Celtic Banter Archive April 29 2015

29 Apr 2015 16:23:19
Playing Devils Advocate here, according to reports Sevco are going to allow their season ticket holders into their home playoff games for free, as their argument is the fans have already paid for these games via their season ticket, this may surprise some on here but I actually agree for this reason only, yes I know Sevco are actually biting back at the SPFL but are spinning it via their pals in the media as "rewarding loyal supporters" but if it was Celtic in this position (yes we would never be in that position, but for sake of the argument) I would expect to get in free as a season ticket holder.

29 Apr 2015 23:37:14
Precedent set last yr when hibs were allowed to do so.
No point in pushing this just because of the club in question.
Only thing I would challenge is the t&cs of the season ticket contracual agreement of rangers, does it cover play offs? Presuming so
Other question is so what, who cares? Not the slightest bit interested in who comes up, no impact on #5 in a row

30 Apr 2015 10:17:27
I agree chances are the sfl will only miss out on the gate recipets for ONE game anyway 😉

29 Apr 2015 07:08:01
I see fifa are looking to up the number ot subs you can use to four, what do you think guy's? I think it's just another example of them pandering to the super rich clubs who would benefit most from the change, what I would do is allow your gk to be changed once during the game without it affecting the amount of outfield subs you can use .

29 Apr 2015 10:58:23
I think it's a good idea why not gives more chances for young players to get some game time!

29 Apr 2015 12:03:31
Sos bhoy we very rarely throw on the young boys when we are coasting just now in games , so I doubt that would change just because we have an extra sub

29 Apr 2015 13:39:51
I would be against that idea. Teams tend to use subs to run the clock down late in games, and an extra sub would just allow for more time wasting.
How about not allowing any substitutions in the last 10 minutes?

29 Apr 2015 14:15:17
So no subs in the last 10 mins of a game when players are most likely to be suffering from fatigue or be exhausted? Did a coconut fall on your head or something?
And yes they don't get much of a chance but an extra sub drastically improves the chances of them getting a game! RD will bring youth through he just had to get the league back under control during a difficult first half of the season!

29 Apr 2015 15:57:54
If players can get to 80 odd minutes in a match, then I don't see how they can't get to 90 minutes. If players are that tired, then you should be substituting them earlier.
When teams make substitutions in injury time, unless the player is injured, it's only done to waste time, because the referee rarely adds the extra time on.
If young up and coming players are good enough, then they should be able to come on earlier in the match. I can't see how putting them on for a minute at the end ofthe match benefits them in any way, they are unlikely to even get a touch of the ball

29 Apr 2015 22:51:44
I agree with Gerryc , there is little reason why super fit professional althletes should not be able to last out the final ten minutes . Amateur GAA players have been tracked running further in 70 mins than professional footballers do in 90 minutes .
Substituting at the end of the game is often for the sole reason of breaking up the rhythm of the game and time wasting . Funny how the player been substituted always seems to be at the far side of the pitch . Maybe the fans who leave early , rant so foolish after all.

29 Apr 2015 23:05:00
Good on FIFA. Great suggestion when they should address the real problem- How money and sky are killing the game.

29 Apr 2015 23:05:47
The ref can add time on at his own digression for subs and the initial comment isn't completely accurate as it's an extra sub in over time so the 80minutes scenario doesn't matter even though your disagreeing with a situation with many variables

30 Apr 2015 22:52:21
If they want to change things,why don't they change the sending off rules,if a player gets sent off ,its like a double punishment,the player gets punished for his misdemeanour and the team gets punished as well,why don't they change it so that you can bring on a substitute to replace the sent of player,so that it still is eleven against eleven,sending offs have ruined so many games.

01 May 2015 01:13:52
Aindoh , the team does deserve to suffer if a player commits a red card offence .
However I think that when a player fouls an opponent with a foul that doesn't deserve a red , but is still a dangerous or personal challenge he should be shown another colour of a card eg. black which would mean that he is sent off and replaced by a sub.

{Ed007's Note - Why a black card?}

01 May 2015 11:50:25
yeah,think that's what I meant,chris,two yellow cards means you get sent off but a sub can replace you,a straight red and you get sent off with no replacement.

01 May 2015 16:36:31
Something maybe as you say Aindoh , as well as two reds making a black, a tackle like Armstrong got a trip as he was running towards goal should merit a black as well.
Black is just a colour I picked to indicate a difference between yellow and red .