ThenNowForever

Because I am in my phone the link is not working for more information but it seems he was only charged with one offence under the offensive behaviour act and not a charge with a religious aggravation or under that act. The sheriff could therefore not convict him under the statutory religious prejudice act or aggravation as it was not libelled and could only convict him of the alternative to the offensive behaviour act for saying what he did which is a breach of the peace. I stand to be corrected but the sheriff (who is a practical and decent one) has not ruled on the potential religious side of the comment.

We only went into administration because Whittaker was sent off against Malmo.

Apparently he was called Casper. I remember that being said in an interview with a player after the fiorentina game.

Since 1998 when I first got a season ticket we have had two great left backs. Numan and the Sasa. Loved them both. Hopefully Wallace will be the next one.

At most of our free kicks within shouting range a guy near me usually comes away with 'if you can't score, make it sore'.

Haha thanks mate. That's me now going in my first RM huff!

Thanks GB. I was starting to think I would be lucky and have a free run at the bar but I will settle for a cracking atmosphere!

I think my problem was I didn't read the headline! I think the BBC must have got to me as I seem to be spouting pish. It shows how bad the BBC is now I think that article is fair and balanced over at STV.

Am I the only one with tickets for the argyle house suite?? I have not seen it advertised or mentioned by any other supporters. Ah well I'll be there anyway

This is slightly off topic but I think it's worth pointing out that the STV link posted shows very fair and balanced reporting with the case for the defence and witch hu....sorry prosecution set out evenly. What a difference from the one sided BBC Scotland reporting that I have grown to hate over the last year and a half

I don't think anyone does MTAF. From what I understand the SFL clubs have got to vote for the restructuring after longmuir and the SFL clubs agreed to a different proposal not that long ago. It will be interesting to see how that vote goes now longmuir has backed alternative proposals. I, for one, would prefer the SFL model although we would still be in the bottom tier I think

We would be the last team to ever win the third division. A record as such. Well until we get back to dominating the top league again and rhegan et al decide for more reconstruction for the good of the game.

Thanks for the info kelv. I don't get to see any football from Oz so was just wondering what the standard was to something I could compare it to. Also yes Harry I agree that we should be looking at players from home first and foremost. Still one of my all time favourite Gers players is Craig Moore!

Oz if you get to see much European football, where would the A league standard compare to? I am just interested in local opinion after reading the bosnich interview

This is section 74 of the criminal justice (Scotland) act 2003. This may give an idea of how the law is applied. Sorry if this has been posted already or is boring legal junk! 74Offences aggravated by religious prejudice (1)This section applies where it is— (a)libelled in an indictment; or (b)specified in a complaint,and, in either case, proved that an offence has been aggravated by religious prejudice. (2)For the purposes of this section, an offence is aggravated by religious prejudice if— (a)at the time of committing the offence or immediately before or after doing so, the offender evinces towards the victim (if any) of the offence malice and ill-will based on the victim’s membership (or presumed membership) of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation; or (b)the offence is motivated (wholly or partly) by malice and ill-will towards members of a religious group, or of a social or cultural group with a perceived religious affiliation, based on their membership of that group. (3)Where this section applies, the court must take the aggravation into account in determining the appropriate sentence. (4)Where the sentence in respect of the offence is different from that which the court would have imposed had the offence not been aggravated by religious prejudice, the court must state the extent of and the reasons for that difference. (5)For the purposes of this section, evidence from a single source is sufficient to prove that an offence is aggravated by religious prejudice. (6)In subsection (2)(a)— “membership”in relation to a group includes association with members of that group; and “presumed”means presumed by the offender. (7)In this section, “religious group” means a group of persons defined by reference to their— (a)religious belief or lack of religious belief; (b)membership of or adherence to a church or religious organisation; ©support for the culture and traditions of a church or religious organisation; or (d)participation in activities associated with such a culture or such traditions.

The first I thought about not playing them again I was happy at the thought of never having to share their air at Ibrox again but if someone said you will play them again and never lose I would welcome a return of the games. I guess that tells me I have a big fear of losing but the joy if beating them is greater. Bring them on (in maybe 12 months or so)!

I used to believe in the 'dignified silence' approach our club practiced but not any more. I think it's an excellent stance the club has taken now and I will back the boycott all the way. I'm glad to see these changed days after what we have been through. The ticket prices won't affect people's views on going. I wouldn't go if it was free and I'm sure people who would not have went if it was £20 would not now go because it is £15.