Rangers in danger of looking as ridiculous....

[Walterbear 557]

On 16/05/2019 at 12:29, buster. said:

I don't know about another country but it's within the rules that currently exist in Scotland and hence nothing will change regards Flanagan and the 2 game suspension.

 

What is generally recognised by many clubs in Scotland is that the current rules/process isn't fit for purpose and needs to be changed. There seems to be a general beliefthat things will change this summer. It remains to be seen to what and if it works any better.

 

What I think is more significant with this statement is the decision to go after specifics, including pointing to a particular incident/player to highlight an inconsistency that I think we all agree is very much part of the current process and individuals involved.

 

I very much agree with the inconsistency, trial by Sportscene, lack of transparency etc.

What I'm saying is that I think we've picked the wrong example to go public on.

For me, you go for something(s) blatant that was ignored by Sportscene and not even chosen by Claire Whyte to be looked at by the panel of ex-refs and you contrast it with relevant examples of our players being highlighted by Sportscene, cited and suspended.

 

With Simunovic, it seems as though it was a case that was looked at and presented to the panel.

So you are basically pointing at the 3 ex-refs rather than the process as a whole.

 

The other issue for me is if it would have been better to get something out there using another conduit, which is a debate in itself. 

 

Siege mentality is one thing but when the club does act like this, it has to get it right and it has to be part of an ongoing strategy. We'll get a better idea of results when we hear of any changes to the process for next season.

 

 

 

I agree in the main but what is missing from the Simunovic verdict is a clear and rationale explanation and that is worth highlighting. His incident should also be compared to those in the 4Lads article. This is not as you suggest however the example to judge Whyte on as she referred it - unless she referred it with an emphasis on something different. 

[RabiDuck 89]

The Simunovic incident was referred and reviewed and it was determined there was no offence committed against Simunovic so the case dismissed?

[craig 5,195]

6 hours ago, buster. said:

Is it just Keef/sports dept. ?

 

-----------------

 

Latest on Celtic from the DR

 

Celtic FC cleared Boys' Club bosses over 'scurrilous' abuse claims in 1986

 

Victims, families and lawyers call for action after Daily Record reveals statement printed in The Celtic View after a club investigation.

 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/celtic-fc-cleared-boys-club-16158020

 

 

 

That hinders, not helps, Celtic's position.

 

It suggests that even their investigations were mismanaged.

[craig 5,195]

5 hours ago, JohnMc said:

I think the improvement in our midfield is the reason our defence is looking better, but I'll concede you might have a point. Being charitable to Flanagan he needs a run at right back before I can fully right him off as the Scouse Kevin Muscat. 

Being charitable to you I will suggest that it was auto-correct that had you spell "right" instead of "write"  

[buster. 4,808]

1 minute ago, craig said:

That hinders, not helps, Celtic's position.

 

It suggests that even their investigations were mismanaged.

That is why I posted it.

[Doc 280]

11 hours ago, JohnMc said:

Having read the Record's front page and the following double page spread inside I think the writer involved must have missed Peter's call because the article is damning, probably the most damning piece as yet published on this scandal in Scotland so far. 

Agree completely. Hopefully a few more journalists now grow some balls and pursue this to its full conclusion. If the upper echelons at Celtic really did whitewash it in the 1980's and just expected the victims to slink off and live with their shame and hurt, then they really deserve everything that is coming to them.