Lennon.. 4 match ban!

[hibbysam]

oh how this doesn't surprise me one bit..

it's all just one big conspiracy against Celtic Football Club isn't it?

absolute joke SFA how they can justify reducing his ban after the stuff he has done/said... this same association that gave Derek Adams a 20+ game ban for exactly the same? outrageous!

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

oh how this doesn't surprise me one bit..

it's all just one big conspiracy against Celtic Football Club isn't it?

absolute joke SFA how they can justify reducing his ban after the stuff he has done/said... this same association that gave Derek Adams a 20+ game ban for exactly the same? outrageous!

Will this apply to the CIS Final, an SFL competition?

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Will this apply to the CIS Final, an SFL competition?

Will be 4 spl games i think

[magpie1892]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Will be 4 spl games i think

Yeah, think you're right. Good news, as I am going to the CIS Final, right above the 'technical areas' and it would be fantastic to see Lennon and McCoist make fannies of themselves yet again with some handbags.

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

oh how this doesn't surprise me one bit..

it's all just one big conspiracy against Celtic Football Club isn't it?

absolute joke SFA how they can justify reducing his ban after the stuff he has done/said... this same association that gave Derek Adams a 20+ game ban for exactly the same? outrageous!

Has Adams not had his ban reduced by quite a bit on appeal also?

Genuine question as i thought i remember reading that here and elsewhere.

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Has Adams not had his ban reduced by quite a bit on appeal also?

Genuine question as i thought i remember reading that here and elsewhere.

yes he got it completely overturned but he also had already served half of the ban by that time.. he only couldnt get it overturned at county as they didnt have the money for decent lawyers..

still if your gonna give one a large ban you can't then go and give another a 4 game ban

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

yes he got it completely overturned but he also had already served half of the ban by that time.. he only couldnt get it overturned at county as they didnt have the money for decent lawyers..

still if your gonna give one a large ban you can't then go and give another a 4 game ban

Thought that, was worried i was making stuff up for a minute there.

I agree it seems like double standards. The bans being reduced on appeal is fair enough but the fact they were so far apart in severity originally does seem strange.

[Sir David Gray]

Absolutely unbelievable.

Lennon's behaviour that night at Tynecastle was disgraceful and totally unacceptable and he was fortunate that the original ban was only for six matches.

After his conduct last night, I'm amazed that the SFA has decided to reduce the ban.

I also see in the BBC article that Celtic brought in the lawyers to fight Lennon's case. Why are lawyers brought in to argue a touchline ban?

Surely football issues should be left to football people to sort out.

[steakbake]

Football people know whits goin on...

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Absolutely unbelievable.

Lennon's behaviour that night at Tynecastle was disgraceful and totally unacceptable and he was fortunate that the original ban was only for six matches.

After his conduct last night, I'm amazed that the SFA has decided to reduce the ban.

I also see in the BBC article that Celtic brought in the lawyers to fight Lennon's case. Why are lawyers brought in to argue a touchline ban?

Surely football issues should be left to football people to sort out.

I'm not sure last nights incident could 'officially' be taken into account as it will be treated as an entirely seperate incident. Should he be found to have a case to answer regarding last night then 'previous convictions' will be taken into account and any subsequent ban will be longer (or not, this is one of the OF we are talking about after all).

As for the lawyers, we called the lawyers in to appeal Derek Adams' touchline ban so not sure we are in a position to have a moan about that.

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Will this apply to the CIS Final, an SFL competition?

Just had on SSN that he WILL be banned for the CIS cup final

Personally feel the ban should have been at LEAST 6 games for what he had to say absolutely scandalous for what the whinging ginger has gotten away with this season!

[thekaratekid]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Will this apply to the CIS Final, an SFL competition?

BBC website says so

"The decision means Lennon will be forced to sit in the stand when Celtic play host to Hamilton in the Scottish Premier League on Saturday, at Inverness in the Scottish Cup quarter-final on 13 March, at Celtic Park when Hibs are the SPL visitors three days later, then at Hampden for the Co-operative Insurance Cup final against Rangers on 20 March."

[Future17]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not sure last nights incident could 'officially' be taken into account as it will be treated as an entirely seperate incident. Should he be found to have a case to answer regarding last night then 'previous convictions' will be taken into account and any subsequent ban will be longer (or not, this is one of the OF we are talking about after all).

I think you're right, but apparently no mention of Lennon or McCoist was made in the referee's report.

I could be wrong, but fairly sure I heard this mentioned yesterday.

[Jones28]

After Wednesdays events Celtic should be chucked out of the Scottish and both halves of the Old **** should be booted out the competition next season.
Disgraceful from both of them, 2 cheeks of the same vile, weegie, inbred arse

[Winston Ingram]

This unbelievable. The irony is astonishing. The day after he takes his touchline tantrums to a new level he gets his ban reduced. The SFA are a joke

[Jim44]

Look on the positive side....................... he will have more time on the touchline, giving all and sundry quality cabaret and getting himself into even more trouble.

[Matty_Jack04]

highlights exactly whats wrong with our game, in the middle of discussions on how we should change the game for the better the SFA pull another spectacular howler!

yesterday they announced investigations into the OF game today they let one of the culprits off the hook....shambles.

the ban should have stood at 6 games, and both lennon and mccoist should have been carpeted not only for inappropiate behaviour on the touchline but failure to control players and staff.......but hey its an old firm game thats what happens eh!

didnt hibs n hearts get the riot act after flares and what not the last time at ER dont hibs and hearts fans share the same 'passion' in the derby as the weegie mobs?? or does it only count if its sectarian bile that drives the 'passion'

the SFA and the blazers that are involved are the major problem in our game, compare the SFA with the FA down south, things are never long drawn out down there, if a player or manager acts in an inappropriate manner its dealt with by the tuesday after the game it involved, our mob however..........sham! get them to ****

[marinello59]

I'll go against the flow here. The only correct decision that could be made here, given the flaws in the last hearing, was to reduce the ban.
What happened the other night really doesn't come in to this one. It's more a case of this case affecting the punishment for his latest touchline tantrum. Hopefully he really will get hammered this time with all escape routes sealed.

[Sylar]

Conspiracy indeed - I read the following this morning:

Celtic's opponents have been shown 10 red cards this season - more than any Scottish Premier League club - with all but one coming after manager Neil Lennon's claims of bias against his club in late October.

Martin Bain (as much as I despise him) made the point in his speech yesterday that their cries of indiscipline against them was perhaps starting to pay off for them and looking at the above, they might have a point.

According to the BBC, he faces a further ban following the antics on Wednesday.

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not sure last nights incident could 'officially' be taken into account as it will be treated as an entirely seperate incident. Should he be found to have a case to answer regarding last night then 'previous convictions' will be taken into account and any subsequent ban will be longer (or not, this is one of the OF we are talking about after all).

As for the lawyers, we called the lawyers in to appeal Derek Adams' touchline ban so not sure we are in a position to have a moan about that.

With regards the lawyers, I'm quite sure that all clubs use them in disciplinary hearings (including Hibs) but I just feel that their use is so unnecessary and they should be kept out of these type of things. Players, managers and club officials should be the ones who fight suspensions and touchline bans etc.

As for Lennon's ban, I believe that, technically speaking, you are correct in that the SFA couldn't take his conduct the night before into account when deciding on this case. However, if we're going to bring lawyers into the equation, I'll bring up a legal point;

If you are out on bail for an alleged assault but during this period, you assault someone else, I'm pretty sure that when your trial came up, although it would be a separate incident, you would be handed down a harsher sentence than you would have got had you behaved yourself whilst you were out on bail.

I certainly don't think your sentence would be more lenient, put it that way.

[ancient hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

With regards the lawyers, I'm quite sure that all clubs use them in disciplinary hearings (including Hibs) but I just feel that their use is so unnecessary and they should be kept out of these type of things. Players, managers and club officials should be the ones who fight suspensions and touchline bans etc.

As for Lennon's ban, I believe that, technically speaking, you are correct in that the SFA couldn't take his conduct the night before into account when deciding on this case. However, if we're going to bring lawyers into the equation, I'll bring up a legal point;

If you are out on bail for an alleged assault but during this period, you assault someone else, I'm pretty sure that when your trial came up, although it would be a separate incident, you would be handed down a harsher sentence than you would have got had you behaved yourself whilst you were out on bail.

I certainly don't think your sentence would be more lenient, put it that way.

In respect of the legalities I believe you're wrong.You would have to be found guilty of both offences and then the sentence for the second one might be longer because of the first guilty verdict.This is what'll happen to Lennon.Being on bail has nothing to do with it as anyone on bail is quite rightly considered innocent.

[PatHead]

Being reported Lennon is set for 8 match ban following Wednesday. Likely to be reduced though me thinks

[Iggy Pope]

This thread is full of sanctimonious claptrap I'm afraid.

[Hibeesb0unc3]

think its ridiculous that after wednesday he got have it reduced and not increased. I wouldn't think there would be another hearing as if they wanted to increase his ban based on wednesday they could have easily done so in their meeting on thursday. absolute shambles

[StarMan10]

i like what the SFA have done theyve basically went okay you can have your six match ban reduced to 4.... couple hours later BAM! heres an 8match ban on top

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In respect of the legalities I believe you're wrong.You would have to be found guilty of both offences and then the sentence for the second one might be longer because of the first guilty verdict.This is what'll happen to Lennon.Being on bail has nothing to do with it as anyone on bail is quite rightly considered innocent.

Fair enough.

What about using the analogy of someone who is out on licence and assaults someone whilst they are out then? Surely they would be put straight back in prison and their sentence would be lengthened?

That might be wrong as well as I'm just "thinking out loud" here.

Either way, I hope Lennon gets absolutely hammered this time after his conduct on Wednesday night. A 10 match ban should be about right.

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Fair enough.

What about using the analogy of someone who is out on licence and assaults someone whilst they are out then? Surely they would be put straight back in prison and their sentence would be lengthened?

That might be wrong as well as I'm just "thinking out loud" here.

Either way, I hope Lennon gets absolutely hammered this time after his conduct on Wednesday night. A 10 match ban should be about right.

Calm down, this is fitba, not ''real'' life.
I'll whisper this bit. I would rather he wasn't banned at all from the touchline. We need the pantomime villains spicing our game up. It certainly adds to the entertainment on match days.

[stokesmessiah]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

i like what the SFA have done theyve basically went okay you can have your six match ban reduced to 4.... couple hours later BAM! heres an 8match ban on top

Its not on top though is it??

Is it not an additional 2 matches which doubles because he has been behaving like a ned all season??