If you live long enough you get to hear or read just about everything. Today some in the old media are telling us Celtic and Rangers (sic) are both chasing a soon-to-be out of contract Manchester United player. The way it used to work is an agent would fly into Glasgow to see Celtic or Rangers, and make sure the other club had an option on the player their rivals were pursuing.
Anyone who thinks Newco can rival Celtic for a footballer had better consult their medication. The rules have all changed, in Glasgow, we stand alone.
Final shout for the ITUC’s 22nd minute Fifa protest tomorrow.
Today’s CQteN raffle winner, of a signed Celtic strip, is John McDonald, from table 36. If it’s the John McDonald I’ve just emailed, congratulations… If not, we’ll find you.
Today is World Down Syndrome Day. For too long those with Down’ have been stigmatised, shown a lack of human respect, or worse. The ‘does he take sugar’ days were not so long ago. World Down Syndrome Day is a about raising awareness and changing our perceptions.
Have to say I’m enjoying the Aberdeen fans’ ‘Peter Pawlett Baby’ campaign. Human League’s ‘Don’t you want me baby’ has flown up the charts on the back of delirious Aberdeen fans, celebrating their position as one of Scotland’s top two. Crazy stuff like this is how football clubs grow.
For all those who have supported Marys’ Meals over recent weeks and months, here’s a cheery video from them, with a little help from Pharrell Williams.
Seville – The Celtic Movement is another cheery wee thing.
“Somewhere around 5am and Glasgow airport is only open for Seville flights and is a sea of green and white. I’ve 80 Euros, my passport, boarding pass and a ticket in my shorts, Celtic top on, no baggage of any description. The happiest queue of all time has formed.”
You can get yours here:
1,204 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- »
gct
with the intention of averting a goal
when did that line get put in the rule?
certainly wasnt there when i played 35 years ago?
AWE NAW
How’s tricks anyway,bud?
You deigning us with your presence on these shores anytime soon?
hoopy-do
13:25 on
22 March, 2014
gct
with the intention of averting a goal
when did that line get put in the rule?
certainly wasnt there when i played 35 years ago?
34 years ago :-)
Overcast day in the desert….
4.0
The FFP initiatives are really working well.
HH
4-0 Chelsea. Vintage football.
BMCUWP
I will be over soon as I need to renew my passport in May and want to visit my Ma before I do so.
HH
BIG-CUP-WINNERS
Sorry, but I don’t understand your point.
He dived through the air and touched the ball with his fingers. He was trying to avert a goal by illegal means.
What is unclear about that?
I’m gonna make an observation about the comment at 1005, regardless of who the poster is, was etc, there is more than one meaning to that word, either in the dictionary or in slang. Nobody on here knows which one was meant so to have a go at him in my opinion other than because of who he is, is just wrong. And yes tony, I know your more than capable of sticking up for yourself, I just detest the way that some are treated on here. There’s so much on here that I don’t like, but my opinions are not every bodies, so I keep most to myself, apart from people who truly know me. And no I’m not racist, homophobic anti this that or the next. I just understand that we are all different and we will never agree on 99.9% of most things. Sorry for the long post.
BBC Sporf @BBCSporf 9m
Mariner: “Gibbs, you’re off!”
The Ox: “Ref, it was me!”
Mariner: “Shut up Walcott, or you’ll be off too”
BIG-CUP-WINNERS –
Sorry mate. Just realised you were responding to hoopy-do.
ryecatcher
Willie Nelson says Lance Armstrong should be congratulated on winning all those races while on drugs. He claims that when he was on drugs he couldn’t find his bike.
BioWillieCSC……..HH
but he wasnt denying a goalscoring opportunity
thats the phrase thats in the laws
i doubt theres anything in the law about a player ‘thinking’ he was denying a goal scoring chance
right im away to phone shug dallas to get the right answer ie what would he have done if it wasnt celtic playing
The miscreant was Dougie Hope, in the 1993 game. It wasn’t the first time one of the Brethren had pulled this trick.
Happened during the sixties too, we were discussing it the other day on the blog.
Had a wee look back at the 10.05 post.
Just for future reference, when talking to any of my homersexual chums, is the word bent homophobic.
i used to handle the ball all the time to prevent goal scoring chances and i never got sent off for it
and its not as if the refs never knew it was me, i wore a different strip from everyone else :-)
Here’s a tricky on. Firstly, let me specify that when I use the term ‘arm’ in this page, I include in the definition of ‘arm’ the player’s hand.
If a player handles the ball accidently this is not an infringement. It clearly states in law 12 that a handball must be deliberate. However, the common interpretation is that if a player has his arm in an unnatural position and the ball strikes it, this is considered deliberate. Or if his arm is in any position but the player has time to get it out of the way of the course of the ball and does not, then this is also considered deliberate. This is not a well understood rule. The only time a handball is not an infringement is if he is too close to the ball to move his arm (factoring in the speed that the ball is travelling at) and his arm is resting normally by his side. Of course, when a man jumps or goes to ground he nearly always moves his arms from his side and it is possible that his arm could be in a natural position but not by his side. The convention is that, having decided to jump or go to ground, he has decided to move his arm away from his side and has thus left himself culpable to a deliberate handball. It can be a source of dispute at times but nevertheless, it is pretty well interpreted by most referees most of the time and necessarily involves discretion.
The interesting point is once more, to do with issuing cards for handballs. This is where it gets tricky. In order to distinguish between the possibilities, it is useful to make the following distinction. In one scenario a player may move his arm from his side, risking the ball hitting it and if it does, this is handball and an infringement. In another scenario a player may deliberately strike the ball with his arm. This is a handball and an infringement AND a cautionable offense. This constitutes a caution for ‘unsporting behaviour’. So, to clarify, there are actually three types of handball:
1) an unavoidable accident 2) an arm moved from the player’s side, risking being struck by the ball 3) a deliberate striking of the ball with the arm
The appropriate courses of action by the referee are respectively:
1) no action 2) a free-kick or penalty 3) a free-kick or penalty AND a caution
However, there is one exception; when a player commits the third type of handball to prevent a goal-scoring opportunity he is sent off for the prevention, not for the deliberate handball. I actually believe this rule to be incorrect (as discussed on a separate page of this blog). A parallel can be drawn with attempting to score a goal with this third type of handball. It is obvious that the result of cheating in this manner is equal to preventing a goal with a handball. The team for whom the offending player plays stands to be one goal better off as a result of this infringement. So, it stands to reason that the punishment should be the same. But it is not. The rules explicitly state that attempting to score a goal by handling the ball is a cautionable offense and not an offense for which a player should be sent off. Surely, if preventing a goal with a handball is a red-card, then attempting to score in this way should be too. However, preventing a goal with a handball is only punishable with a sending off if successful. If a player attempts to score with a handball, he cannot both be successful in doing so, but also be punished by the referee for the infringement because for the referee to punish the player he would necessarily have to disallow the goal scored. Still with me?
The only sensible reconciliation of all these paradoxical scenarios is to change the rule about preventing the goal scoring opportunity. As discussed on another page, this should be a penalty goal (automatic goal). Then, the handball rule could be implemented as above without exception.
The most famous example of this, the ‘hand of god’ Maradona goal is widely considered one of the worst incidents of cheating in the history of the game. It is somewhat ironic that the worst incident of cheating ever seen should only have been punished by a yellow card and a free kick
Shame for Billy Davies :-) :-) :-) :-)
SNECKER
You are of course correct.
However,if you read the post properly it says “in more ways than one”
Your call if you think that is acceptable,but for the avoidance of doubt,my contempt is for the opinion posted,not necessarily for the poster.
Whom,btw,I have frequently thanked for bringing things to my attention.
dontpatmadug
13:38 on22 March, 2014
Symantics.
Deviant is not homophobic but it sounds as bad as bent.
HH
snecker
13:31 on 22 March, 2014
I’m gonna make an observation about the comment at 1005, regardless of who the poster is, was etc, there is more than one meaning to that word, either in the dictionary or in slang. Nobody on here knows which one was meant so to have a go at him in my opinion other than because of who he is, is just wrong. And yes tony, I know your more than capable of sticking up for yourself, I just detest the way that some are treated on here. There’s so much on here that I don’t like, but my opinions are not every bodies, so I keep most to myself, apart from people who truly know me. And no I’m not racist, homophobic anti this that or the next. I just understand that we are all different and we will never agree on 99.9% of most things. Sorry for the long post.
——–
To a point correct but when you use the phrase “in more ways than one” the context is quite clear.
hoopy-do –
I did not at any point say those specific words were in the rule book.
The actual rules state that deliberate hand-ball inside the box that stops a shot on goal is a red card. The ball doesn’t necessarily need to be going in. If it is a shot at goal, that is enough.
remember the motherwell cup final when the tic defender,big dan i think, deliberately handled the ball coming out the air but didnt get a second yellow card for it. the huns, motherwell huns ans papers were raging.
but the reason he didnt get booked and so not sent not is that there wasnt a motherwell player within 30 yards of him so he wasnt preventing an advantage for them
stilk didnt stop days of rage and non rule reading
Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo
13:41 on
22 March, 2014
Semantics indeed. Although would think anyone would take umbrage at being called deviant. As for the old bent straight thing heading to the toon after may pop in to the Waterloo and test the ol linguistc water .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpl_jPxSuFg
gct
i still say the wording is about denying goal scoring opportunities which he didnt
we will agree to differ!
Snecker
Dinna be Sorry,pal..
In Fact.. Nevah be sorry fur Makin yer Opinion Known,oan Here.
Maist of the Folk oan Here ur.. Stand up Guys..
Ach..thur ur a Few..
Prissies… As weel..
But, Jist dae whit Ah dae..
Laugh at thur Stupidity.
Tony Donnelly, is a Strong Character.. He Disnae Pey any attenshun
tae .. whit the Thought Polis, Write .
Nice Chatting ,Kid.
N..
Ah thought that Ye last Submission.
Wiz.. Swell!
Kojo
Still, Laughin’
hoopy-do –
That is the wording for foul play.
For hand ball, the ball doesn’t have to be going in. If it is a shot on goal, it is a red card, regardless. That is written in the rules.
BMCW to be honest, I’m not aware of the accusations, of the said person, I just read it from a point of view that I took it, and I know your an open, honest friendly guy. I just sometimes feel, not by yourself that td67 is a target, and as I said he is more than capable of fighting his own corner. I just find it sad that in this day and age that whether we like it or not, we are being told what to be. As I said we are never gonna agree on any subject because we are all individuals who have their own beliefs, right or wrong. That’s what we are, unique, opinions are opinions, I see things differently from my children because as they like to tell me I’m from a different time(im 42) and I understand that their views are different because of that, doesn’t make my views right or wrong, neither are theirs. And no I don’t know TD67 I’m from up north. This post probably didn’t make sense, but I think you get my gist. Just like Mondays post I’ll get pulled up by the teachers for bad punctuation ;) only kidding. HH
Awe_Naw_No_Annoni_Oan_Anaw_Noo @13.38 hrs,
Wow, no wonder the ref took so long and eventually sent the wrong man off if he was dissecting that.
Cheers.
DontPatmadug.
Depends the context of how a word is used e.g. Allegedly, Was the late Jim Farry “bent”?
Are corrupt coppers “Bent” ? subsequently, Are corrupt referees “Bent”.
There evidently remains a school of thought on here ( pardon the pun ) that because its TD it is used in an incorrect format.
HH.
Cheers kojo, I’ve warmed to your posts, don’t always agree but enjoy them all the same, I only say sorry as I was brought up to be polite. Sorry ;)
Pay Day this Thursday. Hope my work have cash in the bank to pay it. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Greenpinata wholeheartedly agree!
Ooft
I’m away to watch Celtic.
Please don’t tell me we’re going into another week of “Sevco in administration this day or that day”?
Have we learned nothing from all the previous false dawns?
I’d love to see it, if and when it happens. Just count me out of the big 3/4 day build up.
Greenpinata
13:53 on
22 March, 2014
I was using the lowest form of wit earlier mate :) . As for ol TD yep does rub some up the wrong way ( myself included ) from time to time, all is fair in love and war . As for his use of the word bent I believe he was applying both connotations.
HH
off to watch the hoops for those that cannot be there. I carry you in my soul…
HH
Today’s team:
CELTIC (4-4-2) Forster; Matthews, van Dijk, Mulgrew, Izaguirre; Henderson, Brown, Johansen, Commons; Griffiths, Stokes
Subs: Zaluska, Ambrose, Samaras, Balde, Pukki, Kayal, F. Twardzik
SNECKER
Not a problem,bud. I understand exactly your point of view.
Times change as we grow older,what was de rigeur as a kid is frowned upon now.
Sometimes that is against our own inherent sensibilities,so the opinions don’t change with the tide of public opinion.
There are many aspects of life-as viewed in this PC age-with which I have issues. I expect most people are the same. But,tbh,there are also some things which deserve to be challenged.
No-one comes into this world deciding which colour they want to be. Nor religion. Nor which sexual orientation.
Etc.
If I don’t like someone,I like to think it is personal. Not because of a pre-conceived opinion based on the above. And vice-versa.
Holding opinions that date back to days of yore is fine,not a problem. But expressing them should be challenged.
Even if only in the forlorn hope of education.
Me personally I despise people who who use “differences” to slight,or worse,other people.