celtic ask the sfa the question.

That back page of the sun is a joke.

George Peat is the biggest hun in the sfa and for that back headline without any quotes from the top people at celtic is a * joke.

I hope Peter Lawwel comes out today and makes a statment about this.

Putting pressure on Dougie Mcdonald your kidding us on george peat, you have your own agenda.

PEOPLE IN HIGH PLACES AT CELTIC NEED TO COME OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT STORY.

Roger Hannah is a not bad jounalist for the sun am suprised he put his name to that story.

Joke of a story with no name from anyone at Celtic but it still makes the back page off our national newspaper.

Hoops in ref storm | The Sun |Home Scotland|Scottish Sport|SPL

 

Let me get this right, at this point we are the only spl team not to have made an official complaint this season???

if thats the case then why are we the ones tagged with the headline in the 'hun'??

It beggars belief!!

 

Heap the pressure on Dallas and his brothers, let them know that we will contest each decision in future, if the SFA don't take action are we not entitle to appeal to UEFA as a member club ?

 

Exactly what I was thinking. I wonder if there's a place that provides a record of all the statements that George Peat released in the days after these other complaints went it. I would be amazed if he hadn't released statements for them all. Otherwise it might show up an agenda...

 

I'm glad Celtic are finally making an issue of this but for me when the scum do this type of thing it works for them but going by this article it could go against us, I don't like what George Peat say:

Indeed, it is understood that another meeting has already been scheduled, but the original leak from the club angered Peat.
"We find it disappointing and somewhat bizarre that, in the build-up to an Old Firm derby, an unnamed Celtic 'source' would seek to exert additional pressure on match officials by issuing ill-timed and fundamentally inaccurate comments," said the SFA president.
"The validity of these comments is questionable in any case, since the 'source' is not courageous enough to put his name to them.

The last thing we need to do when decisions are going against us is anger the SFA and its officials.

 

how can peat claim the comments are "fundamentally inaccurate" when hugh dallas his head of referees has gone on record doing the exact same thing ie voicing concern over the standard of officiating this season?

 

Simply because Peat is a moron. How he got that job is beyond me the guys a C**T!

Good shout by the celtic source to leak this. Although we have been pish this year getting all these decisions against us has been a joke.

 

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CNicola%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> Let’s take the 2 penalties we didn’t get at Ibrox and the fortuné goal at park head for e.g. they have taken 4 points when they should have had none , not to mention we should have all 6 instead of the 1 we got.
That is a 9 point swing straight away which would have had us 2 points ahead going into this game. Would we honestly be bringing the team down as much as we are if that was the scenario we had, I don’t think so
<o> </o>
More to the point though………
<o> </o>
It looks to me that Celtic went to the SFA for assistance without lodging an official complaint, but got know where.

We have to remember that if a club wants to protest a colour of a card being to strong then that would count as a complaint, which is clearly different to what our board are complaining about.

To lodge a complaint to what we are saying is happening is clearly a serious accusation and is something our board don't want to be seen doing, but at the same time don't want to see it continue.

Mr Peat is kidding himself on if he thinks Lawwell didn't have anything to do with the leak. The board are playing hardball and it is about time

I’m sure if Lawwell conversations with the SFA where constructive enough to make the Celtic board feel that there concerns where taken on board the matter would have went no further.
<o> </o>
It is about time IMO. I don’t know how many threads that we have all argued that either it is our own fault we are in the mess or we are blaming the Refs.
<o> </o>
So it is time to start singing from the same hymn sheet and start backing the clubs opinion with this one.
<o> </o>
Just using the 2 games as above shows how different things could have been, imagine if we added all the other points we have dropped along the way with things going against us.
<o> </o>
I’m absolutely delighted, bring it on.

<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --></style>

 

I disagree.

Celtic have tried being reasonable about this in the past and has it improved the situation? No it hasn't. I don't think anybody at Celtic Football Club made a big deal of the fact we were denied a stonewall penalty(possibly 2) at Ibrox in the first Old Firm game. Did that count for anything when it came time to make the decisions about Fortune'e's 'goal' and Lafferty's assault in the next Old Firm game? No it didn't. We got shafted again.

It's about time we did draw attention to it and did speak out as a club about it. If the media or the head honchos at the SFA want to paint us as being paranoid or out of order for suggesting that we've been hard done by then let them. They can get to * as far as I'm concerned. Anyone with eyes and video footage of the last two Old Firm games can see that we have been on the receiving end of atrocious refereeing.

I'm just about at the end of my tether with being shat on by referees when we play the Huns. It's partly our own fault that we're sitting 7 points behind the Huns but the 6 point swing that could have taken place if the referees had done their jobs properly doesn't help things.

 

Like I said I am happy we finally have come out but going by the reaction of the sfa to this I think it could go against us.

 

peat is a * *! what exactly does this idiot do for scottish fitba?

he is a chairmen of a 2nd div team but head of the sfa!! lol how does this go lol.

iv said it once and i will say it again! the sfa should be run by the chairmen of all the top leagues clubs with everything going on a vote. and i do accept that refs * up! but the amount of times they have * up big decisions this season for us and gave them clowns terrible decisions has been a joke of the highest order.

but whats the point in this now? nothing wont change and we just have to go on and try and restore pride this season.

 

<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CUsers%5CNicola%5CAppData%5CLocal%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <wunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <wontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:595.3pt 841.9pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->
Well it is a case of dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. Either way I am glad our club are not sitting back and letting them away with it just like you.

Up until this was brought out, I was expecting a kicking match from Rangers with no cards being shown up until the last 10 minutes. If this still happens then our board are in a stronger bargaining position to prove there point than they would if they said nothing.

This game is being shown on sky sports and I'm sure they will be well aware of what is going on and they will be using this as an advertising campaign to hype the game up and to add to that they would love to have privy to the footage that proves our case.

The SFA I’m sure will be aware of this and as much as they would love to turn a blind eye to it all, they will have no choice but to put pressure on the Ref to make sure he doesn't slip up with any decision for both sides.

Maybe we both want this win so much that we are thinking of worse case scenarios. I just felt that we where not going to get anything in the first place so it can't do any worse by the board letting the public knows they are not happy about it.

 

Good post mate.

 

its all mind games. Hopefully it might put the ref under a bit more pressure to give us something on Sunday :icon_mrgreen:

 

One Rule For Them, One Rule For Us. Part 2


some points

 

We Shouldnt NEED the ref to give us help on Sunday - If our stuttering one step forward 3 steps back team actually got their fingers out their *`s maybe we wouldnt be in this position - We WON 3 titles under strachan and no mention of the ref - Call me a Cynic but 1st you have the board under fire for not investing last january. 2. Empty seats lets buy Keane to fill them. 3 The board have obviously leaked this to wave away the Kack they and Mowbray will get to buy them time if it goes * up on sunday. Liarwell.Reid,Desmond = the SMOKESCREEN amigos

 

BBC Sport - Football - Celtic referees leak is irresponsible, says Kenny Clark

trust kenny clark to get his unwanted opinions in; seems to love getting his two cents worth every time someone has the sheer audacity to question our 100% impartial fair referees!

and correct me if im wrong but was it not the SFA who leaked what was meant to be a private conversation?

 

Clark is a *. Totally inappropriate for him to get up on his soap box about this. He claims we're being irresponsible yet he is wading into a debate about refereeing with a one-sided view. *.

 

Where's part one mate?

 

lol! i know cant find that yet lol ill get it:icon_mrgreen: