Lawwell - Conflict of interest

[dummiesoot 16,006]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Yep, and? It still doesn't make it any more 'anti-British' than saying 'fuck sands' is 'anti-irish.'

What is the difference between that and ftp and the ira, which he have also been warned about? 

[Bluekev 43,988]

6 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Yep, and? It still doesn't make it any more 'anti-British' than saying 'fuck sands' is 'anti-irish.'

It does when targeting the ruler of the UK.

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, dummiesoot said:

What is the difference between that and ftp and the ira, which he have also been warned about? 

Afaik, we've never been punished or cited by UEFA over chanting Fuck the Pope. It has always been terms that have perjoratively targeted a group of people (fenians for example) rather than specific terms aimed at the head of religious groups or heads of state.  It is something the club have warned against but to the best of my knowledge it isn't something that UEFA have specifically referenced.

The IRA one is, again, becuase it's viewed to reference a specific group based (it seemingly doesn't matter that it's a proscribed terrorist organisition) rather than aimed at a head of state/religious group etc.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, Bluekev said:

It does when targeting the ruler of the UK.

Does that make Fuck The Pope both anti-Catholic and anti-Vatican City since it's targeting their ruler and the head of their church?

[Bluekev 43,988]

14 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Does that make Fuck The Pope both anti-Catholic and anti-Vatican City since it's targeting their ruler and the head of their church?

You know it does but the problem is how the offences are perceived. We get a partial ground closure yet the scum do identical and to be honest worse by throwing missiles at players and get away with either fines or no punishment at all. No one is really arguing what we did was against UEFA rules but it's the difference in punishment between us and them that's the problem.

[dummiesoot 16,006]

27 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Afaik, we've never been punished or cited by UEFA over chanting Fuck the Pope. It has always been terms that have perjoratively targeted a group of people (fenians for example) rather than specific terms aimed at the head of religious groups or heads of state.  It is something the club have warned against but to the best of my knowledge it isn't something that UEFA have specifically referenced.

The IRA one is, again, becuase it's viewed to reference a specific group based (it seemingly doesn't matter that it's a proscribed terrorist organisition) rather than aimed at a head of state/religious group etc.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/6564745.stm

https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2007/mar/20/newsstory.sport3

 

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, Bluekev said:

You know it does but the problem is how the offences are perceived. We get a partial ground closure yet the scum do identical and to be honest worse by throwing missiles at players and get away with either fines or no punishment at all. No one is really arguing what we did was against UEFA rules but it's the difference in punishment between us and them that's the problem.

It's been explained repeatedly. The stuff they've been charged with almost always comes under general fan misconduct (article 16) which sees a section closure as the one of the harshest sanctions available and, almost always results in a fine and/or a suspended punishment. When we've been charged under the same article, we've been hit with similar sanctions.

This one is different as it's under article 14 (racist and other discriminatory behaviour) and a section closure is the mandated punishment for a first offence. If they'd been charged under the same article as we have and only received a fine despite the punishment being a section closure then you'd have a point about the difference in punishments.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, dummiesoot said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/r/Rangers/6564745.stm

https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2007/mar/20/newsstory.sport3

 

Neither of those are just 'fuck the pope' but also include references to a wider group of people. Neither of those were cited under the anti-discrimation articles either but as general fan misconduct.

 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

It's been explained repeatedly. The stuff they've been charged with almost always comes under general fan misconduct (article 16) which sees a section closure as the one of the harshest sanctions available and, almost always results in a fine and/or a suspended punishment. When we've been charged under the same article, we've been hit with similar sanctions.

This one is different as it's under article 14 (racist and other discriminatory behaviour) and a section closure is the mandated punishment for a first offence. If they'd been charged under the same article as we have and only received a fine despite the punishment being a section closure then you'd have a point about the difference in punishments.

Therein lies the flaw.

The stuff they are charged with neglects to include their sectarian and political singing, both of which is banned by UEFA.

As I said, if it were about bad words, nonce fc would have been closed down long ago.

If the UEFA observer was Billy from Brigton who reported a breach, there would be fucking riots on the street. Meanwhile back at the ranch, our board and fans bend over and take it up the arse fro Garry the killy taig.

A level playing field indeed?!

[The Dude 20,026]

8 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said:

Therein lies the flaw.

The stuff they are charged with neglects to include their sectarian and political singing, both of which is banned by UEFA.

As I said, if it were about bad words, nonce fc would have been closed down long ago.

If the UEFA observer was Billy from Brigton who reported a breach, there would be fucking riots on the street. Meanwhile back at the ranch, our board and fans bend over and take it up the arse fro Garry the killy taig.

A level playing field indeed?!

Political singing typically comes under general fan misconduct (Article 16) and they've been fined repeatedly for it.

The match observer wasn't "Garry the Killy taig". I suppose if you tell a lie often enough it becomes fact very quickly.

 

[Bluekev 43,988]

19 minutes ago, The Dude said:

It's been explained repeatedly. The stuff they've been charged with almost always comes under general fan misconduct (article 16) which sees a section closure as the one of the harshest sanctions available and, almost always results in a fine and/or a suspended punishment. When we've been charged under the same article, we've been hit with similar sanctions.

This one is different as it's under article 14 (racist and other discriminatory behaviour) and a section closure is the mandated punishment for a first offence. If they'd been charged under the same article as we have and only received a fine despite the punishment being a section closure then you'd have a point about the difference in punishments.

And that's the point. The offences appear to be the same in normal people's eyes yet UEFA deem them to be different therefore resulting in different punishments with us once again being on the receiving end of the harsher treatment.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Bluekev said:

And that's the point. The offences appear to be the same in normal people's eyes yet UEFA deem them to be different therefore resulting in different punishments with us once again being on the receiving end of the harsher treatment.

Tbh, I wouldn't agree that things like letting fireworks off or flying a banner saying Fuck UEFA is the same as sectarian singing.

Do you think flying a flag saying fuck UEFA is the same as targetting a group of people based on their perceived religious affiliation?

[Bluekev 43,988]

Just now, The Dude said:

Tbh, I wouldn't agree that things like letting fireworks off or flying a banner saying Fuck UEFA is the same as sectarian singing.

Do you think flying a flag saying fuck UEFA is the same as targetting a group of people based on their perceived religious affiliation?

I actually thinks it's worse. Words don't physically hurt people but pyrotechnics and bottles do. Surely trying to intentionally injure the players on the pitch justifies a stadium closure rather than singing a nasty song.

[TEFTONG 60,125]

22 minutes ago, Bluekev said:

I actually thinks it's worse. Words don't physically hurt people but pyrotechnics and bottles do. Surely trying to intentionally injure the players on the pitch justifies a stadium closure rather than singing a nasty song.

Does anyone remember the Liverpool fans smashing up the Man City bus on route to a Champions League game at Anfield..?

Now did Uefa enforce a section of their ground closed..? 

Seems that's ok..? But woe betide you if you sing a song with a word deemed unacceptable. 

 

[The Dude 20,026]

25 minutes ago, Bluekev said:

I actually thinks it's worse. Words don't physically hurt people but pyrotechnics and bottles do. Surely trying to intentionally injure the players on the pitch justifies a stadium closure rather than singing a nasty song.

So do you think we should've had a section closed after we were punished for missiles being thrown at players from our fans?

If we're so concerned with missile throwing, why hasn't anyone highlighting the ones thrown at OUR players on thursday night but are instead greeting about celtic fans instead?

[Bluekev 43,988]

10 minutes ago, The Dude said:

So do you think we should've had a section closed after we were punished for missiles being thrown at players from our fans?

If we're so concerned with missile throwing, why hasn't anyone highlighting the ones thrown at OUR players on thursday night but are instead greeting about celtic fans instead?

It was highlighted. People even posted pictures of it and the point is it should be fair across the board. It seems to be one rule for us and another for the rest. I know i'd rather take verbal off someone than be hit over the head with a bottle.

[Corky True Legend 2,682]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Not particularly, no. That would be like saying shouting Fuck Bobby Sands is anti-Irish.

Now you really are showing that you have sold your soul to your employer's anti Rangers bias. As has been explained ad nausea "fenian" refers to a political group which included both Catholics and Protestants. If it is wrong to sing about them, it is equally wrong to extol Hamas. Or maybe you think differently? It is long overdue that someone from our board explained this to UEFA. I won't hold my breath on that one!

[thehost 11,061]

18 hours ago, 2nd Flute said:

Lawwell,UEFA, FARE, means fuck all, if Bears don't sing songs about Catholics, fenians and the Pope, Rangers are in the clear, no cunt can punish the club, whether we like it or not, it really is that simple  

 

18 hours ago, The Dude said:

Why would he have a conflict of interest? He's got absolutely no involvment in the disciplinary committees. He's been 'appointed' to UEFA as a representative of the ECA.

 

 

Fuck me

 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Corky True Legend said:

Now you really are showing that you have sold your soul to your employer's anti Rangers bias. As has been explained ad nausea "fenian" refers to a political group which included both Catholics and Protestants. If it is wrong to sing about them, it is equally wrong to extol Hamas. Or maybe you think differently? It is long overdue that someone from our board explained this to UEFA. I won't hold my breath on that one!

Which employer is that?

Ah yes, we're singing about a political group that HASN'T EXISTED IN OVER 130 YEARS. That'll really show them who is boss.

Maybe we can start singing about the suffragettes next or the Whigs.

I mean ffs.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, Bluekev said:

It was highlighted. People even posted pictures of it and the point is it should be fair across the board. It seems to be one rule for us and another for the rest. I know i'd rather take verbal off someone than be hit over the head with a bottle.

So where are the countless posts greeting about it? I've read FAR more folk mentioning celtic fans chucking stuff at Cluj players than I have coins aimed at Davis.

You might well rather take verbals but the simple fact is, UEFA view discrimination an incredibly serious offence and have punished us as such with the mandated punishment.

You keep mentioing fairness yet are comparing two totally different set of circumstances and two totally different offences (and the rules covering them) but demanding the same outcome.

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, thehost said:

 

 

 

Fuck me

 

Point me to an actual conflict of interest involving him at UEFA and not some mental conspiracy involving brown envelopes and Lawwell doing his best Blofeld impression

[dummiesoot 16,006]

1 hour ago, The Dude said:

Neither of those are just 'fuck the pope' but also include references to a wider group of people. Neither of those were cited under the anti-discrimation articles either but as general fan misconduct.

 

You are just playing with words mate, being pedantic. I have provided proof that we have been censured for ftp and the ira and you play with words. I usually give you the benefit of th e doubt, but I now believe you think you cannot be wrong. Refusing to be swayed. 

[thehost 11,061]

29 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Point me to an actual conflict of interest involving him at UEFA and not some mental conspiracy involving brown envelopes and Lawwell doing his best Blofeld impression

I suggest you toddle off back to the times of john reid, UEFA reps and where this all started

after you have done your homework I then invite you to look into FARE

 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, thehost said:

I suggest you toddle off back to the times of john reid, UEFA reps and where this all started

after you have done your homework I then invite you to look into FARE

 

So where is Lawwells conflict of interest in this? 

[rabc10000 5,061]

47 minutes ago, Corky True Legend said:

Now you really are showing that you have sold your soul to your employer's anti Rangers bias. As has been explained ad nausea "fenian" refers to a political group which included both Catholics and Protestants. If it is wrong to sing about them, it is equally wrong to extol Hamas. Or maybe you think differently? It is long overdue that someone from our board explained this to UEFA. I won't hold my breath on that one!

I thought we were charged due to the use of the word rather than what the word means?? Once u start adding bastard to any word it turns it into an insult or discrimination and that's what UEFA has fucked us for??? 

I'm probably wrong on this tho