calscot

Still can't believe MW is boasting about 2nd place when in reality he had us in 3rd once teams played their games in hand. It also ignored that Aberdeen had played Celtic once more than us. It's an obvious indication that he could never see things as they were if they were unflattering for him. You cannot fix what you don't acknowledge - and that is reflective of our play under him.

I prefer to compare like with like ie last 7 games for everyone - which I assume would put Celtic top on goal difference. However, it does mean we have the same points despite a couple of disastrous games.

Ah, still deletes when you edit a post on your phone.

This seems like a guy at a nightclub who sees a plain girl who seems to like him, but he speaks all night drinking and chatting up all the lookers, getting knocked back all the way. Then at the end of the night he's pished and desperate and so goes for the slow dance with the plain one. Trouble is she saw what he was doing and so either knocks him back too, or really makes him work for it...

If the songs are that sincere and relevant, then we are truly bigots and therefore deservedly despised for it. To be honest I find a lot of the anti-Scottish stuff on here quite unlikeable, and so I shouldn't be surprised that many Scots don't like the club. Many Rangers fans now seem to be as hateful of our own country as the Tims are.

Why do they say 50/50 when really it was pretty much 100/0?

Trouble is, most people just don't get that quote, and take it far too literally - usually as just an excuse to rubbish statistics they don't like, or to cover up their lack of understanding of them. Here's a couple a statistic for you: Goals scored - Aberdeen 1 Rangers 2. Now I take it you don't believe me...?

Everyone into football love stats no matter what they say - 54 titles, number of points, goals etc. What everyone does to judge players is to subjectively judge how often they did something good and when they did something bad. If you say a player had more bad games than good, it's a type of stats. What people like is stats that agree with their subjective viewpoint, when they say they don't like them, it's when objective stats disagree with that. However, what a lot of people don't like is poor presentation of stats and poor interpretation. They always only give a part of the picture, but quantitatively they are far more accurate than just remembering stuff you noticed. To be honest, I doubt you can actually be any good at any sport these days, without having a great interest and understanding of stats.

I presume we get the same minus their costs...?

I agree, but I think that pro-union is distinct from unionist. For example, how many of the people who voted no, regularly sing unionist songs? (not that that is necessary but it's the type of behaviour we're talking about here.)

I think a lot of the support or acceptance of McInnes as manager seems to depend on their consideration of who is "realistic". If we all thought that some of the names that have more exotic CVs than McInnes were impossible, then we'd probably all agree or it would be about him and one or two others similar in stature. Maybe I was a tad optimistic in landing a de Boer or Laudrup.

How many members of the Scottish Unionist Party do you know? I think voting to stay can be distinct from being an active unionist, just like deciding to not get divorced for the sake of the kids, doesn't mean you love your spouse. But I think you're arguing that a lot of the political and religious stuff our fans sing, isn't actually real.

I think that's more about saying who they are than representing the club. So do you think King and Caixinha would have done the same and if not, has the club moved on and that's all in the past? While that is correct, does the "sash bash" part not suggest there is some kind of strong connection somewhere? I would also say singing loyalist or unionist songs doesn't necessarily mean you're a supporter of the union or the royal family. Just as identifying as a "proddy", doesn't mean you believe in a certain god, are an active member of a protestant church, or even know much about it. As has been said to defend it, "it's just a bit of rivalry banter"...

That is obviously 100% incorrect. He did not lead with a straight leg, he kicked the ball (which is very difficult with a straight leg) and not surprisingly his leg straightened in the follow through. You don't need to know anything about refereeing to see he's making it up. It just makes you think that they have no savvy at all. It needs a far better explanation as a red card than that. If that's what referees are thinking, what about Cordoso's broken nose? What about Brown's flick in the face, etc, etc, etc?

Did they do this as a personal thing or did they represent the club? Have all our chairmen and managers held this view? Even when people refer to a "sash bash" etc? I really don't get how they cannot be linked at least a bit.

I also wouldn't be screaming for red if it was against us - I might be blue tinted but try hard to remain objective in this kind of thing. Can't see many "screaming" for red cards for two worse tackles where they didn't get the ball, even though they might be deserved, although possibly could be yellow. When someone cleanly gets the ball, you have to look for a second kick (or elbow etc) for a red IMHO. Even if you think it's a sneaky bastard one, I think it's incredibly hard to prove it's in any way malicious when a guy has kicked the ball and then got the player in one movement.

Hey it's cool as you got a frame I missed. I seem to have to use the mouse with Youtube and so it's hard to get it right. It used to be that the left and right arrow keys would move it one frame.

I think the point is that while we have good enough players to finish above Aberdeen, for one and a half seasons we were below - which should have been partly to his credit. That he is well beaten twice and overtaken into second, by an under 20 coach who still can't imbue the same players with any level of consistency, is not a good endorsement of his ability to punch a wee bit above his weight, which is what we need.

Because I think it should be rescinded, I think we have to appeal. If we win then it shows 3 rescinded red cards out of four which if nothing else will surely make refs think a bit longer before handing out another. I don't want it to change a sending off if it's due, it's just the number of erroneous ones is surely a bit worrying. As others have shown, there are far worse where the player didn't get the ball that were unpunished. Here it's all about proving intent which without a lie detector I would say should go to the benefit of the doubt. When you miss the ball and get the man, then you had no business being so reckless, whether intended or not. Much easier to prove.

Late tackle by Aberdeen player.

I have to ask you, after you have followed through on a pass, what do you have left with a straight leg apart from momentum? This is not a two part move like the kick in the face from Brown. Even if it is in any way deliberate, he still only used his momentum. If it wasn't momentum, just what was it? Genuine question. Maybe you need to watch it again. His follow through is not excessive - 45 degrees max with a straight leg, his natural move is to plant his kicking foot to keep upright but found an ankle and he can't help putting is weight on it due to the natural stride. The ankle bends and gets caught together with the foot for a bit which makes it look like an unnaturally long time at first glance.

How can passing the ball be reckless? When the ball is there to be played, you don't look all around and take a moment to see if playing it will injure someone coming in late to tackle. People went on about removing the tackle from behind emasculated the game, but this is ridiculous. And I must be in a minority that would absolutely not want Scott Brown to be sent off for that. I wish he were that fair. To me there is a case for a free kick for us given for a late tackle - that the tackler got hurt more as his ankle hit the studs of Jack, makes no difference, he was late, didn't get the ball and got the man. When I played I would never ever pull out of a what 80/20 ball where I could get a full connection of the ball like that or even a 50/50 - and I would never foul anyone deliberately either, nor pull a shirt, dive etc and all that stuff of cheating wankers. I always played by the rules - hard but fair. And I think that's how Jack played it here.

I remember one season we had a thread on here about refereeing injustices for the OF teams on here, where we tried to be as objective that is possible for a fan. We were totting them up and ours seemed to be far more than theirs. As it turned out later, that was the season of the referee strike...

You really have to wonder why SPL clubs and fans have been up Celtic's arse for so long...

I think if we appoint McInnes, the biggest question will be, why did it take so long? It will be so disappointing now, whereas an immediate appointment would have just been seen as an inevitable, quick decision, and been accepted.