He didn't get banned.
Printable View
The word of the day is "transference".
The board has us in the best position we've been in for 40 years. Perhaps they are quite good at running a football club, and know which battles to fight, and which ones to leave to others.
I would imagine that the first thing they consider is whether we are directly affected by what other clubs are complaining about, and whether there is any point in getting involved?
That's what I think anyway. Can you give me some examples of how the board's actions have cost us in recent years?
I suspect this is what he is alluding to https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/18703183
Not quite "kicked out" rather not allowed back in
It is an urban myth perpetuated by Rangers fans.
Rangers were liquidated, or are still in the process of being liquidated, the vote was whether or not to allow the new club/company straight into the premier league. That would have been unprecedented and was correctly voted against by all clubs except Kilmarnock who abstained. A 2nd vote was then held for then SFL clubs on whether to accept their application to rejoin the league at the then lowest level which saw them successfully enter the 3rd division. A similar vote happened with the newco Airdrieonioans who were unsuccessful and subsequently bought Clydebank and promptly renamed them Airdrie United to take their place in the league. On that occasion Gretna successfully applied to join the league in the defunct Airdries place.
There was never a vote to relegate Rangers or 'kick them into outer space' as you put it. Only a vote to admit them to the league set up and at which level.
Just for the sake of accuracy it should be 'allowed in' not 'allowed back in'. To be allowed back in would mean at some time in the past NewHuns had been in -- they hadn't. But you knew that. :wink:
I would describe Petrie's record at best as patchy. Like most of the chairmen at the time of the vote he was emboldened by the groundswell of resistance from ordinary punters to stand up to the SFA and 'do the right thing'. Since then he's been weak, either silent or when forced to speak one of the leaders in the 'let's move on' gang. Whether one agrees with his position or not he has hardly climbed to the greater heights of the moral high ground.
Reading the Aberdeen statement it’s clear they are going after the system rather than just the decision to send off Devlin. They also make a point of questioning the integrity of some recent decisions and the fact the have the support of other clubs. Maybe it’s time those clubs made public their support.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Regards Aberdeen statement looks like they have taken up the opportunity to bring to the fore the issue of the woeful decisions made by referees and also the panel through the Devlin sending off, looking to set out a marker early on that what they have seen so far just isnt acceptable. Whilst it might not have directly affected us so far, I suspect our turn is just around the corner, given we haven't played the ugly sisters or the mob across the city yet, who appear to be the beneficiaries of the diabolical decisions.
Aberdeen and Clarke are setting the stall out for the rest to follow about not rolling over and accepting all the biased, woeful decisions of match officials and their bosses.
Just on not getting involved at this time as its not us that have been affected, we had quite a number of awful decisions against us last year and as a club/board there was nothing said ie Clancy's impact in our games during the season. So perhaps it goes back again to we say nothing, because of our chairman's ambitions ....so if thats it we can look forward to whole lot of £hit decisions that affect our results again this season !!!
Who on earth dreamed up the changes and were the clubs consulted on the new “ex-referees via video conference & no right to appear in person or with representation” set-up and what is the compliance officer’s job now - simply to refer cases?
For me, the McGregor ‘no case to answer’ has been the most perplexing. With Dicker & Devlin you can just about understand one or more of the three panel members backing the ref’s original decision and the new system requires a unanimous verdict.
It’s the clandestine and downright odd system that I can’t fathom...
"In light of recent decisions taken by the SFA, the club believes it is imperative for the country's football authorities to establish consistency and transparency in the appeal and referral process and will engage in dialogue with the SPFL in this regard to seek their assistance,"
"AFC is aware that the views we have expressed are held by many who have found key appeal and referral decisions this year perplexing and want to see the governing body dealing with this proactively, with a consistent and transparent appeals process high up on the agenda."
Doesnt say anything about support from other clubs, unless I have missed it???
OK then, if Petrie was so pro SFA, and by implication pro Hun, he would have voted to allow the new club into the top division. I think we're splitting hairs on the detail when the overall picture is that Petrie went against "the establishment" at that point.
My own opinion is that our board looks after Hibs interests first, and would not get into a fight over something that a) has nothing to do with us, and b) couldn't win.
I suspect you don't lose many arguments, if you only listen to replies that you want to hear.
Thanks, that's what happened.
Our Board challenging outright lies by the media would be nice once in a while though...viz Bojangles Jackson: "every Rangers player on pitch was attacked or spat on by Hibs fans during Hampden riot".
. Hibs have been hard done by on numerous occasions over the years and will continue to do so. Certain clubs clearly haven't over the years and will continue to do so. Why will it continue to happen? Because too many clubs just accept this myth that this is the way it's always been and always should be. There is absolutely no doubt Scottish football is full of cheats and corrupt people. But hibs don't want to know and continually do nothing because it puts the spotlight on the chairman who clearly has a conflict of interests.
It might have been " nice", but what would it have achieved other than a nice war of words to distract from our victory, and more importantly, their failure, which is exactly what they wanted.
Everyone, bar a few currant buns who are still in denial, know it was a crock of s..t.
It's not that clear to me - please tell me what happened to Hibs, and what they could have done about it.
Scottish Football is full of cheats? Tell that to Sepp Blaater. Football is corrupt from top to bottom.
Sorry mate, your post is far too vague and emotive to merit any further discussion.
I came into this saying that the present Hibs board has us in the best position we've been in for 40 years, so where did it all go right?
"with a consistent and transparent appeals process high up on the agenda."
Surely nobody can disagree that this is required.
Look at the successful appeal made by the The Rangers goalie, after quite clearly kicking an opposition player.
Or the claim made by Gerrard that everybody's out to get them and this has been going on for years? Leaving aside how ridiculous that is.... any Manager of any other club would have been charged with "bringing the game into disrepute", or whatever the phrase is. In fact, that very thing has happened to the Killie Boss just last week.
There is a definite rule for some (2 clubs in particular) and a different rule for others.
I asked you earlier to let us know which decisions against Hibs you wanted the board to highlight / Rod to make a statement about, perhaps you missed that?
I am struggling to see the numerous times we have been screwed over by the disciplinary committee - in fact, I would contend that we have usually done quite well when we have argued our case.
I know you have a different view - which is fine - but so far it sounds like a rant about Petrie with nothing to back it up.
We've been hard done by refs on numerous occasions I agree but we've been mostly favourably treated by the appeals process which is the subject of this thread. I am not & never have been a fan of the Tache but I get fed up when a thread designed to support an Aberdeen statement is once again hijacked into an attack on RP & our club. IMO its tiresome & unnecessary.
Am no even convinced the Devlin decision is even a foul, they are both at it and the way the boy goes down doesn’t look entirely genuine for me
Totaly agree with above post.What started as an article by Aberdeen F.C. has turned into other matters totally unrelated to the statement:confused: