PDA

View Full Version : Aberdeen Statement



Pretty Boy
14-09-2018, 10:37 AM
https://www.afc.co.uk/2018/09/14/club-statement-20/?cn-reloaded=1

:top marks

First Clarke and now them. There are questions to be answered and hopefully clubs and individuals are brave enough to ask them.

SirDavidsNapper
14-09-2018, 10:40 AM
Spot on. Hope the rest of us do the same.

Spike Mandela
14-09-2018, 10:41 AM
Stewart Milne....”It’s time to move on”.

Reap what you sow.

Sir David Gray
14-09-2018, 10:41 AM
Rangers statement in 3, 2, 1...

Cabbage East
14-09-2018, 10:42 AM
We really deserve better than the SFA.

Ringothedog
14-09-2018, 10:43 AM
https://www.afc.co.uk/2018/09/14/club-statement-20/?cn-reloaded=1

:top marks

First Clarke and now them. There are questions to be answered and hopefully clubs and individuals are brave enough to ask them.

As long as we have Petrie at Hibs, we will say nothing controversial nor will we criticise the SFA. It is quite sad really as everyone can see that the SFA is rotten to the core and it is them that are dragging the game down to its knees. If they had any respect for Scottish Football they would all resign and let forward thinkers govern our game. They are like pigs at a trough.

we are hibs
14-09-2018, 10:44 AM
Spot on. Hope the rest of us do the same.

No chance the hibs board will rock the boat. Nothing to see here carry on like we have done for years..

The Green Goblin
14-09-2018, 10:45 AM
Good statement. Good for them for stating their intention to do something about it.

Ozyhibby
14-09-2018, 10:46 AM
No chance the hibs board will rock the boat. Nothing to see here carry on like we have done for years..

Our manager gets banned for cupping his ears and we say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Diclonius
14-09-2018, 10:47 AM
No chance the hibs board will rock the boat. Nothing to see here carry on like we have done for years..

Yup.

Petrie has his eye on being in the chair making the questionable decisions in a few years' time. :aok:

Stuart93
14-09-2018, 11:05 AM
Our manager gets banned for cupping his ears and we say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aye I'd love to see us come out with a statement similar to Aberdeens or Clarke's. Never in a million years though.

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 11:07 AM
No chance the hibs board will rock the boat. Nothing to see here carry on like we have done for years..

It's worked out so badly for us, hasn't it?

Alan62
14-09-2018, 11:07 AM
I'm not utterly convinced that the Aberdeen guy's challenge wasn't a red card. He cynically hauls the man down when he's through on goal. Sure there was a little shirt tug ahead of that but the issues for the panel are interpretation - what constitutes an 'obvious refereeing error' and an 'obvious goal scoring opportunity'.

Aberdeen's defence was pretty rubbish really. 'Yeah, but, he pulled our guy's shirt first' and 'our full back was running towards the attacker'.

Fair enough, we've seen some howling decisions this year - the Morelos incident in particular, but I'm not convinced the Devlin incident is one of them.

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 11:09 AM
Our manager gets banned for cupping his ears and we say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He didnt though did he, he got banned from screaming in the refs face at Killie, while I totally understand his reaction and didnt understand Clancy not even trying to speak to him before sending him to the stand (no doubt on the word of 4th official) I think you are always going to get in trouble for that. He had a suspended element to that though and his plane impression while very funny was always going to trigger that also.

green day
14-09-2018, 11:09 AM
No chance the hibs board will rock the boat. Nothing to see here carry on like we have done for years..

Aberdeen are only making a statement because of Devlin, I am unclear why Hibs board would be making one?

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 11:10 AM
I'm not utterly convinced that the Aberdeen guy's challenge wasn't a red card. He cynically hauls the man down when he's through on goal. Sure there was a little shirt tug ahead of that but the issues for the panel are interpretation - what constitutes an 'obvious refereeing error' and an 'obvious goal scoring opportunity'.

Aberdeen's defence was pretty rubbish really. 'Yeah, but, he pulled our guy's shirt first' and 'our full back was running towards the attacker'.

Fair enough, we've seen some howling decisions this year - the Morelos incident in particular, but I'm not convinced the Devlin incident is one of them.

Tend to agree think that one was a 50/50 one. Devlin wasnt stopping Brophy for speed and could kind of see why it was given.

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 11:11 AM
Aberdeen are only making a statement because of Devlin, I am unclear why Hibs board would be making one?

Yep better to keep powder dry until we have a cause to fight no doubt coming along soon.

Forza Fred
14-09-2018, 11:14 AM
Our manager gets banned for cupping his ears and we say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He wasn’t banned for cupping his ears though....

Pretty Boy
14-09-2018, 11:15 AM
I'm not utterly convinced that the Aberdeen guy's challenge wasn't a red card. He cynically hauls the man down when he's through on goal. Sure there was a little shirt tug ahead of that but the issues for the panel are interpretation - what constitutes an 'obvious refereeing error' and an 'obvious goal scoring opportunity'.

Aberdeen's defence was pretty rubbish really. 'Yeah, but, he pulled our guy's shirt first' and 'our full back was running towards the attacker'.

Fair enough, we've seen some howling decisions this year - the Morelos incident in particular, but I'm not convinced the Devlin incident is one of them.

Whilst the incident was the catalyst for their statement I think it's a bit irrelevant to the wider point they make regarding the lack of transparency when it comes to hearing appeals and handing out bans.

Disciplinary procedures in sport should be totally transparent to avoid accusations of corruption. As long as players and managers fates are decided by 3 people in a room with little or no explanation given for the reasoning behind a decision then there will always be an element of suspicion, especially when the decisions are baffling in their inconsistency.

Ozyhibby
14-09-2018, 11:15 AM
Tend to agree think that one was a 50/50 one. Devlin wasnt stopping Brophy for speed and could kind of see why it was given.

The reason he wasn’t catching him was because Brophy had fouled Devlin. It’s never a red card.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 11:17 AM
The reason he wasn’t catching him was because Brophy had fouled Devlin. It’s never a red card.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not so sure think both were fouling.

green day
14-09-2018, 11:18 AM
He didnt though did he, he got banned from screaming in the refs face at Killie, while I totally understand his reaction and didnt understand Clancy not even trying to speak to him before sending him to the stand (no doubt on the word of 4th official) I think you are always going to get in trouble for that. He had a suspended element to that though and his plane impression while very funny was always going to trigger that also.

Correct, he had a 2 match suspended ban, and the airplane was deemed to be "entering the field of play" (hard to argue, tbh:greengrin) which gave him a one match ban and hence triggered the 2 suspended.

NL did talk to the media afterward, said he thought it was a bit harsh and that no common sense was used - but that rules (re entering the field of play) were rules - He also said it was worth it and he would do it again :thumbsup:

Alan62
14-09-2018, 11:18 AM
Whilst the incident was the catalyst for their statement I think it's a bit irrelevant to the wider point they make regarding the lack of transparency when it comes to hearing appeals and handing out bans.

Disciplinary procedures in sport should be totally transparent to avoid accusations of corruption. As long as players and managers fates are decided by 3 people in a room with little or no explanation given for the reasoning behind a decision then there will always be an element of suspicion, especially when the decisions are baffling in their inconsistency.

I agree to some extent on transparency - although that has issues as well. In this case, the panel has published an explanation which is clear and, in my view, correct.

Greentinted
14-09-2018, 11:22 AM
While ostensibly it’s a statement regarding one particular incident, we can all see the inferences run a lot deeper but until the clubs (who, after all, we are told, are the SFA) do something to rectify the ridiculous voting system used to affect change and progress, then it’s all just, sadly, hot air.

Alan62
14-09-2018, 11:22 AM
The reason he wasn’t catching him was because Brophy had fouled Devlin. It’s never a red card.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Brophy's foul on Devlin doesn't enter into the red card appeal which is entirely focused on Devlin's foul on Brophy because that's what the red card was for.

we are hibs
14-09-2018, 11:52 AM
Aberdeen are only making a statement because of Devlin, I am unclear why Hibs board would be making one?


We have been on the recieving end on plenty of occasions and will continue to do so as the board never speak up.

we are hibs
14-09-2018, 11:53 AM
It's worked out so badly for us, hasn't it?

What?

theonlywayisup
14-09-2018, 11:58 AM
The Aberdeen FC statement.............




Aberdeen FC finds the explanation provided by the SFA in relation to the Michael Devlin red card appeal unacceptable.


The club maintains its view that the player was wrongfully dismissed, that the evidence presented was a robust defence and was overwhelmingly compelling in the player’s favour.


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.


Furthermore, at a time when technology is making a significant and positive impact across sport, the club believes that the impact of the VAR system trials in the English Premier League need to be considered if stakeholders in the game are going to regain trust in the process.


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.


Doing so would enhance the game’s integrity, greatly assist referees, improve the game for fans and, ultimately, the perception of Scottish football.

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 11:58 AM
While ostensibly it’s a statement regarding one particular incident, we can all see the inferences run a lot deeper but until the clubs (who, after all, we are told, are the SFA) do something to rectify the ridiculous voting system used to affect change and progress, then it’s all just, sadly, hot air.

Th ultimate irony was that there was a vote and Aberdeen were the team who decided to vote against changing the voting though personally think there may have been a bit more to it than that.

Future17
14-09-2018, 12:01 PM
Yep better to keep powder dry until we have a cause to fight no doubt coming along soon.

First they came for the Dons and we said nothing...

Hibbyradge
14-09-2018, 12:02 PM
Our manager gets banned for cupping his ears and we say nothing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He didn't get banned.

hibbydog
14-09-2018, 12:04 PM
Rangers statement in 3, 2, 1...

Rangers FC finds the fact that other clubs are releasing statements unacceptable. Especially when the statements are well considered, factually correct and not bitter.

Please leave it to our pie eating, skol drinking expert.

Beggars belief.

J Traynor

green day
14-09-2018, 12:04 PM
We have been on the recieving end on plenty of occasions and will continue to do so as the board never speak up.

Which decisions specifically would you have our board make a statement about?

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 12:06 PM
What?

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?

CLASS OF 72 -73
14-09-2018, 12:17 PM
As long as we have Petrie at Hibs, we will say nothing controversial nor will we criticise the SFA. It is quite sad really as everyone can see that the SFA is rotten to the core and it is them that are dragging the game down to its knees. If they had any respect for Scottish Football they would all resign and let forward thinkers govern our game. They are like pigs at a trough.


Agree.
As long as Petrie is sniffing for the top post you won't see us take the brave ground.

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 12:20 PM
Agree.
As long as Petrie is sniffing for the top post you won't see us take the brave ground.

Sort of like, voting for the Oldco to get kicked out of the league, type of thing?

Ozyhibby
14-09-2018, 12:22 PM
Sort of like, voting for the Oldco to get kicked out of the league, type of thing?

Can you show me where this happened?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

green day
14-09-2018, 12:47 PM
Can you show me where this happened?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 12:53 PM
Can you show me where this happened?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm afraid I can't, and must be guilty of believing the urban myth that all the clubs, bar Kilmarnock voted to kick the Huns into outer space.

Is It On....
14-09-2018, 01:06 PM
Rangers FC finds the fact that other clubs are releasing statements unacceptable. Especially when the statements are well considered, factually correct and not bitter.

Please leave it to our pie eating, skol drinking expert.

Beggars belief.

J Traynor

Bheggars ?😉

Pretty Boy
14-09-2018, 01:21 PM
I'm afraid I can't, and must be guilty of believing the urban myth that all the clubs, bar Kilmarnock voted to kick the Huns into outer space.

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.

Ozyhibby
14-09-2018, 01:26 PM
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.

Thank you. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tomsk
14-09-2018, 01:28 PM
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

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.

Ozyhibby
14-09-2018, 01:30 PM
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

eastcoasthibby
14-09-2018, 01:30 PM
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 !!!

number9dream
14-09-2018, 01:37 PM
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...

green day
14-09-2018, 01:54 PM
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


"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???

WhileTheChief..
14-09-2018, 01:55 PM
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.

Yeah but it’s a lot easier to type “they were kicked out the league”!

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 02:02 PM
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.

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.


Yeah but it’s a lot easier to type “they were kicked out the league”!


Thank you. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I suspect you don't lose many arguments, if you only listen to replies that you want to hear.


Yeah but it’s a lot easier to type “they were kicked out the league”!

Thanks, that's what happened.

Scotty Leither
14-09-2018, 02:09 PM
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".

we are hibs
14-09-2018, 02:11 PM
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?

. 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.

Hibbyradge
14-09-2018, 02:15 PM
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".

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.

Hibbyradge
14-09-2018, 02:19 PM
. 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.

What was it like before Rod Petrie was involved with the SFA?

In fact, what was it like before he was involved with Hibs?

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 02:32 PM
. 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'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?

Keith_M
14-09-2018, 02:33 PM
"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.

green day
14-09-2018, 02:42 PM
. 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.

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.

brog
14-09-2018, 02:59 PM
. 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.

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.

SMAXXA
14-09-2018, 03:10 PM
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

staunchhibby
14-09-2018, 03:10 PM
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:

JimBHibees
14-09-2018, 03:15 PM
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.

Totally agree.

Smartie
14-09-2018, 03:26 PM
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 !!!

We're in quite an interesting and strong position on this one - in that we haven't been affected by anything yet, so can be considered to be (fairly) neutral and objective. Other teams could be accused of sour grapes or a vested interest in matters. Do we have to wait until we are hard done by before we get involved? We are going to benefit through Dicker missing the game against us at the weekend, which is a ridiculous state of affairs. I like that Aberdeen have been critical of the process, and don't think it would be wrong of us to weigh in in support, although I do tend to prefer to see us near the bottom of the statement league.


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".

RP, LD et al played an absolute blinder throughout that debacle. Whilst there were ridiculous lies printed, we can't hide the fact that we were on the pitch when we shouldn't have been, some Rangers players had attention that they should not have had and that some property was damaged. Hibs didn't get involved in hysterics and quietly went about minimising the fall out, and I think they did a superb job of it. Anyone who has half a brain cell knows that what the DR printed was garbage - why get involved in tit for tat drivel? "Don't roll with pigs in s**t" was great advice given to me many years ago - and that is exactly what getting into a public war of words would have been doing.

allezsauzee
14-09-2018, 04:20 PM
Poor start to the season by Hibs on the statements front, we are in danger of being left behind again! Come on Petrie get this sorted!

O'Rourke3
14-09-2018, 04:27 PM
Like being near the bottom of the crime count league. No statements is a good place to be.

Sent from my KFTBWI using Tapatalk

Joe6-2
14-09-2018, 04:44 PM
Yep better to keep powder dry until we have a cause to fight no doubt coming along soon.

Yeah, but would we fight it, e.g. Lennon’s cupping his ears, the absolute crap after the cup final, not a bloody word

green day
14-09-2018, 04:57 PM
Yeah, but would we fight it, e.g. Lennon’s cupping his ears, the absolute crap after the cup final, not a bloody word

Is this a windup?

Lennon did not get a ban for "cupping his ears".

He got a 1 match ban for entering the field of play.............in front of all of us there and on TV - It was pretty hard to deny. His ban was automatically extended to 3 as he had a 2 match suspended ban hanging over him.

As for all the crap after the cup final - what did you want the club to say?

Rod did his bit by saying it was "exuberance", and after he and LD did a brilliant job behind the scenes ensuring we got off pretty much scot free.

Hibbyradge
14-09-2018, 05:01 PM
Yeah, but would we fight it, e.g. Lennon’s cupping his ears, the absolute crap after the cup final, not a bloody word

And nothing happened to Hibs on either occasion.

Hibbyradge
14-09-2018, 05:02 PM
Is this a windup?

Lennon did not get a ban for "cupping his ears".

He got a 1 match ban for entering the field of play.............in front of all of us there and on TV - It was pretty hard to deny. His ban was automatically extended to 3 as he had a 2 match suspended ban hanging over him.

As for all the crap after the cup final - what did you want the club to say?

Rod did his bit by saying it was "exuberance", and after he and LD did a brilliant job behind the scenes ensuring we got off pretty much scot free.

The 1 match ban was for the aeroplane impersonation at ER, not the ear cupping at Ibrox.

lyonhibs
14-09-2018, 05:06 PM
We're in quite an interesting and strong position on this one - in that we haven't been affected by anything yet, so can be considered to be (fairly) neutral and objective. Other teams could be accused of sour grapes or a vested interest in matters. Do we have to wait until we are hard done by before we get involved? We are going to benefit through Dicker missing the game against us at the weekend, which is a ridiculous state of affairs. I like that Aberdeen have been critical of the process, and don't think it would be wrong of us to weigh in in support, although I do tend to prefer to see us near the bottom of the statement league.



RP, LD et al played an absolute blinder throughout that debacle. Whilst there were ridiculous lies printed, we can't hide the fact that we were on the pitch when we shouldn't have been, some Rangers players had attention that they should not have had and that some property was damaged. Hibs didn't get involved in hysterics and quietly went about minimising the fall out, and I think they did a superb job of it. Anyone who has half a brain cell knows that what the DR printed was garbage - why get involved in tit for tat drivel? "Don't roll with pigs in s**t" was great advice given to me many years ago - and that is exactly what getting into a public war of words would have been doing.
That some people still think our board should have acted in some other fashion after 21.05.2016 absolutely baffles me, given the eventual outcome of it all (basically hee haw)

I think Aberdeen's statement is great and raises some good points. It would be even stronger if the foul in question indubitably wasn't a sending off, which isn't the case IMO.

Chic Murray
14-09-2018, 05:18 PM
Given that one of Clarke's complaints is that his name was spelled wrong on the charge sheet, it's maybe better not to get involved.

green day
14-09-2018, 05:21 PM
The 1 match ban was for the aeroplane impersonation at ER, not the ear cupping at Ibrox.

Yep, I know that - but I think Joe6-2 was getting mixed up between that and the airplane one which he got the ban for.

If you believed twitter, NL was banned for 3 matches simply for celebrating a goal..................

overdrive
14-09-2018, 05:31 PM
I'm generally in favour of the club "speaking up" but it should be noted what happened the last time we spoke up as a club. We spoke up a few times that season about Craig Thomson. The SFA rewarded us with him taking charge of the cup final. We spoke up against that. Result: he screwed us over.

Maybe keeping quiet is the best tactic when it comes to the incompetence/corruption associated with our referees and national association.

Deansy
14-09-2018, 05:37 PM
We really deserve better than the SFA.

THIS !

WHY - there is/isn't a nation-wide campaign for this corrupt/not-fit-for-purpose 'organisation' to be completely scrapped and all within it sacked is baffling ??

Billy Whizz
14-09-2018, 06:11 PM
https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/scottish-fa-statement-on-the-judicial-panel-protocol/?rid=14258

ancient hibee
14-09-2018, 06:57 PM
"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.



What appeal by a Rangers goalie?

ancient hibee
14-09-2018, 07:03 PM
It seems that there were two working party groups made up of club,coaches and players who met a number of times and agreed how the disciplinary process was going to work.Hasn’t worked out too well.

Spike Mandela
14-09-2018, 07:05 PM
https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/scottish-fa-statement-on-the-judicial-panel-protocol/?rid=14258

So if 2 on the panel think it is red, and the match official thinks it’s a red it just takes one Rangers fan on the panel to make sure it isn’t. Glad they have streamlined it for them.:cool2:

Joe6-2
14-09-2018, 08:44 PM
Yep, I know that - but I think Joe6-2 was getting mixed up between that and the airplane one which he got the ban for.

If you believed twitter, NL was banned for 3 matches simply for celebrating a goal..................

Yes, and thanks