Nathan Patterson - to good to bad

Like a lot of people I'm starting to get my international mojo back again. It wasn't just the not qualifying that hurt, but some of the performances in that time, the lack of talent, some pretty horrible managers....its been hellish.
Now I genuinely believe we are on the way up, look at the young players who can't get in the team.....for the first time in a generation we have potential, starting to get excited.

But what if one of those you players breaks the rules? In this case a stupid wee laddie of 19 goes to a house party during a killer pandemic......I can see an argument for him just being young and inexperienced, naïve and easily pressured and therefore not deserving the same punishment as the other players, but being 'to good' to ban because Scotland might need him? That seems to be Gerrard's argument and it doesn't sit well at all.

Football has not covered itself in a lot of glory during the last year, Hearts and their court battles, players flying off to wherever they fancy, fans congregating in their thousands for protests/celebrations! We are very lucky the game wasn't shut down.

For me the bans are essential, it shows society that football takes COVID seriously, it sends a message that the rules apply to everyone. Nathan Patterson may very well be a top prospect and a future superstar but he is not above the law. I doubt it will ruin his career as Gerrard warns but even if it puts him back it is a deserved punishment....he's just lucky it was not a lot, lot worse.

Not too much of a conundrum fir me. I think he is a terrific talent and we could use a right back in our international squad but he has to face a forfeit for his selfish stupidity and serve the full ban.

Classic Sevco. We deserve special treatment because he plays for us and he's dead good. Oh and he's definitely a Scotland star for the future. But no pressure on Clarke.

He's broken the rules so should pay the price. Don't care how old he is, still an adult who should be able to understand what is expected of him. Hopefully this will be a learning experience for him.

I'd have the same opinion if the player who had broken the rules was integral to Hibs (eg Boyle) or Scotland (eg McGinn) - they broke the rules and have to accept the consequences.

As regards the specific example of Paterson, he's a 19 year old who is back up at his club and nowhere near the current Scotland squad so there isn't even a football reason to let him off. His career will continue as if nothing had happened, other than the occasional comment by opposing fans.

Flip side is that The Rangers boss should be saying to him to use this a warning early on his career, that if you step out of line , there are consequences. It is a classic diversion piece to move the responsibility for any impact to the player , away from the player himself.

You cannot have one rule for a good player and another for a average.Ridiculous arguement by brain dead Gerard.If he got a minor njury and was out for 6 weeks would that affect his career??? The Huns need a right back and are playing tge appeal game.So obvious.

Embarrassing stuff from Gerrard. Ability and importance has to bearing on punishment

Do the crime do the time, consequences are not really something Sevco understand and it's no surprise Gerrard thinks the same way.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

Saw this comment last night, absolute nonsense from Gerrard once again.

How are we supposed to hand out punishments based on how good someone is?

"He's old and pish so we'll give him a 6 match ban but he's only 19 and might play for Scotland one day so let's just give him a slap on the wrist."

Wonder if this was Gerrards defence when he beat ***** out of a DJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir David Gray

Saw this comment last night, absolute nonsense from Gerrard once again.

How are we supposed to hand out punishments based on how good someone is?

"He's old and pish so we'll give him a 6 match ban but he's only 19 and might play for Scotland one day so let's just give him a slap on the wrist."

---

I only saw it this morning and it wound me up properly, hence the post - get it out my system :wink:. Footballers are sooooo privileged right now it is unreal! Regular testing, paid well for what they love, getting to go to work, international travel....I could add to the list. But for some that is not enough, to hell with the rules, wanna party too.

It feels like a threat of sorts too.....'ban the lad and Scotland loose a star in a position you really need to fill'. We all want quality players all over the pitch in that famous blue jersey, I want to see us hump Denmark and Austria and coast to the World Cup, I want to see us get past the Group stages at the Euro's and do something special....I want that so much. If quality of player ends up being a thing when it comes to bans though, I have no respect.

Remember Duncan Ferguson? Easily our best player back in the day, got a ban for serious violent conduct and threw his toys out the pram and never played for Scotland again. He could have made a huge difference to that national side back then, I never doubted that the ban however was the right decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Count

You cannot have one rule for a good player and another for a average.Ridiculous arguement by brain dead Gerard.If he got a minor njury and was out for 6 weeks would that affect his career??? The Huns need a right back and are playing tge appeal game.So obvious.

---

:agree: absolute nonsense from the man who looks like he’s having an excruciating tom kite 90% of the time.

Didnt England leave Phil Fodden and another lad (cant remember who) out of a few matches for breaking rules? Or did I dream that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lancs Harp

Didnt England leave Phil Fodden and another lad (cant remember who) out of a few matches for breaking rules? Or did I dream that?

---

Greedwood was the other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lancs Harp

Didnt England leave Phil Fodden and another lad (cant remember who) out of a few matches for breaking rules? Or did I dream that?

---

Yeah but the difference is.this is Scotland and the huns we're talking about. All rational thinking goes out the window there. They broke the rules, they have been punishec, they should serve the punishment. Move on..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWHIBBIES

Wonder if this was Gerrards defence when he beat ***** out of a DJ

---

Pretty much yeah.

He got away with it then so no surprise he’s using the same defence here I guess.

Tavernier still injured?

Seems a mistake to me appealing the ban.
It is a 4 match ban with 2 games suspended.
I presume without the appeal yesterday would have been game 1. Neither was really required but Patterson and Bassey played.
Presume they are going to try to spin this out beyond the Celtic games now or until they get Tavernier back.
Why can't the rich and powerful just accept a decision. First reaction is to reach for their lawyer and start spinning. Poor behaviour.

Entitlement and special pleading; it's The Rangers way. Just wish they would cease to exist.
Can the SFA double the ban for wasting everyone's time?

Looks like he’s a good player, but his brains seem to be in his feet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CMurdoch

Seems a mistake to me appealing the ban.
It is a 4 match ban with 2 games suspended.
I presume without the appeal yesterday would have been game 1. Neither was really required but Patterson and Bassey played.
Presume they are going to try to spin this out beyond the Celtic games now or until they get Tavernier back.
Why can't the rich and powerful just accept a decision. First reaction is to reach for their lawyer and start spinning. Poor behaviour.

---

Exactly. Its a four match ban not 4 years!!!

Don't forget the period between the offence and receiving the ban was at least 4 weeks (can't be bothered looking back for exact time) and just so happened to coincide with Tavernier's injury. SPFL / SFA a complete embarrassment. Bending over backwards for a club barely 9 years old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ancient hibee

Tavernier still injured?

---

Exactly, using the appeal until he’s fit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green.oracle

Exactly. Its a four match ban not 4 years!!!

Don't forget the period between the offence and receiving the ban was at least 4 weeks (can't be bothered looking back for exact time) and just so happened to coincide with Tavernier's injury. SPFL / SFA a complete embarrassment. Bending over backwards for a club barely 9 years old.

---

Seems like the party was in mid Feb with the hearing March 25th or so then Rangers allowed to appeal. Seems a ridiculous length of time to get to a decision. Also seemed convenient decision wasn't initially made until after Rangers won the league. Could also have ramifications for us given I am assuming Queens can play the Rangers loan player tonight who was banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

Seems like the party was in mid Feb with the hearing March 25th or so then Rangers allowed to appeal. Seems a ridiculous length of time to get to a decision. Also seemed convenient decision wasn't initially made until after Rangers won the league. Could also have ramifications for us given I am assuming Queens can play the Rangers loan player tonight who was banned.

---

Yes he'll now be able to play tonight.

For context, two young Sevco players (Jones was one) were punished earlier in the season for Covid breaches and Gerrard didn't complain about the effect on their careers. He was perfectly happy for two players that he didn't want to get punished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

:agree: absolute nonsense from the man who looks like he’s having an excruciating tom kite 90% of the time.

---

Can't agree with that. He 's a classy looking guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MWHIBBIES

Embarrassing stuff from Gerrard. Ability and importance has to bearing on punishment

---

:agree:

Gerrard is a welt.

Given the lack of seriousness/respect that some Rangers players (including their current goalkeeper) have shown when on Scotland duty before, this is an even bigger joke of a comment than on first viewing.

I see Sevco have extended Tavernier's contract until 2024.

Nathan Patterson is growing and growing. It's a shame that he's going to miss games moving forward. Don't think everything has been taken into consideration when you are talking about the boys in terms of age and how damaging it could be for them in their careers moving forward now. You're talking about one of the brightest prospects ever in terms of right-back. This kid is going to go and play for Scotland and all of a sudden Sevco want to bench him for that long. I don't get it.

The little runt should have thought about things a bit better. Might have saved himself from the big ban. Time to grow up and think.

Sent from my LG-H870 using Tapatalk