0
    0

    Comment on In Whose Interests by Jingso.Jimsie.

    Watching the game from Ibrox last night on BT Sport, I was rather astonished to hear Rob McLean state that a certain player had added a couple of zeros to his potential transfer fee with his performance.

    As I thought that the player in question was already valued at £25m (according to the media), that would make his potential transfer fee £2500,000,000, or a quarter of a billion pounds! That would certainly sort out the cash crisis in Govan & be one in the eye for CFC! 

    (BTW, I note the same KK* 'couple of zeros' comment is in one of the Record's articles this morning. Shirley knot a Level Sinko briefing point?)

    *A favourite abbreviation of my teachers in the early 1970s when marking my work – 'Kanny Koont!'

    Jingso.Jimsie Also Commented

    In Whose Interests
    'easyJambo 5th November 2019 at 11:35

    How other sports deal with financial doping.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/50300756'

    #####################################

    I've just had a look at today's Guardian Online where there's an article by Robert Kitson, the paper's rugby correspondent:

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/nov/05/saracens-salary-cap-breach-asterisk-great-rugby-club

    In the article, he writes that: 'It is a significant story, if not a massive surprise. For months it has been an open secret that some jealous individuals within Premiership Rugby had plans for Wray.' 

    That's a nasty piece of 'succulent lamb-ism' in my book.

    Kitson implies that certain individuals brought the matter to the attention of the authorities, not because of altruism or a desire for sporting integrity, or for a fair & equitable application of the rules, but because of simple jealousy of Saracens' (or Wray's) achievements. A fine piece of deflection, indeed.

    I'd have expected pash like that from lazy, frightened Scottish journalists, but from the Guardian?


    In Whose Interests
    StevieBC 5th November 2019 at 12:33

    And yet again, since the release of RIFC financials 4 days ago, and the questions / risks they pose to Scottish football…

    there's not a peep from either Maxwell or Doncaster.

    No leadership.

    No concern.

    #######################################

    You know how these things work by now.

    There'll have been a convivial, off-the-record conversation involving representatives of RIFC/TRFC & Maxwell & Doncaster on Sunday at Hampden.

    Assurances will have been sought & received by both sides.

    Positions of plausible deniability will have been established.

    So it continues…


    In Whose Interests
    easyJambo 4th November 2019 at 14:40

    It was a horrible injury suffered by Gomes, but a ridiculous decision to send Son off.

    The ref correctly decided the foul was was worthy of a yellow card, but once he saw the injury he changed it to red. The VAR official appears to have backed up the decision by saying something along the lines that the challenge endangered the safety of an opponent.

    That is nonsense. If that was the case, then every foul that results in a player being injured and having to be substituted should also be a red card offence.

    ###################################

    A few points about the Gomes incident:

    Firstly, Son had already attempted to professionally foul Iwobe, intending to bring him down (he missed), before Iwobe passed the ball to Gomes. Son kept running & had a swipe at him, fouling him. Son had run approx. 40m & attempted to foul two players, succeeding once. It wasn't a heavy contact & the consequences could not have been foreseen. IFAB Law 12 indicates that 'excessive force' is required to 'endanger the safety of an opponent', which is a red card offence. If Son was 'reckless & acted with disregard to the danger to, and consequences for, an opponent', as per Law 12, then that's a caution.

    Secondly, I think the actions of Aurier in this sequence of play require further technical analysis. Had Son missed again, I think he was going to take out Gomes. From photographs, he makes contact with the sole of his boot on Gomes’ right ankle (Gomes is, by this time, already falling due to the contact from Son).

    Thirdly, the referee's apparent lack of response to the injury which occurred very close to him should be questioned. He has a duty of care to the players, yet seemed to display none.

    Fourthly, the reported statement by the EPL (which I can't find on premierleague.com) is confusing & confused. They may as well have issued the following: 'Look, a guy got a broken leg. That's got to be a sending-off, hasn't it?'

    Fifthly, I hope THFC appeal the red card. It was a knee-jerk response by panicked officials. 

    BTW, does anyone know when Sky's coverage of the (non-contact) Netball Super League commences? 


    Recent Comments by Jingso.Jimsie

    Tangled Up In Blue by Stephen O’Donnell (Book Review)
    https://twitter.com/herron_media?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

     

    Lindsay Herron appears to be the 'unnamed freelancer' behind the third charge story…

    …an' him a guid Ibrox man, an' aw'.

     


    Tangled Up In Blue by Stephen O’Donnell (Book Review)
    I can't find a UEFA link to officials appointed to the Europa League Qualifying Rounds, but 

    http://law5-theref.blogspot.com/

    lists all officials by round/date of game. They're in the 2019 archive panel on the right-hand side.

    There is no Scottish official listed for TRFC v. Midtylland at Ibrox on 15.08.19, so it's Trumpian fake news. 

     


    Tangled Up In Blue by Stephen O’Donnell (Book Review)
    'bordersdon 29th August 2019 at 14:40

    Excuse my ignorance but is it the referee observer who would site clubs for such things or some other official?'

    #########################

    It is the 'Match Delegate', not the 'Referee Observer', who is responsible.

    https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/02/52/80/38/2528038_DOWNLOAD.pdf

    From page 37:

    Article 63

    Match delegates:

    a. act as UEFA’s official representative at a UEFA match;

    b. chair the organisational meeting prior to the match;

    c. are responsible for ensuring the orderly organisation of the match and that the competition regulations, and especially the rules for order and security inside and outside the stadium before, during and after the match, are observed;

    d. submit a match preparation report to the UEFA administration when requested to do so by the latter;

    e. submit detailed reports to the UEFA administration immediately after each match;

    f. if requested to do so by the UEFA administration, conduct a pre-tournament site visit to assess the facilities and level of organisation of the tournament in question;

    g. attend specific training seminars organised by the UEFA administration.

     

    Referee observers are covered in Article 64, if anyone is interested.


    Tangled Up In Blue by Stephen O’Donnell (Book Review)
    'valentinesclown 29th August 2019 at 08:23

    L Wasaw v Ibrox club on 22 Aug in Poland, 29 Aug statement from Ibrox club saying second charge from EUFA fo racism (notified within 7 days of match).

    18 July Ibrox club v St Josephs, we get informed of EUFA charge on 23 Aug (gap of 36 days). On 11 Aug Ibrox club launch Anyone Everyone campaign…' 

    #############################

    (Apologies in advance for the 'I suspect…', the 'Is it possible…' & the 'I think…' that follow… )

    I suspect that UEFA were quick to advise TRFC of the charge relating to the 22.08.19 game as it was a second offence (with added penalties) & therefore not a 'one-off'. Gerrard ‘sort of’ gave the game away at his presser on the 23.08.19 with his comments re ‘ground closures’ etc..

    I also suspect that TRFC were given time to put their house in order (Everyone Anyone campaign launch?) regarding the charge of 18.07.19. The punishment for that charge was announced on 23.08.19 after the 'racist singing/chanting' in Warsaw.

    Is it possible that UEFA were going to apply a suspended punishment for 18.07.19 if TRFC did not re-offend this season?

    BTW, I think that there will be some sort of serious loss of 'dignity' at Ibrox tonight. Whether that's via banners castigating UEFA, anti-UEFA or racist singing/chanting or something else, the fans' overweening sense of 'entitlement' will ensure that it's a bad night (whatever the result, because the football may not really matter in the end) for TRFC.


    Tangled Up In Blue by Stephen O’Donnell (Book Review)
    'upthehoops 27th August 2019 at 18:30

    If anyone is telling the SFA to keep quiet it will be Rangers in my view. The cultural power that club holds in Scotland is immense.' 

    ##############################

    Unless there's been a sea-change at TRFC, they wouldn't want the SFA to be silent.

    They'd want a supportive statement about how 'unfair' or 'disproportionate' (wasn't that word used by the Union Bears?) the punishment was for a club that was attempting to drive change via their recently-announced 'Everyone Anyone' inclusivity initiatives etc. etc..

    They'd want the SFA to stand with them. They haven't. I wonder why? Perhaps the SFA is ‘mair feart’ of UEFA than they are of TRFC?