Walterbear 557 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 50 minutes ago, ian1964 said: Oct. 11, 2018 David Edgar The SFA and Paul Gascoigne Don't normally write on the site as you know but I am so utterly, so completely disgusted with the SFA I had to get it out. What they have done in revoking his nomination is an unnecessary and cruel public humiliation of a man with both mental and addiction problems. While laughably claiming to support #MentalHealthWeek they have gone out of their way to butcher someone who is absolutely not in a strong enough place to deal with it. This shameful act has been done purely because Paul Gascoigne is English and played for Rangers. Nothing else. And the bigotry of those behind this campaign to rescind the nomination should have been called out for what it was. Instead it was indulged by weak, hypocritical and craven individuals who could not be any lower if they were underground. They have disgraced their office, not that they will care. Their actions lack not so much class as basic human decency. They should be ashamed and castigated as the malevolent, evil bastards they are. Disgustedly, David (@ibroxrocks) https://heartandhand.co.uk/blogs/writing/the-sfa-and-paul-gascoigne They can revoke it but they shouldn’t include health (and in this case it is clearly mental) as the reason. And if they use other rationale such as wife beating or criminal imvestigation or racism then they need to state that. They then need to explain why they employ a racist and why a convicted racist is paid money for footballing services to them. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSocksRedTops 3,476 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) I'm not sure if Paul was a valid nomination considering he only played just over 70 games in Scotland but the way that this has been handled is shocking. Edited October 11, 2018 by BlackSocksRedTops 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSocksRedTops 3,476 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 Sorry to dwell on the details but they mention racist and sectarian controversies in the press articles. I remember the flute playing thing (which seemed more naive than anything) but what else are they referring to? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) 38 minutes ago, BlackSocksRedTops said: I'm not sure if Paul was a valid nomination considering he only played just over 70 games in Scotland but the way that this has been handled is shocking. What then is a "valid" nomination? Like anyone else inducted into the HoF, Gascoigne was nominated by public vote. Are you invalidating those votes? Perhaps because they didn't reflect your own choices? It's amazing how many times the outcome of free public votes is overturned, disregarded or simply ignored. Gascoigne may or may not have been deserving of this so-called honour but to claim he wasn't a "valid" nomination has to be the most stupid and arrogant tosh I've seen in a while. Edited October 11, 2018 by Bill 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walterbear 557 Posted October 11, 2018 Share Posted October 11, 2018 He asked a black guy at a gig to smile so he could see him. Now in my mind that 100% depends on how it was said as to whether it was racist. Black people are comfortable with being black and being referred to as black. If it was meant to demean the guy then it’s racist for sure and should be condemned. If racism is the reason for the action they should clearly state it and we would all understand but then they have to also justify why they payed Griffiths (convicted racist) and McKay. In fact they would have employed Griffiths tonight if he hadn’t told them to feck off. Noone can have any dispute if HOF nominations are subject to moral considerations and if they then reject gazza on that basis but the SFA have to do it in a consistent way with reference to organisational values and codes of conduct. They can’t just make it up as they are going along and issue vague statements which kick a mentally ill guy when he’s down. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Briton 314 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 Shouldn't be in Rangers HoF, let alone Scotland's. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 1 hour ago, Briton said: Shouldn't be in Rangers HoF, let alone Scotland's. Can't agree with the former but do with the latter,.......... but that isn't really the issue at play here anymore. This is now about how and why the nomination was withdrawn. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JohnMc 2,473 Posted October 12, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted October 12, 2018 Are any of us actually surprised at the craven behaviour associated with this? I mean the SFA are involved so don't expect leadership for a start. As a few have mentioned I was also surprised at Gascoigne's nomination. For me whilst hugely enjoyable his time at Rangers wasn't long enough to warrant inclusion in the Rangers Hall of Fame far less the Scotland one. But Gascoigne had, and still has, such a high profile that his 'fame' transcends normal standards. Perhaps, for that alone, he should be nominated. However, this withdrawal is disgraceful. Had any of his 'issues' happened since the nomination then perhaps a case could be made, but as all the incidents happened long before there is no excuse. Scottish football sickens me. As an aside, if short periods at Rangers are enough I think we should consider a campaign to get Mark Walters inducted. I'm sure the Celtic-minded on the board and in the media would welcome the opportunity to apologise publicly for the genuine racism he received and the sickening scenes we all witnessed. 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSocksRedTops 3,476 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 9 hours ago, Bill said: What then is a "valid" nomination? Like anyone else inducted into the HoF, Gascoigne was nominated by public vote. Are you invalidating those votes? Perhaps because they didn't reflect your own choices? It's amazing how many times the outcome of free public votes is overturned, disregarded or simply ignored. Gascoigne may or may not have been deserving of this so-called honour but to claim he wasn't a "valid" nomination has to be the most stupid and arrogant tosh I've seen in a while. I'm not invalidating votes. I'm just not sure of the voting process tbh. Are the names put forward by the SFA and then the public vote on them? Or do you the public just vote from the outset? If it is the latter then surely the nominations could be influenced by larger fan numbers? Rangers and Celtic have thousands more fans than every other team in Scotland so surely it would be easy to mobilise fans online and vote/nominate any player? If it is the former option and the players were put forward by the SFA, then I stand by original point about 70 games not being enough to get you in the HOF. And finally...can you please complete a post without labelling other people or their views as stupid? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
compo 6,137 Posted October 12, 2018 Share Posted October 12, 2018 I think this award is recommended by a panel of sports writer's and then discussed and decided upon by the big wigs according to some reports one of the council members had a tantrum and said he would boycott the ceremony I say let us know this member and his reason . Another report says it due to Paul's health witch I take to be mental health in my opinion it's a kick in the balls to those who suffer this disease it would have been a tremendous lift to charities who help these people . 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.