Dazzer Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 So in other words, they don't want to have footballers to show emotion during goal celebrations? It was such an important occasion for the club as it pulled us out of our slump in form. Scottish Football - Passion = SFA's Perfect world => Non existent. Your right, someone must of made a complaint, in order for the investigation to be actioned. It was technically a goal celebration.....with a dash of attitude/Relief/expression/ and maybe a tiny hint of up yours Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Jesus wept. I don't believe for a second that Regan means a word of that reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Wellfan 2k7 Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Your right, someone must of made a complaint, in order for the investigation to be actioned. It was technically a goal celebration.....with a dash of attitude/Relief/expression/ and maybe a tiny hint of up yours I do worse when I was in PE ... towards the teacher....when he's not looking We should film it and see what the SFA make of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzer Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 I do worse when I was in PE ... towards the teacher....when he's not looking We should film it and see what the SFA make of it? Good idea! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Modernist Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Who was on the three man panel ? Anyone ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamH Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Darryl Broadfoot is one of the biggest twats at the SFA (and that's an achievement in itself). He thinks he's some sort of big shot when in reality he's the type of guy who would have been relentlessly bullied at school and the best he can do on a night out is Michelle McManus. I've heard she's mortified and strongly denies it though. Hope Motherwell raise a complaint against him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn_Broomfield Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 I've forgotten more about football in the last week than he has ever known. The fact that he is a rampant h*n and orangeman amplifies the situation. A perfect example of the atrocious state of football journalism in Scotland. (save for few) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Wellfan 2k7 Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Its all morally incorrect, but then again so is the entire SFA. They wouldn't take notice to any complaint against him unless he said something seriously stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweed Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 No offence to anyone who has emailed Stewart Regan but I cannot believe he is replying to emails personally. Nor should he be. Football is an emotional game and passions run high which is clear from the opinions from folk on here tonight. Not that I disagree what anyone has said, I think the decision is a total joke but for the Chief Exec to risk getting into a public slanging match with supporters of any club is just asking for his credibility to be shot. I actually think the compliance officer was a good idea in principle for ridding the game of diving, the shot across the bough provided by Aluko and Pawlett has seen a reduction in that in recent weeks. Granted I think the Pawlett one was harsh because although it wasn't a foul I don't see where he could have gone apart from down given the angle of the Hibs players on him. It punishes folk who have blatantly cheated and got their team an advantage. Again, violent conduct like the Steven Naismith incident where the punishment would have been a red card being retrospectively looked at. However the flaws are how it is communicated to said compliance officer. As well as the four officials there is also a referee's observer in the stands. ALl these incidents have been noticed in the stand and he should be the person saying to the compliance officer 'have a look at the incident between Craigan and Barrowman' or whatever. Orf alternatively you forget compliance officer and let these guys review the incident post match independently of the referee and report it to the SFA. That therefore means someone at the game decides what they want to relook at on TV. But with the goal celebration and gesture issue, I can see why a point may want to be made but punishing the player more than a referee would is disproportionate. When you look at the two guys to be done for diving; they gained their team the opportunity to score the winning goal. They gained two points by cheating so a ban to me seems fair enough. If its spotted at the time the punishment is less because they haven't made a false gain so thats fair enough. But Griffiths and Higdon (even if we assume for a minute both are guilty) gained Hibs and Motherwell no advantage so to punish them more than they would do during the game just isn't rational. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numpty Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Maybe we should hire this guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Wellfan 2k7 Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 Thought the exact same when I read the Metro yesterday morning! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordy Posted January 26, 2012 Report Share Posted January 26, 2012 No offence to anyone who has emailed Stewart Regan but I cannot believe he is replying to emails personally. Nor should he be. Football is an emotional game and passions run high which is clear from the opinions from folk on here tonight. Not that I disagree what anyone has said, I think the decision is a total joke but for the Chief Exec to risk getting into a public slanging match with supporters of any club is just asking for his credibility to be shot. I actually think the compliance officer was a good idea in principle for ridding the game of diving, the shot across the bough provided by Aluko and Pawlett has seen a reduction in that in recent weeks. Granted I think the Pawlett one was harsh because although it wasn't a foul I don't see where he could have gone apart from down given the angle of the Hibs players on him. It punishes folk who have blatantly cheated and got their team an advantage. Again, violent conduct like the Steven Naismith incident where the punishment would have been a red card being retrospectively looked at. However the flaws are how it is communicated to said compliance officer. As well as the four officials there is also a referee's observer in the stands. ALl these incidents have been noticed in the stand and he should be the person saying to the compliance officer 'have a look at the incident between Craigan and Barrowman' or whatever. Orf alternatively you forget compliance officer and let these guys review the incident post match independently of the referee and report it to the SFA. That therefore means someone at the game decides what they want to relook at on TV. But with the goal celebration and gesture issue, I can see why a point may want to be made but punishing the player more than a referee would is disproportionate. When you look at the two guys to be done for diving; they gained their team the opportunity to score the winning goal. They gained two points by cheating so a ban to me seems fair enough. If its spotted at the time the punishment is less because they haven't made a false gain so thats fair enough. But Griffiths and Higdon (even if we assume for a minute both are guilty) gained Hibs and Motherwell no advantage so to punish them more than they would do during the game just isn't rational. Well, I e-mailed StewartRegan@scottishfa.co.uk and got a reply from StewartRegan@scottishfa.co.uk So who replied and said he was Stewart Regan if it wasn't Stewart Regan? The SFA are so amatuerish they do not have the sense not to get in a public slanging match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 This sorry saga gets worse by the minute. The whole process is flawed in so many ways. It would appear that the media has way too much influence in this process. They are incapable of unbiased objective reporting and therefore little weight should be attached to their opinions. Will the compliance officer take on board complaints from ordinary PAYING fans at games if incidents are not highlighted by the Chic Youngs and Richard Gordons of the world. Incidentally, how are SFL games monitored given their poorer radio and TV coverage? If Darryl Broadfoot did indeed make those comments on Twitter then the SFA should be asked whether he represents their official view. If not he should be disciplined as have employees of other organisations who have made inadvisable comments on Twitter or Facebook. Good on the club for issuing their statement. Let the powers that be know what we think on Saturday!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnstone Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I actually think the reaction from SFA officials tells its own story. They know this rule is total nonsense and know its going to open a huge can of worms and they are panicking big time. Broadfoot should be sacked. He cannot talk like that to SFA members in an official capacity on a public forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmmfc Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 So I believe that Broadfoot is the "SFA press officer", i.e. the person who makes the coffee, uses the photocopier, gets told what to write down, then e-mails it out to media outlets. He/She obviously thinks they are of importance within the SFA, but really, he/she is just the admin lassie. Concentrate on the ones that matter, i.e. Lunny, Regan. * Delete he/she as appropriate, depending on whether Darryl is male or female. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I don't really like or agree with some of the tweets, but I don't think we should be getting up in arms that Broadfoot tweated x y and z. If he had done it from the SFA twitter feed then yes, but from his own personal account then its his opinion and to be honest, he's surely entitiled to one. Lets not forget that pretty much everyone who works for a media agency always has the disclaimer these views are my own and not those of the 'add appropriate organisation.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I don't really like or agree with some of the tweets, but I don't think we should be getting up in arms that Broadfoot tweated x y and z. If he had done it from the SFA twitter feed then yes, but from his own personal account then its his opinion and to be honest, he's surely entitiled to one. Lets not forget that pretty much everyone who works for a media agency always has the disclaimer these views are my own and not those of the 'add appropriate organisation.' hugh dallas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 So the SFA are employing failed journalists to do their bidding are they? Daryll Broadfoot was as good as journalist as his namesake Kirk is a fitba' player. He should not be commenting in such a fashion given his position so who do I complain to so's I can get him sacked for being a fud. MInd you he was employed for being a fud in the first place so not sure if that would be considered a sacking offence. See, I agree that he's talking shite and is quite probably towing the party line, but really was he that bad a journalist? Are you sure your not mixing him up with Daryl King? I think, that Broadfoot managed to become chief football writer at the Herald at the age of 28. Thats not too shabby an achievment. Granted the standard of journalism is poor in this country, but he was much better than some of those who write in the red tops. *Still a c**t though, obviously! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 hugh dallas? Hugh Dallas sent an email about the pope using his work email address. Not in any way, shape or form comparable. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I don't really like or agree with some of the tweets, but I don't think we should be getting up in arms that Broadfoot tweated x y and z. If he had done it from the SFA twitter feed then yes, but from his own personal account then its his opinion and to be honest, he's surely entitiled to one. Lets not forget that pretty much everyone who works for a media agency always has the disclaimer these views are my own and not those of the 'add appropriate organisation.' I bet you if a footballer wrote something on his twitter account about a referee he would receive a ban. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 I bet you if a footballer wrote something on his twitter account about a referee he would receive a ban. Agree that he would recieve a ban. Don't think it would be fair though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nethertonwellfan Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 Agree that he would recieve a ban. Don't think it would be fair though Me neither but what's good for the goose and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
real dosser Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 Could someone with a wee bit of computer savvy set up an on-line petition regarding the offensive statement regarding our club made by an official SFA employee that we could all sign and submit to the SFA ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 Hugh Dallas sent an email about the pope using his work email address. Not in any way, shape or form comparable. Sorry. broadfoot's twitter gives his location as hampden and offers a link to his employers website. it might not be an 'official' sfa account but an sfa employee telling fans to fuck off on a public forum is surely unacceptable? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuwell Posted January 27, 2012 Report Share Posted January 27, 2012 would it not be a better idea to stick to the main issue and not get side tracked? The real target here should be the SFA and it's rules regarding retrospective disiplinary action - not what someone wrote in a tweet. 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.