Boostin' Kev Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Just occurred to me that while driving through Gorgie last month I must've only been 2 streets away from Tynecastle. I'm starting to feel a bit uneasy after reading this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 So Rico and every decent Old Firm fan shouldn't go and support their team because a minority of dickheads won't drop the sectarian bile? Tbf, everyone refusing to attend until the dickheads quit their religious bile is probably the level of commitment required to make a stand against sectarianism. Parkhead and Ibrox empty except for just a few hundred supporters might make the clubs, the SFA and maybe even the bigots themselves take a long hard look and act accordingly. I think I might see a pig flying over an icy hell before that happens though. A few hundred? Aye right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 According to the Scottish FA http://m.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/13719380.UEFA_raps__reckless__Scottish_FA_over_claims_sectarianism_just_part_of_the_national_game/ Not part of it, but a major money spinner given all the wailing about the lack of a certain tie the game couldn't do without four times a year. I hope Uefa is also turning its fire on its Belgian membership, where they can't even agree on which language to speak, let alone reasons for spousal battery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Just occurred to me that while driving through Gorgie last month I must've only been 2 streets away from Tynecastle. I'm starting to feel a bit uneasy after reading this thread. Jambo b*****d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 They'll be getting f**k all for Christmas fae granda_blue then Bah Humbug! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boostin' Kev Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 Jambo b*****d I'm away for a shower be back in 10 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisal Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 You just know that if the SFA decided to deduct points it would be because a diddy team supporter would spend 90 minutes listening to OF bigotry would crack and call them him/tun b*****ds.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 You just know that if the SFA decided to deduct points it would be because a diddy team supporter would spend 90 minutes listening to OF bigotry would crack and call them him/tun b*****ds.. This is the point. I'd have no issue with that if it was reciprocated by the ugly sisters being fined a zillion points and relegated to playing FIFA on some spotty kids bedroom floor for last years disgrace at Hampden for example. Of course the h word isn't in anyway sectarian, they just don't like it, so it's a bit moot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 You just know that if the SFA decided to deduct points it would be because a diddy team supporter would spend 90 minutes listening to OF bigotry would crack and call them him/tun b*****ds.. And rightly so. There is no place for sectarianism in the game.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 They'll be getting f**k all for Christmas fae granda_blue then My grandchildren must all be Celtic supporters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted September 16, 2015 Share Posted September 16, 2015 You just know that if the SFA decided to deduct points it would be because a diddy team supporter would spend 90 minutes listening to OF bigotry would crack and call them him/tun b*****ds..Him/tun b*****ds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35349978 Couldn't find another thread suitable. This character Mulraney says SPFL opposition to strict liability is 'pretty unanimous' though obviously doesn't realise the meaning of the word as others disagree. I like the idea of strict liability, it would stop those in charge from ignoring bigotry by kidding on the ugly sisters were doing enough to stamp it out. Other implications too of course like those United and Celtic 'fans' setting of flares at recent games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrots and Peas Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35349978 Couldn't find another thread suitable. This character Mulraney says SPFL opposition to strict liability is 'pretty unanimous' though obviously doesn't realise the meaning of the word as others disagree. I like the idea of strict liability, it would stop those in charge from ignoring bigotry by kidding on the ugly sisters were doing enough to stamp it out. Other implications too of course like those United and Celtic 'fans' setting of flares at recent games. But then what's reasonable to stop flares? Pat downs at the gate? What's reasonable to stop sectarian singing is docking points. Doubt many fans would continue if it harmed their chances of winning the league. Facial recognition cameras or fit ever are an easier option apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 But then what's reasonable to stop flares? Pat downs at the gate? What's reasonable to stop sectarian singing is docking points. Doubt many fans would continue if it harmed their chances of winning the league. Facial recognition cameras or fit ever are an easier option apparently. Fines. Either idiots would stop doing it or fellow fans would start being less reluctant about pointing out the offenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 You don't need strict liability to crack down on sectarianism. You just need to enforce the country's law. Unfortunately though, you also need the will to enforce it and that will never happen. You need a backbone for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 You don't need strict liability to crack down on sectarianism. You just need to enforce the country's law. Unfortunately though, you also need the will to enforce it and that will never happen. You need a backbone for that. It's effectively the same thing. They don't want strict liability because they don't really want to address the issue, they don't want to invoke the existing laws for the same reason. The benefit of strict liability is that it reduces, those doesn't remove, the wiggle room when offences are committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim999 Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35349978 Couldn't find another thread suitable. This character Mulraney says SPFL opposition to strict liability is 'pretty unanimous' though obviously doesn't realise the meaning of the word as others disagree. I like the idea of strict liability, it would stop those in charge from ignoring bigotry by kidding on the ugly sisters were doing enough to stamp it out. Other implications too of course like those United and Celtic 'fans' setting of flares at recent games. Agree with most of the above but the worry would be, even with strict liability rules, the brass would find it easier to take on a smaller club for some wee misdemeanour or other rather than take either of Celtic or Rangers on head to head. They wouldn't have the nuts for it. You could just see Dundee United, for example losing points for fireworks but Rangers not for hymns as they'd trot out some Pish about not being able to identify culprits etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Mike Mulraney on the news there refusing to answer Chris McLaughlin (on whether sectarian singing should be punished) because it was a closed question, and offering another closed question as the alternative. Also, only clips of the recent Celtic smokebombs being shown by the BBC, ignoring ours. Typical Old Firm bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7-2 Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 It's effectively the same thing. They don't want strict liability because they don't really want to address the issue, they don't want to invoke the existing laws for the same reason. The benefit of strict liability is that it reduces, those doesn't remove, the wiggle room when offences are committed. Of course they don't want to. It'd cost the Old Firm too much and the other 40 are too scared to stand up to them. The real ones to blame for non-action are the police and government who could use the existing laws but don't. There is no need for any new level of legislation to deal with the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.A.F.C Posted January 19, 2016 Share Posted January 19, 2016 Referee should just blow full time and award three points to the away team. Singing songs about killing people is far worse than the racism that has been punished. A few poxy fines won't stop it. When fans can see that it will effect their team it would stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.