Jump to content



McCulloch and Simonsen in front of SFA today: Both get 2 match bans

Recommended Posts

The really bad thing about this is that it needs suspensions and injuries to remove these under-performers from the starting line-up. The manager should see that, the coaches should advise him, and the players should accept that they are not good enough anymore as well. We got two decent enough CHs last summer and should have played McGregor and Zaliukas when they were both fit. Dunno whether Mohsni will be back, but if he's about, he'll play no matter what. Outright silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know why people would want us to suffer an injustice that could easily be repeated, just to have a player they don't like become unavailable. Surely that's putting your own agenda before the big picture?


I think McCulloch is innocent of stamping - it's just one of those things in football or any physical contact sport, where you occidentally land on a falling body. Maybe the tackle was a bit off and had other incidents, but that within the realms of the referee and not a retrospective sending off offence for stamping.


As for Simonsen, if he's guilty, I have no sympathy for him. The rules are there for a reason, to keep integrity in the game. If guilty, I don't want him playing for Rangers, and hope they throw the book at him. If players want to gamble, why not go to a nice casino where they can have a much more pleasant time of losing their money? I'm sure membership will be a formality for them.


My differing stances for the cases are based on the crime and the guilt, rather than whether I like the player or not (I don't have much enthusiasm for either).

Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact that we didn't with Black, has essentially set the precedence & we can't sack him.


Alternatively, we could say given the profile of the Black incident and the subsequent warnings all players must have been given but to continue gambling is a worse offence and deserves a harsher punishment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't prove that McCulloch is innocent of stamping calscot and it's also going to be very difficult for the compliance officer to prove he's guilty of it.


I'd imagine plenty of neutral judges would be suspicious of Jig's intent, especially when considering his overall nature and character as a player, but you can't punish someone based on little more than suspicion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.