Celtic Banter Archive January 16 2014

16 Jan 2014 20:59:55
Any news on a new striker and what's the chances of joe signing a new contract?

16 Jan 2014 18:25:28
Omg stv news guys in shock big wide eyes oh no it can't be happening again? Haha 15% pay cuts required to get to the end of season and no £22million share issue this time to bail them out? Now which flavour of jelly to have with my ice cream this time?

Lime. And put a Freddo Frog in that Jelly!

Melb Bhoy

16 Jan 2014 21:22:42
BigP

15% wage cuts at Ibrox, wee Durante said no chance that's 50% ae ma wagies

I'm reading New The Rangers FC had an SPFL condition attached to their membership that they wouldn't have another insolvency event within three years.
Ogilvie and Regan at SFA have egg all over their faces allowing a new club without three years good stable accounts into SFL football. That was a financial governance regulation swept under the carpet. What does the SFA and Uefa say to clubs not honouring players contracts and asking for 15% reductions?
What is the players unions saying?

16 Jan 2014 22:55:54
@(3)
I looks for all they're worth that they are trading while insovent, if this is the case why have the SFA not done more researching, if they can't get to the end of the season how does this impact on the league, do hearts escape relegation, what about the teams they've played in cups and they're final v RRovers, I would love every supporters club in Scotland to nominate a spokesperson for a meeting at Hampden (excluding Rangers)and find out what the general consensus is, or is it us that are obsessed Ths.

I hate dwelling on that lot but this is a major talking point stv kinda skimmed over it commons player of the month got more air time? The usual sfa will try to bend the rules to help them temp league memberships now wage capping(even though only club that effects is Celtic) Charlie chuckle made all these under table agreements and one by one the sevco rangers II break them?

The good thing is that the players are right in rejecting a 15% pay cut mcoist has been on nearly a million quid a year so if I was a player knowing that I would tell them to shove right up there person this stinking poisonous wretched excuse of a tribute act should never have been allowed into the Scottish league again same club pish be interesting if they go into admin again what punishment will be determined first administration or are they oldco 2nd admin

Ayrshire bhoy

The powers that be will be bricking it as they will have to state if this lot are experiencing a first admin or second admin? New club. old club? Haha squeeky bum time folks? Gutted I am on holiday just now baiting the bears would've been hilarious?

17 Jan 2014 12:33:35
If there gony win the league by more than 25 points it's an easy decision for them 2nd admin 25 points deduction and still win league and promotion .
Surely a team in administration shouldn't be allowed to win promotion

When a company goes into admin and is then liquidated it is legally impossible for that company to go into a second admin as it no longer exists. this is another area where the same club thing is untenable and is defining. they are trying to say that they have the same history as the old club, but the old club was deducted 15 points for going into admin. if their argument was correct about the club and company being different, then the club wouldn't have been deducted the points would it? because to get a league title you need points and if they can be deducted from the company then the company holds the points and therefore the title. simple really.

16 Jan 2014 18:14:06
Sevco players refuse a 15 percent pay cut there maybe tuping ahead doo do do do roo


Ayrshire bhoy

16 Jan 2014 16:27:51
Griffiths or watt. Watt for me every time. Bibzy 7

Watt. Has an attitude but nowhere near as bad as Griffiths. He needs to get the head down when he's back fi Belgium, earn himself game time again and do whit he does best - knock them in as a STRIKER, just incase Lenny's reading.

16 Jan 2014 17:24:46
For me just now would have to be grifiths, only reason being they were both playing SPL last season and grifiths was by far the better player scoring 20 odd goals and winning poty (think).
What did watt do apart from goal against Barca.
Not saying watt wouldn't become better if given s regular start as a striker.

If Watt makes a good impression at Lierse in the second half of the season I think he deserves a chance up front for us next season.Don't think he's been given a fair chance there, he was usually brought on out wide. As for Griffiths, don't think he's any better than what we've got at the moment also trouble never seems far away from him.

One played 42 times as first choice striker, one played 28 - most fi the bench and out of position on the wing I might add. Unfair comparison!

Just done a bit of research on both players performances last season. Watt actually made 30 appearances, coming on as a sub 17 times, scoring 5 goals and played 1434 mins. Griffiths made 45 appearances, coming on as a sub once, scoring 27 goals and played 3728 mins - almost double Watt!

Until Watt get's his arse in gear and his head out the clouds he hasn't got a chance of becoming a regular.

16 Jan 2014 15:15:23
Think a little punt for Kenwyne Jones might be in order, recon he could do some damage upfront for the hoops. what's yer thoughts on that Ed?

{Ed007's Note - He's on £40k a week, if we were going to pay any player that there is better than him out there.}

16 Jan 2014 14:16:45
Not celtic related but R.I.P Roger Lloyd Pack (trigger from only fools and horses) sad news

The bar scene where Del falls through the bar hatch is a classic. The only thing funnier I can think of is the rangers going bust!

16 Jan 2014 13:37:12
Has there been any movement on the egytian lad?Also I think its safe tosay we have enough strikersto compete in the SPFL but we do not have good enough for CL. Wee need a player like either big hartson or sutton to partner fridjonsson wee icelander looks dynamite. Commons sitting behind the front 2 wide player at either side of commons, and johansen sitting in DMC position ready to move in to AMC. If we can secure a CD and a ST with presence and power then I would be happy.

16 Jan 2014 00:13:46
Now that it's a FACT that no member of the GB broke seats at Motherwell will the club apologise and let them back in 111?

The club will have to do something as the public relations with the support has been tainted for a while with various public incidents, plus a few other grievances I have read on here.
The attendances are clearly down and January is a long cash-strapped month so they will have to get bums on seats somehow - maybe a big signing? Naaah! That'l be the day.

JJ

If they are not guilty then the club should make a statement but I don't remember them coming out and stating it was just them involved. However the gb has done more damage to our clubs reputation more so then the acts at Motherwell on the big stage. Just because they are not guilty at one scene dosent get them out of jail for many more offenses at other, unless they will cooperate and act accordingly to the rules then nothing will change.

Elaborate on the other offenses. Are you talking about criminal offenses or offenses against humanity sorry I mean offenses against Seep Bladder and his gang of corrupt officials. Sopotcelt.

16 Jan 2014 06:46:02
Motherwell wasn't the only reason celtic took the action. Since they were banned then allowed back after promising not to break the rules, they have come back and broke them. The rules aren't made by celtic they just need to be seen to implement them or the club is punished. If the GB want to go to celtic games it's simple obey the rules set out by the governing bodies (not celtic) If the GB or other fans don't agree to these rules take it up with the relevant people.
At the end of the day shay celtic fan wants to see celtic punished?

It was on the back of what happened at Fir Park that the GB were disbanded, even fellow fans jumped on the bandwagon. Now that it has been proven that the GB had nothing to do with it the club must enter negotiations to reinstate their tickets for 111. Perhaps the board and some of our own fans will learn from this and not be so quick to condemn in future or at least until the facts are known.

The GB problems started well before Motherwell. Yeah its unfair what happened after the Motherwell game, but at the end of the day the seats were ripped up in their section so why did none of the GB do anything about it at the time? I grew up singing the rebel songs etc, it is just part of growing up in the west of Scotland but its high time all the politics and hatred ended at football games. I just don't think there's any need for it in this day and age. Just a personal opinion!

I smell infiltration in the banks I mean ranks. Sopotcelt.

Why should the GB do anything, isn't that what stewards and police are paid for? If the Bhoys had stepped in they would have been accused of bullying other fans and the panty-wetters would have been up in arms that it's not the GB's place to police fans. Haters are going to hate and there is an element within the Celtic support that are quietly delighted by what happened as it gave them a stick to beat the GB with, they don't even need any corroborating evidence.

16 Jan 2014 15:26:11
Che why should the GB get special rights at celtic games?
If a hold up a banner that the rules say are wrong or if a stand up myself at my seat and start singing songs that the rules say are band, I would be punished probably banned . The GB have been warned on more than 1 occasion to stop the rule breaking and they don't, so they got punished but got aloud back in, I wouldn't have been let back in!
They then go on to hold up banners which the rules say are banned twice. So why shouldn't they get banned for this?
Some rules are sh*t but it's not celtic that make the rules.
If the GB don't like the rules they should do something about it without breaking the rules.
Basically people should abide by the rules or face a punishment.
And b4 any1 starts a would f*cking love to go to the game get drunk sing all the songs av sang in the pubs for years and nobody say anything but a realise what happens if a do.

I don't see where I mentioned anything about the GB getting special rights. Because of what happened at Fir Park they were given the ultimatum of relocating or getting a refund, surely now that it has been proven that they played no part in it then they must be allowed to move back to 111? The club's statement at the time said

"Following events on Friday evening at Fir Park Stadium, Celtic Football Club today announced that it has issued precautionary suspensions against 128 individuals preventing them attending matches involving Celtic, pending further investigation, ” it read. "These suspensions will cover matches at Celtic Park and away matches.

"In addition, the club will be relocating around 250 season book holders in Section 111 to other areas within the stadium, or offering refunds covering the remainder of the season to those who do not wish to be relocated."

There is no mention of any incident other than Fir Park, it was solely because of those events that the GB were wrongly disbanded. Out of the 128 people who were not GB members having there season tickets suspended none of those bans are still in place, and out of the 250 GB members none of them were at fault. The club and a lot of supporters have serious egg on their face over this, far too many people were that keen to jump on the bandwagon and every one of them have been proven wrong. You can mention songs or banners, even lateral movement but none of them are mentioned in any correspondence the GB and the club have had regarding the ban from 111.

Lawwell's trying to build his family friendly EPL like football club so they're ready to jump ship if the opportunity of England or a Euro league arises. To do that they need to increase ticket prices so it's only affordable to the upper class citizens, they then go through the Hibernification process of removing any Irish history, then finally remove any supporters with a voice - starting with those who have a political opinion!

Che, totally get what you are saying and I would love to see this situation resolved.

Motherwell aside, the problem a few of the older fans have with the GB is the fact Celtic needs a singing section at all. They hate this reminder of modern football. Its not that they are part of a tut tut mob and I dare say a few them have colourful pasts themselves but if they were ever arrested at the football for being eg. drunk and disorderly – they took it on the chin and didn’t start moaning about PLCs or boycotts.

I know you may think some fans are just saying tut tut for no reason (and maybe some are) but its not the case of a large majority. It just another 'aw does it have to be all about the GB'

Celtic created this and have not dealt with it well at all and I don’t know what’s went on between both parties. Sorry state of affairs.

@cmcbhoy Name me a list of Irish rebel songs that are filled with hatred? Last time I heard the songs sung at football they remembered fallen comrades, or celebrate the land of Ireland? You'll find it's the songs sung in the southside that voice sectarian and bigoted views towards Catholics and republicans.

16 Jan 2014 17:32:26
Che ma point is they could and probably should have been banned b4 the Motherwell game as they kept braking the rules . If it was the average fan anywhere in stadium they wouldn't get a 3rd and 4th chance. So why should they?

Mrs E it was the club and our own supporters jumping the gun that made it all about the GB. It was hardly their fault they were wrongly accused and that the pompous tw*ts within our support couldn't wait to try and twist the knife in, was it?

A bit presumptuous of you there MB, thankfully though the decision isn't up to you. Whether you think they should have banned is immaterial, the GB were not banned they were offered a relocation or a refund which leads to the question, did the club know the Fir Park incidents were nothing to do with the GB? None of the GB were banned were they? So how many chances do the 128 people who were wrongly banned get, they have been banned after all, surely that is a more serious offence than being forced to relocate or take a refund, the 128 who were wrongly banned weren't given that option. The point is that the GB were disbanded because of the actions of others at Fir Park and no matter what people like you want to drag up the facts of the matter are they were not guilty of what the club and panty-wetters accused them of. You said earlier and I quote

"Basically people should abide by the rules or face a punishment."

What rules did the 128 people break to warrant their season ticket being suspended and what rules did the GB break at Fir Park to warrant the break-up of 111, remembering that all official correspondence from the club only mentioned the incidents at Fir Park. What did 378 fans do to warrant any punishment now knowing that the club has backtracked on the 128 people who were banned? Because you think they should be banned anyway doesn't cut it as an acceptable answer.

Hb totally right on that one m8 marty bhoy

16 Jan 2014 18:45:30
Che it's not prucumptious of me to say fans get banned for breaking the rules, if the average fan breaks the rule there lucky to get a 2nd chance never mind a 3rd and a 4th. Now correct me if I'm wrong but the GB have been warned on more than 2 occasions about there breaking of the rules. So I'm simply asking why should anybody who keep breaking the rules GB included not get a ban

But the GB aren't banned, they have been offered a relocation or a refund so that's that blew out the water. What rules did the 128 fans who had their season ticket suspended break? The GB have been made the scapegoat in the whole mess, a mess which was created by the club and self-righteous fans like yourself jumping the gun before there was any evidence. The GB were disbanded after what happened at Fir Park, nothing else, so how can you justify that when the 128 must be guiltier than the GB to have their tickets suspended in the first place?

16 Jan 2014 20:43:21
Who said they wer banned?
They did get banned for a day or 2 however.
And it's not blew out the water it proves the point even more so, a regular fan gets banned if they break rules but the GB haven't been . Therefor they seem to be getting special treatment over a regular fan .
Why won't you answer me Che? Why should the GB not get banned for breaking the rules as they did in a couple of games just b4 the Motherwell game .
Av not mentioned the 128 fans in any of ma posts because av only spoke about the GB breaking rules b4 the Motherwell game, again a simply want to know why u think the GB should avoid punishment for there rule breaking?

16 Jan 2014 20:50:53
Self-righteous and jumping on the band wagon av not once blamed the GB or any1 els for what happened at Motherwell.

Honestly Che a would love the GB to go to games and be able to sing, set off flares and put up whatever banners they wanted. Unfortunately the top brass in FIFA or uefa say otherwise, it's hard enough playing in Scotland against the establishment without falling foul of the rest aswell .

You still haven't explained why YOU said the GB could have and should have been banned? They never broke any rules at Fir Park, and as I have repeatedly said the correspondence from the club offering relocation or a refund stated it was because of the incidents at Fir Park. If FIFA and UEFA say otherwise about flares why do Italian and Turkish even English teams all get away with it? Even in Scotland there are other teams who use pyro and don't get the stick Celtic fans get, what makes it worse is that it is other Celtic fans that are the worst at spewing out their PLC driven dogma. I wonder if your outlook would be different if you had been one of the 128 innocent supporters who were randomly selected to have their season ticket suspended.

16 Jan 2014 21:47:37
Your refusal to answer my question speaks volumes, av not once said they should get banned for what happened at Motherwell . A don't think av mentioned the Motherwell game. My whole point which you are choosing to ignore is "b4" the Motherwell game the GB had been warned on numerous occasions about breaking the rules a regular celtic fan wouldn't get this grace. So again Che why should the GB?
And again If you feel the GB are being victimised by the authorities who make the rules then do something constructive about it, go fight the case am sure thousands would back them believe it or not me included.
Agreed political msgs are in many a ground agreed flares are aswell. But just because I agree doesn't mean al turn up at games with them because unfortunately a no what happens.
Surely the GB know this too

Yeah OK, you never mentioned the Motherwell game. Read back what you have said and note the amount of times you have contradicted yourself.

16 Jan 2014 22:29:40
Think maybe you should read back it says "b4" Motherwell game .
Why won't you answer the question Che . Why would a regular celtic fan get a ban for breaking rules on more than 1 occasion, but yet when the GB do it, it's ok.

You're miles out, WTF are you even talking about? THE GB ARE NOT BANNED! NOBODY IS! Why should people get banned just to keep clowns like you happy with something to moan about? Why should people be banned, relocated or offered a refund if they have done NOTHING WRONG? Why can't you just admit you are wrong and you jumped in without any facts or evidence to back up what you have been saying? Why the f**k am I even having this conversation with you? The majority of fans have now accepted that the GB done nothing at Fir Park to warrant the club's action but you are still trying to justify your own shame of slagging fellow fans off. I don't know what rules you think the GB have broke on more than one occasion but I'd hazard a guess you read it in some PLC's panty-wetter press release. The fact of the matter is that that the GB are under the current embargo simply because of what happened at Fir Park, what don't you understand about that? I have the letters here that say it, you are just imagining things and making it up as you go along. Try and deal with facts, not your opinion, the actual facts surrounding the situation.

17 Jan 2014 10:31:47
Wow! Che where u been if u don't think the GB have broke any rules your credibility has just got up and left you.
It's plain to see your choosing to ignore everything I'm saying because it doesn't suit your argument . quite clearly said the rules they broke were B4 the Motherwell game.
They have broke rules on nervous occasions regular celtic fans don't get this leniency!
Just answer me why??

@HamiltonBhoy, I completely agree, I still listen to them to this day. My issue isn't with the songs, it's with what is allowed in the ground and what's not. It's about what is getting the club into trouble. We have an amazing reputation throughout Europe and like a lot of Celtic fans don't want that tarnished by a select few that think they are bigger than the club. Do whatever you want outside the ground but inside Celtic Park show some respect for the club. There's no place for politics or hatred.

@MonkeyBhoy I completely agree with you as I think most Celtic fans will. It just seems to be the people that have an affiliation with the GB that have a problem. As I've said many times I like what the GB do for the atmosphere but they have to take responsibility for their action but they're not willing to.

17 Jan 2014 12:49:16
Cmcbhoy f*ck a like what the GB do in fact a love it.
And a also agree that what they have done to break the rules shouldn't be classed as breaking the rules but unfortunately a don't make the rules .
Ma point to Che is simple if a break the rules I accept I will get some sort of punishment, as I have in past got 2nd chance and warned about ma behaviour. If a done it again I'd be banned from CP.
So why should the GB get chance after chance after chance after being warned of there rule breaking, when regular fans dnt get the same leniency. Che doesn't want to answer me lol.