Aberdeen appeal Shinnie red card

[CentreLine]

Is Ryan Porteous still the only player ever to be handed an additional ban for a “frivolous” appeal, despite the fact we had no game coming up immediately. Aberdeen appealing Shinnie’s looks like an attempt to have him available for their game the The Rangers.

[darwenhibby]

It will be heard and rejected by Friday
Remember the committee conveniently met when we appealed think it was Hunter’s sending off on Christmas week so he was unavailable for the derby

[CentreLine]

It will be heard and rejected by Friday
Remember the committee conveniently met when we appealed think it was Hunter’s sending off on Christmas week so he was unavailable for the derby

Definitely they’ll sit but will they issue an additional ban, or was that a punishment exclusive to public enemy RP do you think?

[Trinity Hibee]

4 game ban for shinnie. 2 for the red card, 1 for it being his 2nd of the season and another for there being no chance of successful appeal.

Absolutely laughable. **** the SFA/SPFL

[007]

4 game ban for shinnie. 2 for the red card, 1 for it being his 2nd of the season and another for there being no chance of successful appeal.

Absolutely laughable. **** the SFA/SPFL

Is a bit of a joke. He clearly gets to the ball first and catches the guy's shin after. They must think he's deliberately left one on the boy, which I think he's capable of, but in this instance I'm not convinced he did. How's he supposed to kick the ball without any follow through?

Might suit us if we make top 6.

[eastterrace]

Is a bit of a joke. He clearly gets to the ball first and catches the guy's shin after. They must think he's deliberately left one on the boy, which I think he's capable of, but in this instance I'm not convinced he did. How's he supposed to kick the ball without any follow through?

Might suit us if we make top 6.we need Aberdeen to keep picking up points to stop them getting third so shinnie would be a big miss for them.

[davhibby]

4 game ban for shinnie. 2 for the red card, 1 for it being his 2nd of the season and another for there being no chance of successful appeal.

Absolutely laughable. **** the SFA/SPFL

In what way is it laughable? It’s about as clear a red as you can get these days. There’s been at least 3 reds so far in the league for similar tackles that probably weren’t as bad so nice to see the SFA remember about this rule that magically existed when we appealed the Porto one last season.

Like it or not it’s not 1980 and that challenge would be a red in any game in the world

[Tyler Durden]

Is a bit of a joke. He clearly gets to the ball first and catches the guy's shin after. They must think he's deliberately left one on the boy, which I think he's capable of, but in this instance I'm not convinced he did. How's he supposed to kick the ball without any follow through?

Might suit us if we make top 6.

The contact being deliberate is not relevant. It was a daft appeal on their part

[greenlex]

Is a bit of a joke. He clearly gets to the ball first and catches the guy's shin after. They must think he's deliberately left one on the boy, which I think he's capable of, but in this instance I'm not convinced he did. How's he supposed to kick the ball without any follow through?

Might suit us if we make top 6.
It’s not really. He gets the ball but he definitely followed through to get the player. Put it this way it would be fair enough if it was a 50/50 ball but he clearly had more chance of winning it probably more 70/30 and rather than being robust it absolutely dangerous/ reckless and endangering the opponent. Jail for me. Cant believe they had the brass neck to appeal it.

[Trinity Hibee]

In what way is it laughable? It’s about as clear a red as you can get these days. There’s been at least 3 reds so far in the league for similar tackles that probably weren’t as bad so nice to see the SFA remember about this rule that magically existed when we appealed the Porto one last season.

Like it or not it’s not 1980 and that challenge would be a red in any game in the world


😂😂😂😂 okay then.

[Trinity Hibee]

It’s not really. He gets the ball but he definitely followed through to get the player. Put it this way it would be fair enough if it was a 50/50 ball but he clearly had more chance of winning it probably more 70/30 and rather than being robust it absolutely dangerous/ reckless and endangering the opponent. Jail for me. Cant believe they had the brass neck to appeal it.

He definitely didn’t follow through to get the player. He went to win the ball and yes his momentum takes him into the player. He in no way went to do him

[B.H.F.C]

He definitely didn’t follow through to get the player. He went to win the ball and yes his momentum takes him into the player. He in no way went to do him

Thought he knew exactly what he was doing. Getting the ball when your studs end up that high up someone’s shin is an irrelevance these days.

[Trinity Hibee]

Thought he knew exactly what he was doing. Getting the ball when your studs end up that high up someone’s shin is an irrelevance these days.

That is absolutely nonsense and you can see that from his own reaction. The replays show he didn’t deliberately go in to injure the player. It’s a hard tackle I agree but this idea he wanted to do the boy is just lies.

Anyway people’s loyalties maybe getting in the way here so we’ll agree to disagree.

[greenlex]

He definitely didn’t follow through to get the player. He went to win the ball and yes his momentum takes him into the player. He in no way went to do him

But do him he did. He knew what he was doing. As I said he could have won the ball easily without the challenge he did make.

[Since452]

Good news for us in the run in (if we make top six). He's a huge player for them.

[Unseen work]

It’s 100% debatable whether it was a red or not, so to get an extra game ban for it being ‘frivolous’ is nonsense imo.

Also why is it a straight 2 match ban for the red?

That said, hopefully one of the games he misses is against us if we achieve top 6.

Very important player for them.

[007]

The contact being deliberate is not relevant. It was a daft appeal on their part

I thought it had to be excessive force (which I don't think that was) to be a straight red or has that rule changed too?

[B.H.F.C]

That is absolutely nonsense and you can see that from his own reaction. The replays show he didn’t deliberately go in to injure the player. It’s a hard tackle I agree but this idea he wanted to do the boy is just lies.

Anyway people’s loyalties maybe getting in the way here so we’ll agree to disagree.

The point you seem to be ignoring is that it makes no difference that he played the ball first. You can’t make a tackle like that now. That’s nothing to do with loyalties.

[davhibby]

It’s 100% debatable whether it was a red or not, so to get an extra game ban for it being ‘frivolous’ is nonsense imo.

Also why is it a straight 2 match ban for the red?

That said, hopefully one of the games he misses is against us if we achieve top 6.

Very important player for them.

How is it a different type of challenge for instance to the Holt one in our game at home to Livi earlier in the season? If anything it’s worse. Holt got a red and the appeal failed. There was absolutely no chance of them winning the appeal on this and Aberdeen should’ve known that.

[B.H.F.C]

I thought it had to be excessive force (which I don't think that was) to be a straight red or has that rule changed too?

Rule is as follows for serious foul play.

“A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play”

You could probably argue it was more reckless than serious foul play which is defined as “Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned” but I don’t think it was as I think he knew what he was doing. He was always favourite to win the ball and didn’t need to go in the way he did for me.

[green day]

Shinnie got the ball, but he also deliberately took the guys shin.

Hes a thug, and got away with it for years (this is his first straight red, iirc !!)

Correct red, and laughable appeal - there was no other outcome than the additional ban.

[Unseen work]

How is it a different type of challenge for instance to the Holt one in our game at home to Livi earlier in the season? If anything it’s worse. Holt got a red and the appeal failed. There was absolutely no chance of them winning the appeal on this and Aberdeen should’ve known that.

Don’t get me wrong I never thought it would be overturned, but alot of people seem to disagree about it.

An match extra ban for appealing it seems harsh to me, even if I am delighted about it 🤣

[Tyler Durden]

I’m fair enjoying the seethe from the Stand Free brigade

Shame we aren’t a few points closer to put up a fight for 3rd

[BoyledEgg]

we need Aberdeen to keep picking up points to stop them getting third so shinnie would be a big miss for them.

Eh? We need them to drop points for us to have a chance of catching them in 3rd.

[Libby Hibby]

I’m fair enjoying the seethe from the Stand Free brigade

Shame we aren’t a few points closer to put up a fight for 3rd

A win for us on Saturday and defeat for them and it’s 4 in it, game on.

[ElginHibbie]

https://www.afc.co.uk/2023/04/18/aberdeen-fc-in-disbelief-and-shocked-by-appeal-outcome/

Their statement is glorious, proper heids gone

[007]

Next match is Rangers so there was no chance it would be rescinded.

[Real Emerald]

Shinnie got the ball, but he also deliberately took the guys shin.

Hes a thug, and got away with it for years (this is his first straight red, iirc !!)

Correct red, and laughable appeal - there was no other outcome than the additional ban.

He has deliberately made sneaky dirty fouls for years and has known exactly what he was doing. Utterly amazing he got his first red card a couple of weeks ago as he’s got away with murder for years. Going by other red card decisions this year, it’s a red and it may just make other refs think about the way he fouls his way through games.

[NC1875]

Shinnies got away with murder for years so glad it’s finally caught up with him. Get it up him and Aberdeen. It weakens them so only a good thing for us!

[JimBHibees]

Shinnies got away with murder for years so glad it’s finally caught up with him. Get it up him and Aberdeen. It weakens them so only a good thing for us!

Apparently his red card against St Johnstone a few weeks back was his first of the career which is incredible given the number of fouls he gives away and the constant abuse the gives refs

[easty]

I’d be unhappy to see us get a red for that tackle, and I’m surprised the appeal failed

Hopefully he misses a game v us though.

[CentreLine]

I saw the tackle as a leg breaker at the time and couldn’t understand why the ref didn’t blow up right away. Wasn’t at all surprised when it went to VAR and thought they came to the right conclusion. Shinnie has always been an outrageous thug on the park and I’m glad it’s caught up with him finally. Mind you, the “victim” Baldwin, is no stranger to a robust challenge of his own.

[wookie70]

I've not seen the incident but he is due about 10 red cards for games against us where he persistently made professional fouls throughout teh games. No sympathy whatsoever and about time the clueless refs caught up with him

[ChilliEater]

I'm still in the "not even a free kick" camp on these challenges. Same with the Dundee United and Killie reds against hearts and Porto's at Ibrox. I thought Vassell's one against us should have been yellow because of the height of his foot, and I thought Holt's one against us was a red because I thought he made a second movement to deliberately stamp on Nisbet. I realise others won't agree 🙂.
Going for the ball, winning the ball, but then contacting your opponent due to your momentum is red, but sliding in late and catching your opponent without getting the ball is yellow? Makes no sense to me.

[LaMotta]

I saw the tackle as a leg breaker at the time and couldn’t understand why the ref didn’t blow up right away. Wasn’t at all surprised when it went to VAR and thought they came to the right conclusion. Shinnie has always been an outrageous thug on the park and I’m glad it’s caught up with him finally. Mind you, the “victim” Baldwin, is no stranger to a robust challenge of his own.

:agree:

Really no idea why Aberdeen apealled this or why they have released that daft statement. This wasn't the incident to do that on, as challenges like this have been given as red cards for years.

[Jones28]

Thats a tremendous statement from Aberdeen.

It has a real hun-like sense of entitlement about it.

Someone on twitter (Pie & Bovril?) pointing out that the last 4 challenges of similar nature have been overturned and this one hasn't been, one of those overturned was McCrorie. So in the same breath they're complaining about a system they have benefitted from?

****ing idiots.

[Smartie]

Could you imagine what you'd have said in response if, a few years ago, someone would have suggested that Hibs would have had the Scottish cup recently in the bag and Graeme Shinnie was picking up red cards?

[Northernhibee]

For only an extra two games ban he could have head butted their coach.

[PatHead]

Rule is as follows for serious foul play.

“A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play”

You could probably argue it was more reckless than serious foul play which is defined as “Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned” but I don’t think it was as I think he knew what he was doing. He was always favourite to win the ball and didn’t need to go in the way he did for me.

Thanks for the info regarding the rule. I can't see the bit about "unless you are a Sevco player". Is that just an unwritten rule?

[superfurryhibby]

Clear red, no doubt about it.

[CentreLine]

Clear red, no doubt about it.

And the panel seem to agree with that. But Aberdeen want to keep bringing in panels until they get the result they want, despite admitting the rules say they are not allowed to comment publicly.
I think they have chosen the wrong argument to start a fight with the SFA. I’d expect the club to be hauled up for their statement and to open a can of worms if they pursue it further. Seems to me their argument is so poor, if this one was to go all the way to sport arbitration thingy I’d expect them to be slaughtered for their challenge.

[superfurryhibby]

And the panel seem to agree with that. But Aberdeen want to keep bringing in panels until they get the result they want, despite admitting the rules say they are not allowed to comment publicly.
I think they have chosen the wrong argument to start a fight with the SFA. I’d expect the club to be hauled up for their statement and to open a can of worms if they pursue it further. Seems to me their argument is so poor, if this one was to go all the way to sport arbitration thingy I’d expect them to be slaughtered for their challenge.

There should be access to appeal without a punitive sanction for clubs in our top flight, they can pay costs or something if it fails.

Not sure why the Sheep would be so shocked at it failing, despite their saying they've looked at other appeals. Shinnie's studs are halfway up the guys shin, coming in straight on at him. It was a challenge worthy of a red, by the standards of modern football.

"Former top referee Stuart Dougal told BBC Scotland's The VARdict: "There is enough in that challenge, if the referee has not seen it, to merit getting the referee across to look at it again.

"If I was refereeing that game, that's a red card all day long. For those who don't think it is a red card all day long, they have to move with the times."

[Smartie]

And the panel seem to agree with that. But Aberdeen want to keep bringing in panels until they get the result they want, despite admitting the rules say they are not allowed to comment publicly.
I think they have chosen the wrong argument to start a fight with the SFA. I’d expect the club to be hauled up for their statement and to open a can of worms if they pursue it further. Seems to me their argument is so poor, if this one was to go all the way to sport arbitration thingy I’d expect them to be slaughtered for their challenge.

This weekend would probably be a good weekend to get Aberdeen.

Who have they got? Ah, ok, I get it.

[Billy Whizz]

I remember the league cup tie at ER around 2018/9 or so. Aberdeen won on penalties and I think Shinnie scored the winner
He shouldn’t have been on the park to take that penalty

[Smartie]

I remember the league cup tie at ER around 2018/9 or so. Aberdeen won on penalties and I think Shinnie scored the winner
He shouldn’t have been on the park to take that penalty

His ability to evade clear, obvious and deserved cards in those days was admirable.

[Jones28]

I remember the league cup tie at ER around 2018/9 or so. Aberdeen won on penalties and I think Shinnie scored the winner
He shouldn’t have been on the park to take that penalty

We absolutely battered them. We should have been 4-0 up by the final whistle.

[itslegaltender]

Shinnie used to share the cloak of invisibility with Scott Brown last time he played up here when it came to referees and getting bookings or red cards. Glad to see he has been given a boot in the balls here.

[007]

We absolutely battered them. We should have been 4-0 up by the final whistle.

Is that the one where wee Tommy Agyepong missed his penalty?

[cameronw-hfc]

Genuinely in disbelief people are debating this. Doesn't matter whatsoever if you meant it or won the ball, if your studs are halfway up someone's shin, it's a red. If you lead with studs showing, it's a red.

FYI, I don't think he means it, but that doesn't really matter.

[Lancs Harp]

What waste of time appealling that. It was never going to get overturned.

[Pretty Boy]

It was a red card. An unfortunate one because there was clear intent to play the ball and it was there to be one but ultimately he has made contact with a player half way up the shin with studs and that's always going to be a red card.

The additional game for a frivolous appeal is wrong though. For all I said it was a red I can see why it was appealed in the sense there was no intent and it wasn't intentionally reckless. That might not have merit when all is said and done but I'd argue it's also not frivolous.

[Billy Whizz]

Is that the one where wee Tommy Agyepong missed his penalty?

That’s the one, but Shinnie battered him in front of the dugouts in extra time. Should have been a 2nd yellow for Shinnie

[ekhibee]

He has deliberately made sneaky dirty fouls for years and has known exactly what he was doing. Utterly amazing he got his first red card a couple of weeks ago as he’s got away with murder for years. Going by other red card decisions this year, it’s a red and it may just make other refs think about the way he fouls his way through games.
This. Shinnie has always been a dirty *******, but he always seemed to get off scot free, no sympathy for him at all.

[JimBHibees]

It was a red card. An unfortunate one because there was clear intent to play the ball and it was there to be one but ultimately he has made contact with a player half way up the shin with studs and that's always going to be a red card.

The additional game for a frivolous appeal is wrong though. For all I said it was a red I can see why it was appealed in the sense there was no intent and it wasn't intentionally reckless. That might not have merit when all is said and done but I'd argue it's also not frivolous.

I would say get it up him. Has got away with murder for ages

[JimBHibees]

Shinnie used to share the cloak of invisibility with Scott Brown last time he played up here when it came to referees and getting bookings or red cards. Glad to see he has been given a boot in the balls here.

Agree totally

[Since90+2]

I don't think he's a particularly dirty player but he gets away with about 4 or 5 fouls before he gets booked (and sometimes he doesn't event get booked at all) literally every single game.

[Smartie]

It was a red card. An unfortunate one because there was clear intent to play the ball and it was there to be one but ultimately he has made contact with a player half way up the shin with studs and that's always going to be a red card.

The additional game for a frivolous appeal is wrong though. For all I said it was a red I can see why it was appealed in the sense there was no intent and it wasn't intentionally reckless. That might not have merit when all is said and done but I'd argue it's also not frivolous.

I agree and think the authorities need to be careful with what they hope to achieve when doling out suggestions that behaviours are frivolous.

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

Genuinely blows my mind a bit that some folk seem to think this shouldn’t be a red. As clear a red as you’ll likely see. Totally irrelevant if he went for the ball, won the ball, didn’t mean to hurt the opponent etc. He clattered the boy at force with his studs showing, above his shin.

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

Is that the one where wee Tommy Agyepong missed his penalty?

Yeah and the one when their keeper was about two feet off his line every single penalty [emoji35] was so obvious it was ridiculous yet the ref let him do it every single time. Bogdan was even pointing it out to the ref each time but he just ignored him

[TheHibernator]

PFA have come out and made a statement in support of Aberdeen and Shinnie.

Radio silence when it was Porteous, double standards are shocking.

https://twitter.com/pfascotland/status/1648719713017516034?s=46&t=R5YpuFvTlkpZl9HXTa3UhQ

[Eyrie]

I have no problem with the extra game ban if an appeal is deemed to be pointless as there has to be a deterrent to teams trying to delay a ban to keep a key player available for an important match.

[I'm Spartacus]

Funny as I thought it was a red card for the follow through, but then I also though thought the County player went in equally as hard.

Adding games on for the appeal is an absolute shambles, it's costs money to appeal and that's why the panel are there, so why add on?

Hunbelieveable.

[O'Rourke3]

Funny as I thought it was a red card for the follow through, but then I also though thought the County player went in equally as hard.

Adding games on for the appeal is an absolute shambles, it's costs money to appeal and that's why the panel are there, so why add on?

Hunbelieveable.1000 is nothing in the grand scheme of Premiership budgets where it's worth a press of the gamble button. Therefore a further ban is more of deterrent. Stuart Dougal the retired ref was adamant it was a red according to the rules. This one was never going to be overturned. They wasted everyone's time. Some payback for Shinnie who should have had more bookings and reds in his first stint.

Sent from my SM-G990B using Tapatalk

[Eyrie]

Funny as I thought it was a red card for the follow through, but then I also though thought the County player went in equally as hard.

Adding games on for the appeal is an absolute shambles, it's costs money to appeal and that's why the panel are there, so why add on?

Hunbelieveable.

It's not that long ago that Hearts put in an appeal for the odious Naismith purely to have him available for a derby at the PBS where he then created a goal for them. The appeal couldn't be heard until after the game and was unsurprisingly rejected but Hearts had successfully exploited the appeal system to have a key player play in an important game.

So there is a need to discourage dishonest appeals and charging £1000 isn't a deterrent. Raise it to £10k and the likes of Kilmarnock or Ross County would be priced out whilst the Ugly Sisters still wouldn't notice.

[ChilliEater]

I'm genuinely confused as to the rule. I totally understand the wording of it - if you use excessive force it doesn't matter if you play the ball first - but really can't get my head around the application of it, or how refs, even if they happen to be totally upstanding, fair minded, intelligent and honest indviduals, are meant to interpret it during a game. As far as I can see, pretty much every one of the tackles in this video are now straight reds (33s in, someone against Arsenal, looks a lot like the Porto tackle at Ibrox)?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EokDsVgXCs

[Smartie]

I'm genuinely confused as to the rule. I totally understand the wording of it - if you use excessive force it doesn't matter if you play the ball first - but really can't get my head around the application of it, or how refs, even if they happen to be totally upstanding, fair minded, intelligent and honest indviduals, are meant to interpret it during a game. As far as I can see, pretty much every one of the tackles in this video are now straight reds (33s in, someone against Arsenal, looks a lot like the Porto tackle at Ibrox)?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EokDsVgXCs

It’s one area where I have a bit of sympathy for the refs.

Ok, they now have VAR to “help them out” but the rules seem to suggest that the lines between “not even a foul” and “red card” are more blurred and vague than ever, with more contentious decisions than ever.

[04Sauzee]

Following our request to the Scottish FA for Graeme Shinnie’s appeal to be re-heard by a freshly constituted fast track tribunal, we have been informed that this has been dismissed.
We now have no further recourse, so Graeme will miss the next four Scottish Premiership matches.

We have taken the temperature of several Premiership clubs and will now pro-actively work with clubs and the Scottish FA to bring about sensible and positive governance changes...

for the benefit of Scottish football.

Supporters, the lifeblood of our game, deserve to see a consistency and transparency in decision-making. Aberdeen FC is ready to play its part in a constructive and timely manner

[JimBHibees]

It's not that long ago that Hearts put in an appeal for the odious Naismith purely to have him available for a derby at the PBS where he then created a goal for them. The appeal couldn't be heard until after the game and was unsurprisingly rejected but Hearts had successfully exploited the appeal system to have a key player play in an important game.

So there is a need to discourage dishonest appeals and charging £1000 isn't a deterrent. Raise it to £10k and the likes of Kilmarnock or Ross County would be priced out whilst the Ugly Sisters still wouldn't notice.

Solution to that is make sure there are a set number of days between submitting appeal and next game and making sure s fast track appeal can be decided on prior to next game.

[matty_f]

Following our request to the Scottish FA for Graeme Shinnie’s appeal to be re-heard by a freshly constituted fast track tribunal, we have been informed that this has been dismissed.
We now have no further recourse, so Graeme will miss the next four Scottish Premiership matches.

We have taken the temperature of several Premiership clubs and will now pro-actively work with clubs and the Scottish FA to bring about sensible and positive governance changes...

for the benefit of Scottish football.

Supporters, the lifeblood of our game, deserve to see a consistency and transparency in decision-making. Aberdeen FC is ready to play its part in a constructive and timely manner

They can **** off with acting like the good guys and trying to pretend their being altruistic. They're doing it because they didn't get what they wanted, they’d not give a **** if it was anyone else.

[Since452]

**** Aberdeen. Sheep ****ging weirdos. 6-0.

[hibees 7062]

**** Aberdeen. Sheep ****ging weirdos. 6-0.

I agree ☝️

[007]

Following our request to the Scottish FA for Graeme Shinnie’s appeal to be re-heard by a freshly constituted fast track tribunal, we have been informed that this has been dismissed.
We now have no further recourse, so Graeme will miss the next four Scottish Premiership matches.

We have taken the temperature of several Premiership clubs and will now pro-actively work with clubs and the Scottish FA to bring about sensible and positive governance changes...

for the benefit of Scottish football.

Supporters, the lifeblood of our game, deserve to see a consistency and transparency in decision-making. Aberdeen FC is ready to play its part in a constructive and timely manner

Very Rangers.

Let's get down to business, to become the huns.

[Rumble de Thump]

Aberdeen could employ a coach who doesn't instruct their players to act like a bunch of thugs. Maybe try playing a bit of football sometimes. Their fans would probably enjoy it too.

[ancient hibee]

Following our request to the Scottish FA for Graeme Shinnie’s appeal to be re-heard by a freshly constituted fast track tribunal, we have been informed that this has been dismissed.
We now have no further recourse, so Graeme will miss the next four Scottish Premiership matches.

We have taken the temperature of several Premiership clubs and will now pro-actively work with clubs and the Scottish FA to bring about sensible and positive governance changes...

for the benefit of Scottish football.

Supporters, the lifeblood of our game, deserve to see a consistency and transparency in decision-making. Aberdeen FC is ready to play its part in a constructive and timely manner
Strangely I don’t remember the PFA or Aberden showing us any solidarity/sympathy when Ryan was suspended for an extra week after being sent off against.....lAberdeen. Obviously there’s frivolous and frivolous.

[The Harp Awakes]

Very Rangers.

Let's get down to business, to become the huns.

Indeed. Living up to the name they used to be known by, the huns of the North.