HawkeyeTheGnu

I take it that the club print names and numbers on their shirts, so could they not offer this service to fans? Might bring in a little bit of extra momey.

And, fortunately, Goodwillie made a right Constable of that chance at the end

You're just taking the Picasso now.

Both got sent off for 2 bookings so the suspensions won't kick in til after the next game IIRC. think it's the next game. Pretty sure Dave the rave missed the first game after his two yellows vs St Johnstone last season, came back a game and then missed another under the totting up system.

I actually though Mutimbo did ok when he came on. Certainly seems a bit more lively than when he first came on. But a good shout about Sutherland - I forgot he was on the bench. He'd have scared the bayjasus out of Ash (named after the tree I presume - about the same mobility) Taylor who turns slower than a pint of milk.

That is the biggest smile I have had leaving a game since the cup semi!

well given Hearts had no shots on target, he probably had the time. Probably a still life of Dani Lopez.

Section 3.5, immediate suspension I'm afraid. yeah, and two yellows means no appeal.

Not a fan then?

We absolutely destroyed them in the first half. It should have been at least 4-1 at half time and could easily have been more. And that would not have flattered us in the slightest. We were hanging on a bit at the end but it would have been a joke if we hadn't won I though Aberdeen looked pretty poor to be honest. The goal they got was the result of their 32 blocking off Fon Williams and the referee doing nothing. I thought Beaton was useless in the LC semi against Hearts, and he hasn't improved. The Aberdeen players were throwing themselves about at the end, which was pretty embarrassing. Thought Christie was unlucky, but would like to see it again to be sure. Storey looks a real find - if the ref had actually done anything to stop the constant holding by Taylor then he may have caused even more damage. If we play like that week in week out then I think we will be fine. The Scottish media may have to rethink the coronation of the champions elect, however.

Last time I checked Aberdeen was past Perth too...

Must admit I hoped it was nothing trivial when I saw he had to go off.

FTFY

why not stick the third keeper on the bench for experience if we haven't travelled with a spare outfield player?

Six subs? What on earth is going on?

Pretty much the same comments he made after Dallas ruined the St Johnstone game last season, but no action then. What has changed? If it wasn't for who his dad was, there is no way Dallas would be anywhere near the top flight. And why did it take the Compliance Officer more than 2 weeks to decide this needed a notice of complaint?

The bit I have highlighted is total codswallop. The moment the referee makes the decision that Oshaniwa has committed a foul, then Sho-Silva's reaction does not come under consideration...unless he retaliates. He could have gone down and rolled all the way to the centre circle, it would have still not resulted in him getting booked. I don't think it is me that is talking total codswallop. The rules of the game state that a player should be cautioned if he "attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled." These are two separate things and therefore with respect to feigning injury it is irrelevant whether the player has actually been fouled or not. Equally, any action the referee may have taken against the player perpetrating the foul is also irrelevant. Sho-Silva's did not pretend to be fouled because he clearly was fouled, but what he may have done was to feign injury in a misguided attempt to draw the officials' attention to the incident. If the referee felt that the foul could not have led to the level of injury ShoSilva's actions were indicating, then under the laws of the game he should have cautioned Sho-Silva for feigning injury. I am offering absolutely no opinion as to whether Sho-Silva's reaction was inappropriate or not, all I'm saying is that because he went to ground, the referee had a decision to make which he would not have had to make had Sho-Sliva stayed on his feet. Sorry, but you are wrong. It is only an offence to feign injury in order to win a foul or in an attempt to get an opponent cautioned. If the rule was as per your interpretation, then every time a player was fouled and took an extra roll or held a shin and then got back up, they would be booked....and that doesn't happen. The reason it doesn't happen is because the rules don't say it should. In short....Sho-Silva did not pretend he got punched.....he DID get punched and the rule you quote (which is the rule on simulation) does not get any consideration the moment the referee determines that he was fouled. Just because players don't get cautioned every time for the minor types of simulation you quote does not mean that such actions aren't against the rules. By your very flawed logic you might as well say that because players don't always get booked for holding and shirt pulling in the penalty area that the rules don't say that holding and shirt pulling is not allowed. Presumably you can provide some quote or reference to support your opinion that the rules on simulation do not apply if the referee judges that the player actually was fouled? What you are saying is that it is perfectly OK under the laws of the game for a player to feign injury in order to make an offence look worse than it actually was, provided that the referee actually awards a foul. You must accept that whether the referee awards a foul or not, the intention and actions of the player simulating is exactly the same and therefore should logically be dealt with in the same way. He didn't simulate. He was punched, he may have exaggerated the effect of the punch, but he didn't try and make out something happened which didn't. The one phrase I would avoid is that the Hearts player threw a punch, it was more a very gentle lob than a throw. I guess this is the extension of the "entitled to go down" argument when a defender makes the merest contact with a forward in the box. Maybe he had been briefed on the magnificence of Scottish referees and decided to give a bit of help with making the decision.

Simulation? No. Exaggeration? Yes. And possibly the worst acting seen out with "Take The High Road".

The Hearts player got himself sent off. Over reaction by our player - yes, but if you push a clenched fist into someone's face then you are running the risk of a red card. Looking at the team they put out, I think Hearts under estimated us tonight. They looked at the table and rested some players with one eye on their upcoming games with Aberdeen & Celtic.

Only saw the last 20 mins so can't comment on the whole game. First thought was that Sho-Silva went down over next to nothing, but the shot from across the goal shows that it was a flick followed by a punch. Not the worlds hardest punch, but he made sure the officials were aware. I don't think either of them has a chance of an alternative career in boxing! Thought Storey took his goal well - hopefully that's us up and now. And Chris Sutton is still a complete kn0b. Why do people get him to comment on Scottish football.

Good luck with that

Why do we keep signing unfit players?

What was the lad meant to do put on the Celtic top which he would have been requested to do so by his new employers and sit with a glum face to please the likes of yourself? He should have refrained wearing the top until after this loan deal whether that be in January or the summer All he has now done is alienate himself to a section of the ICT support Dougal He is a Celtic player now, hence the photo shoot. And since when has anybody paid any attention to the drivel that tabloids come out with. Of all people I would have thought you would recognise drivel when you saw it.

Good to see they are giving the newer sides some much needed coverage.

I think that is fair. They are not going to pay a million when they can sign him on a pre-contract in 4 months. If we couldn't agree a new deal for Christie, I would fancy our chances leaving it to a court to decide what is a fair settlement for training compensation. Ryan Gauld - sold for £3 mil James McCarthy - sold for £1.2 mil Stuart Armstrong - sold for £2 mil Both McCarthy and Armstrong have been awarded PFA and SFWA young player of the year awards, respectively. With Christie being SFWA young player of the year 2014/15, I think a good lawyer could easily make a very fair argument that > £1 mil is fair compensation. Training compensation and market value are completely different things. I'm not even sure we'd get into 6 figures for the former. I seem to remember a figure of £5000 a year for every year the player was signed by the club as being the level of compensation. Dont remember where I got that from but think it came out in some tribunal. The better outcome in any deal, and bear in mind that none of us actually know what Celtic have offered, is that a decent level of sell on fee is agreed. I 'disregard' the 'one-year-option' when updating the 'Contract Situation' thread. Utterly ridiculous clause in a contract. If say, Dani Lopez had a 'one-year-option' on his contract, but we decided to release him at the end of the season, I don't think he could stay here and claim a wage for another season. We can't just use it when it suits us. As much as I agree with virtually everything OCG posts, in this case, I beg to differ - Ryan is out of contract in the summer! If he goes and we get him and Stokes on loan, then 20% of our outfield team will be ineligible to play agains Celtic. I assume sponge bob square head John Collins will be in the media how this helps create the strong opposition they need to avoid getting regularly pumped out of the Champions League That is entirely dependant on lending club. There are many examples where players are permitted to play against their employers. Indeed we ourselves brought on Fetai at Ibrox. It was also reported in local press that Celtic gave permission for the lad Fisher to play against them but Tommy Wright felt it was too soon after him coming to St J. No. SPFL rules (specifically Regulation 67) forbid this. The rules were changed a few years ago.