0
    0

    Comment on One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All by Jingso.Jimsie.

    A little bit of speculation on my part:

     

    TRFC will appeal Kent's notice of Complaint today.

     

    Tomorrow, they will represent their defence at a hearing. The word 'provocation' will be used unsparingly. The Judicial Panel, having read all the Level Sinko froth over the last few days, will refer to the JPP Section 11.4 & particularly 11.4.2.2:

     

    11.4.2.2 The existence of provocation and whether the Party acted in retaliation and/or self defence. 

     

    The Notice of Complaint will be rescinded. Level Sinko will get a bonus. TRFC will rejoice Real football fans will shake their heads, both at the injustice of the findings, but also in embarrassment.

    Jingso.Jimsie Also Commented

    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Bogs Dollox 2nd April 2019 at 17:10

     

     

    Jingso.Jimsie2nd April 2019 at 16:46    

     

    All of that is utterly irrelevant to what we were discussing regarding Brown's unprofessional and unecessarily provocative behaviour.

     

    Why take the ball of the spot? '

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

    I don't know why Brown picked the ball up when the game was effectively stopped. You'd need to ask him that. While you're at it, ask him if it was 'unprofessional' and 'unnecessarily provocative' for him to do so.

     

    However, you clearly stated that Brown picking up the ball prevented the game restarting. I outlined in my reply at 1646hrs that Brown didn't prevent a restart as neither team nor the referee was in position for that event to take place prior to Kent's lash-out under the Laws of the game. You claim that the points I made are irrelevant. I fail to see how they are.

     

    Perhaps it's better if I just leave it there & I'll discuss the matter no further.


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Bogs Dollox 2nd April 2019 at 15:33

     

    In the Kent incident he withholds the ball to prevent the restart of the game…'

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

     

    The game couldn't have restarted immediately before the Kent incident occurred.

     

    Law 8 states the following:

     

    For every kick-off: • all players, except the player taking the kick-off, must be in their own half of the field of play • the opponents of the team taking the kick-off must be at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball until it is in play • the ball must be stationary on the centre mark • the referee gives a signal • the ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves.

     

    Neither the referee, TRFC players or their opponents were in position for the kick-off. I accept that Brown lifted the ball from the centre-mark, but the ball wasn't 'live'. The referee hadn't blown his whistle. The referee (apparently) wasn't  even looking in the vicinity of the centre-spot or he'd have seen what transpired. Brown clearly doesn't prevent the game restarting at that moment because nobody except Kent was ready for the kick-off. Bain & Brown were (I think) the only two CFC players in their own half.

     

     


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Big Pink 1st April 2019 at 11:29

     

    I think Bobby Madden had a fairly good game yesterday. Lots for him to do. He missed what I thought was a clear penalty to Rangers and the now-infamous left hook from Kent, but overall I though he was professional and honest…'

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

     

    I won’t mention any specific incidents, but I think that Mr. Madden had a 4/10 performance at best yesterday. That's simply not good enough for a FIFA referee in the highest-profile domestic fixture in Scotland.

     

     


    Recent Comments by Jingso.Jimsie

    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Why attack HMRC at this juncture? 

    You don't do that if you're on good terms with them, do you?

    Even if you were on good terms, you've opened yourself up to a potential world of hurt in the future. 

    Possibly a Ratner's moment by Level Sinko/RIFC/TRFC.

     


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    As we're swopping quotes attributed to Churchill, I'll contribute my favourite:

    'An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last.'

    I think we know who is doing the appeasing, but is there such a thing in nature as a blue crocodile?

     


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    'Timtim 13th November 2019 at 22:20

    https://twitter.com/magnusllewellin/status/1194728372020101122

    Working on a significant story involving Rangers

    @RangersFC

    and the taxman. See Thursday's

    @thetimesscot…'

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

    I'm rather amused to see who was the first to reply to Mr. Llewellin's Tweet – it was our 'old friend' Ernest Becker, the 'Denial Of Death' chap.

     


    Celtic’s Questions to Answer
    Why has JohnJames used the EPL/FA criteria for his GBE complaint about Alfredo Morelos? 

    The SFA Handbook for the relevant year* contains the (identical, I think) qualifying information and is available on line. 

    Incidentally, it's widely recorded that Morelos signed for TRFC on 19.06.17, not 01.07.17, as reported by JohnJames. 

    *The SFA Handbook year runs from July to June.   

     


    In Whose Interests
    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!'