Fred_Zeppelin Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 As pointed out, they'll appeal because there's absolutely nothing to lose. They have their good name to lose, by backing a clear racist. Which is why I don't think it's clear. Liverpool backed Suarez because of the value of him to the club, not only as a player but also as an asset, Tonev is a loan player who can't get a regular start, it would be much simpler to send him on his way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulS2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 What exactly did he say does anyone know? As said it must be pretty conclusive to get a ban this long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty CTA Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 As pointed out, they'll appeal because there's absolutely nothing to lose. There should be a consequence of some sort or folk will appeal everything regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 They have their good name to lose, by backing a clear racist. Which is why I don't think it's clear. Liverpool backed Suarez because of the value of him to the club, not only as a player but also as an asset, Tonev is a loan player who can't get a regular start, it would be much simpler to send him on his way. It's also pretty impossible to believe that a panel listened to the evidence for 5 hours and then found him guilty of a serious charge if the evidence was anything less than conclusive. If it was just one player's word against another he would never have been found guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langtonian Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 clubs and players appeal red cards when its blatantly obvious they are guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 They have their good name to lose, by backing a clear racist. Which is why I don't think it's clear. Liverpool backed Suarez because of the value of him to the club, not only as a player but also as an asset, Tonev is a loan player who can't get a regular start, it would be much simpler to send him on his way. I agree with you on this. On the face of it Celtic have nothing to gain here, the guy turned up injured, has hardly played and as far as I'm aware has hardly set the heather alight when he has. It could be argued they have nothing to lose either, the cost of an appeal will be a fraction of his weekly wage, unlike for other clubs, where it is about a weeks wage. We also know Celtic have a reputation for appealing everything.... The only potential loss would be damage to the clubs reputation if there was some "smoking gun" type evidence, which I think we can assume they know doesn't exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 There should be a consequence of some sort or folk will appeal everything regardless. The cost of an appeal is prohibitive to most clubs, I'm sure I've heard a figure of £1200-1500 quoted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 It's also pretty impossible to believe that a panel listened to the evidence for 5 hours and then found him guilty of a serious charge if the evidence was anything less than conclusive. If it was just one player's word against another he would never have been found guilty. This is the same panel that passed a not proven verdict on Kris Boyd when what he did was live on TV for all to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 The only potential loss would be damage to the clubs reputation if there was some "smoking gun" type evidence, which I think we can assume they know doesn't exist. You're assuming that a football club...any club...has any morals at all. Celtic could be appealing for many different reasons....to curry favour with fans, to satisfy a victim complex, or simply because they know they have absolutely nothing to lose, so why not do it ? I find it disappointing that some people are sticking up for a player who's been found guilty by a panel of neutrals that have looked at all the evidence, and then decided that this evidence was indeed a 'smoking gun'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Anyone mentioned vigils yet ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I find it disappointing that some people are sticking up for a player who's been found guilty by a panel of neutrals that have looked at all the evidence, and then decided that this evidence was indeed a 'smoking gun'. I'm not sticking up for him at all. If he did racially abuse shay Logan, he should be punted by Celtic and consider himself lucky he only got a 7 game ban from Scottish football. I'm just agreeing with EK celts point that if there was clear evidence, celtic would be daft to appeal, as it could damage their reputation when the truth came out. It's not to say he didn't do it, they just suspect it's not clear cut. (Ie a video of him saying it, or the word of an official or a team mate..) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debian Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I'm sure Lambert said they couldn't send him back. He is here for the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 You're assuming that a football club...any club...has any morals at all. Celtic could be appealing for many different reasons....to curry favour with fans, to satisfy a victim complex, or simply because they know they have absolutely nothing to lose, so why not do it ? I find it disappointing that some people are sticking up for a player who's been found guilty by a panel of neutrals that have looked at all the evidence, and then decided that this evidence was indeed a 'smoking gun'. Poor attempt at smear, Rossy. No-one is sticking up for a racist, I'm questioning an SFA decision just like you and everyone else on the TAMB has at some point or another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Anyone mentioned vigils yet ? Aye, what must he make of all this?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Poor attempt at smear, Rossy. No-one is sticking up for a racist, I'm questioning an SFA decision just like you and everyone else on the TAMB has at some point or another. Semantics. If he played for any other team you would accept that he's been found guilty. But because he plays for Celtic you've already incorrectly questioned the evidence, and refuse to believe he's guilty simply because Celtic have appealed it, as they have nothing at all to lose. Aberdeen FC have supported Shay Logan, and the panel looked at the evidence and found Tonev guilty. Are you actually saying that they're all liars and the only one telling the truth is Tonev ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Semantics. If he played for any other team you would accept that he's been found guilty. But because he plays for Celtic you've already incorrectly questioned the evidence, and refuse to believe he's guilty simply because Celtic have appealed it, as they have nothing at all to lose. Aberdeen FC have supported Shay Logan, and the panel looked at the evidence and found Tonev guilty. Are you actually saying that they're all liars and the only one telling the truth is Tonev ?? And you're not taking the Aberdeen player's side because you're an Aberdeen supporter? If I was a clever kvnt I'd have a latin phrase at hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 And you're not taking the Aberdeen player's side because you're an Aberdeen supporter? If I was a clever kvnt I'd have a latin phrase at hand. No, I honestly don't care one way or another...none of us had any opinion on it until he was found guilty. If it had been one player's word against another's, and he'd have been found not guilty, then I doubt if anyone would have questioned the verdict. But he was found guilty. You seem to be sticking up for a racist simply because of the club you support. But knowing you, i'm sure that's not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred_Zeppelin Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 No, I honestly don't care one way or another...none of us had any opinion on it until he was found guilty. If it had been one player's word against another's, and he'd have been found not guilty, then I doubt if anyone would have questioned the verdict. But he was found guilty. You seem to be sticking up for a racist simply because of the club you support. But knowing you, i'm sure that's not the case. If you can poi8nt out where I'm sticking up for a racist please do, otherwise STFU! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I'll wait until i see the evidence until i decide on the merits of his conviction. However, if he has committed racist abuse, then a 7 game ban seems quite lenient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deecie Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 If you can poi8nt out where I'm sticking up for a racist please do, otherwise STFU! http://tartanarmyboard.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=1945&p=44614 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 If you can poi8nt out where I'm sticking up for a racist please do, otherwise STFU! http://tartanarmyboard.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=1945&p=44614 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 I wonder what kind of treatment Logan will get from the travelling support on Sunday?and if you know your history, probably throw bananas at him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Sellick have nothing to lose by appealing, so why not give it a go? If he is found guilty again, and get rid of him, no-one will think there's a culture of racism at Celtic. Just like no one thought that of Liverpool with the Suarez thing They're just rightly sticking by their asset, until proven that they shouldn't bother. If there is evidence that he racially abused Logan, and none of us know who has made statements, and what was heard, then he should be punted back to his home club Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cove_Sheep Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Will the appeal be held before the game at Pittodrie next weekend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted October 30, 2014 Share Posted October 30, 2014 Will the appeal be held before the game at Pittodrie next weekend? Has to be heard within 5 days of them receiving the appeal I believe. Not sure how long they have to appeal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.