated:

Brilliant Yngwie. Well done Donnie. TB may not need a driver on the way down but he sure as hell will need one on the way back.

Put that to music and you'ld have a half decent retort to the tinks when they come singing their silly songs. And if you don't like what Charles writes, don't read it. Simple!

In that match the big decisions went our way. A cynical person might possibly think his enthusiasm to get the red card out yesterday suggests he was intent on evening things up. I wonder why that might be?

I just don't get those folk who say we shouldn't appeal. Regardless of whether we think there is a not a cat in hell's chance of getting a fair hearing, you have to make the point. Not to do so means that by default you accept the current situation of poor refereeing, an inept (or worse) appeals panel and cheating by professional players. The more often injustices are made, the more important it is to draw attention to them. The club will look at the film very carefully, talk to Greg and if they conclude the decision was clearly wrong, then they simply have to appeal. TB's "assault by fingernail" comments after the match were spot on and it may be that he gets himself into trouble for daring to criticise the establishment in the way he did. I have stuck up for referees before because it is an extremeny difficult job and decisions are made in a split second. In general, bad decisions even themselves up over the course of the season and if it was a case of it just being a day when the big decisions went against us then I would be with Dougal on this - but it isn't. Apart from the unjust sendings off, we've had penalties and offside goals awarded against us but we get nothing. These decisions change games and there can be little doubt that with a fair split of big decisions going our way we would be comfortably mid table by now. No wonder fans stay away when matches are decided by players bending the rules of the game and referees letting them get away with it.

If that happens when a neutrino is only walking, what happens when it runs? Maybe I'll find out before I was born.

I think the whole saga of Gazza is incredibly sad. He was undoubtedly one of the most talented players of recent times who did things on the football pitch that thrilled, but equally he was/is an emotionally disturbed character who did things off the pitch which appalled. Behind his antics was a very insecure man who wanted to please people, wanted to be respected and wanted to be loved. He didn't have the inteligence to understand that his attention grabbing behaviour lost the respect and affection of the people he most wanted to impress and he lacked the strength of character to cope with that. He took solace in the bottle and hit out at those he loved in a misguided attempt to prove himself. You can never excuse wife beating but whilst some men think they have some right to physically dominate their partners my guess would be that Gascoigne is deeply ashamed of what he has done. He's not an inately bad person, he's a very sad person who, as a result of his own inadequacies, has not fulfilled the potential of his fabulous talent and who has hurt the people he loves the most. He needs to steer clear of publicity and live quietly somewhere where he has no-one to impress. As for a coaching post at ICT, if Butcher has any respect and affection for him as a man, that is the last thing he will offer him.

It was a fantastic result and a fantastic day but we certainly rode our luck. What I had forgotton was just how good Fraser's save was late in the 2nd half - they really don't come much better.

The Luftwaffe?

So he'll be one of their longer serving managers if he lasts that long.