I know we met them in a European Cup semi-final in 1972, but the forthcoming tie against Inter Milan is all about the wonderful heritage we were gifted in 1967. La Grande Inter, as Internazionale, then the greatest team Italy had known, had won two of the previous three European Cups and were controversially denied in the semi-final of the other. They won three of the previous four Italian titles, denied the fourth on a play-off, and topped the table with two weeks of the Italian season to go.
They were an awesome team with gifted strikers but it was the defence which marked them out; this was a team who didn’t concede goals, when they took the lead, they kept it.
Simpson, Craig, Gemmell; Murdoch, McNeill and Clark; Johnstone, Wallace, Chalmers, Auld and Lennox, and Jock Stein, not only killed La Grande Inter, but did so, so comprehensively, they forced Inter, and the rest of the Italian game, to change their ways. Catenaccio, the suffocating, ultra-defensive system, was finished.
For Europe, the consequences were profound. Celtic, with their wave after wave of attack; 45 attempts on goal in a European final; were celebrated everywhere. The drift towards caution stopped, teams realised the very best defensive sides could be beaten into submission by sheer talent. In the two subsequent decades the dominant Latin countries of Italy, Spain and Portugal, who had won all previous European Cups, would win the trophy only once.
Football fans across the globe, not just Celtic fans, will want to be there when the teams meet in a game which represents History, not just our history, Europe’s History.
We’ll talk later today on moves being put on the SFA at the moment. ‘Here we go again…….’
Still time to order your 2015 CQN Annual for Christmas.
You can also order the CQN Annual and DVD bundle here. It’s a great offer, check it out – oh, and there’s tons of photos, fresh stories and comment on the first time Inter faced the green and white hoops.
The latest edition of the Magazine is out today, click on the download link on the graphic below to read for free.
[calameo code=0003901718eccc6101c78 lang=en page=1 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]
674 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- ...
- 18
- »
Four candles?
Or was it fork handles?
What was said, and what was heard?
Not trying to be flippant here, but…
HH!!
ernie lynch
14:50 on 16 December, 2014
Tom McLaughlin
14:43 on 16 December, 2014
His immediate reaction corroborates his version of events.
********
It shows he clearly felt he’d been racially insulted. That doesn’t mean he was. The suggestion is that he might have misheard. But Tonev, a guy with no prior history of being a racist or of uttering racist remarks (and who has only ever had one booking in his career, btw) is now branded as a racist, with no corroborating evidence. I’m not saying Logan is lying, but the judgement is effectively saying that nobody ever mishears somebody else. That’s bizarre.
celticforever
14:57 on
16 December, 2014
I’m sorry that defence is ridiculous. People use words they don’t know the meaning of every day.
Besides I’m sure he knows what ‘black’ means.
It’s one man’s word against another, when it comes right down to it, and with no witnesses or any other kind of proof, it’s a no brainier, I was involved in a similar charge, I was accused and went to a tribunal, no witnesses, no proof, I walked, did I say what I was accused of?
Yes I did, but he couldent prove it, it makes me sound like a bad man, but without going into detail there was a lot more to it than that.
In effect a players career could be ruined by a judgement of one mans word against anothers
Never heard of a heated exchange between players including the phrase; ‘Are you sure?’ Replied to with ‘Yes, yes’
Load of Mozambique (Keek).
Árd Macha
JJ
Make that 3!
Forgot our big pal across the Pond!
HH jamesgang
Jamesgang,
Who are the 2 bad lawyers who post on here? :))
Awe Naw
“….Lord Hamilton in First Indian Cavalry Club versus HM Commissioners Custom & Excise..
Funnily enough that is the first case that I brought to mind after the first Tribunal…
From Awe Naw`s transcript above:
” In a
situation such as the present, where there are two inconsistent accounts, it is not a question
of deciding which on balance is the more likely version. Before a determination can be made
that a complaint of misconduct has been proved, the body making the determination must
be satisfied that it is more likely than not that the subject of the complaint committed the
act of misconduct alleged. That is what proving an allegation on the balance of probabilities
means.”
So, according to this, it was not a case of believing Logan rather than Tonev but that Tonev `more likely than not` committed the offence.
Alexander in Wonderland.
JJ
The controversial Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, brought in by the SNP, resulted in 161 people being charged and prosecuted in court in 2013/14.
However, it can be revealed that the act has resulted in just 52% of suspects being convicted of any crime, with many found not guilty.
The latest figures released by the Scottish Government show that 161 people were charged under the act over the last year.
A total of 86 of those were found guilty and 74 were found not guilty. The conviction rate dropped dramatically on the previous year.
In 2012/13, 68 people were convicted under the Football Act compared with just 27 found not guilty.
The act has come under severe criticism from football fans and opposition politicians since being brought in by the SNP.
Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy last month vowed to scrap the controversial Offensive Behaviour at Football Act if he gets into power.
The legislation was passed by Holyrood after being introduced by the SNP in 2012, despite having no support from other parties.
Since its implementation it has attracted a range of criticism from across Scotland, with one sheriff describing the legislation as “mince”.
MSPs took part in a debate on sectarianism at Scottish Parliament as Mr Murphy outlined his plans.
The candidate for Scottish Labour leader said the way to tackle intolerance is through education and working with churches and community groups.
Mr Murphy said: “If I am elected Scottish Labour Party leader and First Minister I will scrap the Football Act right away. The law was an attempt to chase headlines rather than actually fix a complex problem.
“Sectarianism and intolerance goes far beyond 90 minutes on a Saturday or 140 characters in a tweet. Instead of fixing the problem, they have created a pointless culture of mistrust between football fans and the police.
“Sectarianism is a deep rooted and hate filled long-term problem in Scotland. It was allowed to fester and grow over many decades. Shamefully it was celebrated by a minority and silently tolerated by far too many. We have come a long way since the 1970s and ’80s, but there is still a lot more to do.”
The legislation also came under fire from Scottish Conservative justice spokeswoman, Margaret Mitchell MSP.
Ms Mitchell said: “Expressions of religious hatred, regardless of how they are articulated, are completely unacceptable in any civilized society. So it is deeply depressing that in Scotland today, sectarian divisions continue in some local communities.
“This frequently manifests itself as so called sectarian ‘banter’ or as terms of abuse, intimidation and harassment which can, at the extreme end of the spectrum, develop into violence.
“As recently as April this year, sectarian tensions once again emerged at the Glasgow Cup Final between the Celtic and Rangers’ under-17 youth teams. It’s little wonder campaigners such as Nil by Mouth argue that not enough is being done by the Scottish Government and the football authorities to combat sectarianism.
“However in seeking to tackle the problem it is vitally important that the focus does not become narrowly restricted to football alone but rather seeks to adopt a holistic and consensus-driven approach.
“Nor is it desirable or possible to ‘arrest’ our way out of this problem which seems to be the intent behind the deeply flawed Offensive Behaviour and Threatening Communications Act.”
@STV
Afternoon all
Not surprised at Tonev verdict and have suspected club is on a real loser here from day one.
Not because of any perceived bias on the panel or a conspiracy from the media or Aberdeen players and officials but because I have always wondered why on earth Logan would choose, in the middle of a mafch, choose to make this allegation. I find it perfectly believable that one witness comes across as being more reliable than another. Whether there is enough here to convict Tonev in a court of law I would doubt but the SFA panel , like this blog, is not a court of law. More flagrant injustices against accused people in the workplace occur every day of the week. Reputations are tarnished, careers ruined and as with Luis Suarez Tonev will find somebody to employ him in another country
I do not know what happened that moment on 13 September but I believe Celtic are skating on very thin ice here. And yes if you want my opinion I think that Tonev will in the heat of the moment have made a racist comment though I am not sure I think that necessarily makes him a racist per se.
Away back to my work
Jimbo67
Thi
I see Tom English is putting his tuppence worth in on twitter. “Celtic may be sticking their fingers in their ears but their player has been found guilty of racist language” I’m sure Tom thought that both the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4 were also guilty and only at the point when a judge released them did he think they were innocent. I’m not saying for a second Tonev is innocent but I would not want to be branded a racist on such flimsy evidence.
The fingerprints of the Scottish Executive are all over this case – they are the ones who, so conveniently, brought about proposals to scrap corroboration in criminal cases before the referendum, mainly targeted at rape cases, in order to curry favour with female voters, who were the group most opposed to separation.
Although the Tonev case is in the football arena, I suggest that a ruling clearing Tonev due to a lack of corroborating evidence, with all the coverage it would generate, would not have pleased the Holyrood administration.
If we go down the road of accepting one person’s word over another with no other evidence, we will open up a ‘can of worms’ of spiteful accusations, and on this showing the complainer has the upper hand – how can you prove that you did not say something
After today`s discussion, I am keener than ever to meet the elusive ernie lynch but I fear that will never happen.
I cannot see how Tonev can win this battle. Under their own rules, the SFA have done nothing wrong. What case could Celtic/Tonev take to the CAS? As far as I can see, the only `case` is that the balance of probability aspect is not suitable for such a serious case but it was agreed to by Celtic and all other Scottish Football Clubs.
Cheerio,
JJ
Geordie Munro
I’m taking the 5th Amendment on that one pal!
And if you don’t know what that is, mibbee you’re one of them!!!!
;-)))
HH jamesgang
I believe tonev … I think Logan is a liar .
Tonevs career is finished .. I hope Logan’s ends soon too
You just run to the referee, then your manager, telling both you’ve been racially abused.
Case won.
This case could open the floodgates.
Has it been said what Tonev said he said, that I would like to hear, he did say something but what? Anyone know?
TBJ……………..
A very balanced post.
I’m sure there are more than a few on here who feel exactly the same.
Although, stand by for the flack……………………
So what happens next time a player claims racist language was used and there are no witnesses? The precedent has now been set – if he seems credible then guilty as charged.
In the Tonev case replace Tonev for the Celtic and Scotland captain – Scott Brown. Would he be found guilty on this evidence? No chance.
Would Leigh Griffith’s? Course he would. This is a disgraceful decision and hope Celtic take it all the way.
As for flares at fitba matches. I don;t see the point myself. Another fine coming our way.
LB
Hearing we are trying to sign both Guidetti and Denayer from Man City,might be where the £3 mil story is coming from.
JJ
You take me to court and say I called you ? Anything.
I say NAW a didnae.
Judge asks any witnesses?
Lawyer SAIS NAW.
What’s your proof judge sais.
I believe my Client.
Judge sais ti my lawyer, have you any proof your client didnae say that.
MA lwayer sais, same proof he has of saying he did say it
Judge sais you you have NAE proof either.
Only that I believe my client yer onner.
Case dismissed on the account of both party’s having no witnesses or any kind of proof what so ever.
The court will now recess as the judge is going to a wet t-shirt and poll dancing competition in the Brazen Head.
ALL RISE!
!!Bada Bing!!
A good news story to lift the gloom!
I hope we sign them both.
Thanks!
Hi Ghuys; Salve salve, As far as I can see reaching the judgement the SFA have and on the evidence presented could pave the way for chaos to reign in the Scottish Game. IE what is to stop any black player at a Scottish club in a game against Celtic making up a story that he has been racially abused by a Celtic player? Using the logic of the Tribunal’s position, you could have Celtic’s championship challenge severely dented with any amount of players suspended. What exactly did Mr Logan say to the match official at Aberdeen to get sent off? was there not some confused reportage of the actual language used?.
I think this case should be heard at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in order to conclude if these are indeed sufficient circumstances to warrant such a ban or any ban at all. Remember when Fergus pursued the SFA, every panel they sat on found against Celtic but crumbled even before the case got in front of the CAS.
Greenwells
lapsus alumni.
Has the club released any statement on the appeal decision?
#Jungle Jim Hot Smoked – if Celtic believe the player, then the only course of action is the law courts – remember Jean-Marc Bosman – he was ignored by football authorities, but won his case in the European Court of Justice.
Tonev will not have a future in football – he now has ‘form’ and could be reported by anyone with a grudge against him, with almost certain success,
Greenwells Glory
I thought the same previously before todays judgement-dangerous precedent set. HH
So if players of teams playing celtic systematically run to the ref and they’re captains and say that one of our players said racist comment.
We could end up with either ALL our best players banned.
Or all of our first team banned at the same time.
Then in effect we would or could never win the league again.
Jamesgang,
No me pal:)
Here…what was you on the telly box for? Repeated at 6?? :)
You take that mob out of that fifth/six floor at Hampden away from there wee comfort zone in the real world they will be left wanting, trust me on that,.
A sheet house lawyer would rip that case up like wet toilet paper, .
Excuse the analogy.
newradbhoy
15:54 on 16 December, 2014
So if players of teams playing celtic systematically run to the ref and they’re captains and say that one of our players said racist comment.
We could end up with either ALL our best players banned.
Or all of our first team banned at the same time.
Then in effect we would or could never win the league again.
—–
And on the balance of probability we would be guilty because we have form….
If celtic do go to acas.
Does that not mean that any team from the sfa cannot play in Europe.
They wouldn’t self harm themselves just to get at us and make sure we couldn’t earn extra revenue out of Europe would they ?
WOULD THEY ?
Has anyone ever heard of anyone being found guilty on a case of probability?
When I joined my first golf club, I joined a group of guys at my local pub, who played golf every Sunday morning, early. (The Dawn Patrol).
All rule queries were directed to a bloke, who, surprisingly, knew very little of the actual rules, but whose decision was final.
In one game I hit my drive into an area marked “ground under repair”. It was a big area that was being dug up to improve the drainage.
My ball was lost, although my three playing partners agreed that the ball was lost in the area so marked, “ground under repair”
I dropped a ball at the spot where my ball had entered the marked area and played on, no penalty.
When the scores were counted I had won by a single shot. However, someone reported me to the “rules man” who promptly penalised me 2 strokes and disqualified me for cheating!!!!!
In spite of my protests and confirming with the club pro that I was right, the “rules man” said “it’s got f*ck all to do with him, you’re out!”
I think the “rules man” was on the panel who found against our Aleks.
Sounds like it anyway.
Oh, and I never played golf with those wankers again.
Did the panel ask themselves why a player would come out with a racist comment knowing full well that some of his own black team mates could have overheard?.
To me, the balance of probabilities would suggest a person wouldn’t dare do that.
TD @ 3.43
The court will now recess as the judge is going to a wet t-shirt and poll dancing competition in the Brazen Head.
ALL RISE!
——-
Was that as a spectator, participant or ……. judge?
;-)
HH jamesgang