What happens if they ban Patterson & the covid 5 today or tomorrow?

Status
Not open for further replies.
They could hit with notice of complaint but they won’t be served a ban in time for tomorrow regardless.
I imagine the club have been in conversation with the SFA to be honest
 
No chance of that happening. Fast track isn't an option and those would require a scheduled hearing.

He will be available tomorrow, and should play imo. My feeling is he will also be available for Saturday and again should play. We have done our own internal disciplinary procedure, it's not up to us to do the SFA's job for them.

Completely disagree with thise asking for appeals. They fucked up and deserve to be punished. I think we should be accepting a ban for the players if/when they arrive.
 
Jamie said:
What do you want to appeal?
Click to expand...
Consistency and lack of any punishments for other breaches? If all 5 get 7 game bans then we will have had equivelant of 49 games of players unavailable when no other team in a league full of teams that have breached protocols have lost players for more than 3. That's despite 8 going to a pub and not distancing, Griffiths not just attending a house party but hosting one and being reminded of his responsibilities, Dundee Utd team photo breach, St Mirren players car sharing, a player playing in a match when he should've been isolating after going on an overnight jolly, another player flying a girl in from America who he was a close contact with playing and training despite said girl not isolating, yet another player travelling home on a normal flight out with the secure bubble protocols playing the day after his now manager said he would be unavailable due to having to self isolate and then there is Dubaigate. The term consistency didn't just mean on the pitch from Rangers.
 
markkerrsbackpass said:
I'm really surprised there has been no movement on this from the SFA and would love to think it's because we are questioning them behind the scenes on their reticence to punish anyone involved with Dubaigate.
Click to expand...
It took 17 days for the Jones/Edmundson hearing so this would appear to be on a similar timescale.
 
Well stuart01x they dont believe it any more than we do its simply a case of any negative narrative kept and spun in the news cycle regardless of whether its not true and especially if its not.

Its nothing new of course but I must say to do it over a situation as serious as this (Covid itself rather than the lads mistake) is somewhere south of shameful.
stuart01x said:
Agreed. This Covid 5 label really grips my shit. We have enough enemies in the media and beyond painting this picture without our own adding to it.
Click to expand...
 
bearsmarsbars said:
Are we allowed to appeal and free him up for the game tomorrow? Cheers.
Click to expand...
This will not be a 'Fast Track' Tribunal with the offer of a ban but a 'Disciplinary' Tribunal (they are different things), with no punishment set in advance of the Hearing. As such, they will set a date for the Hearing. That will be two weeks from date of citing.

They will be fine for the next 2 League games and, hopefully, by the time the DhimDome comes around Tav and Jack will be fit.

Should sticky this because it comes up at least twice a day.
 
Last edited:
I thought Leon King done well when he came on against Falkirk at RB. I know he's only 17 but he seems to have a level head on his shoulders.
 
Crown_Defender said:
No chance of that happening. Fast track isn't an option and those would require a scheduled hearing.

He will be available tomorrow, and should play imo. My feeling is he will also be available for Saturday and again should play. We have done our own internal disciplinary procedure, it's not up to us to do the SFA's job for them.

Completely disagree with thise asking for appeals. They fucked up and deserve to be punished. I think we should be accepting a ban for the players if/when they arrive.
Click to expand...
I agree we should accept a ban - on the proviso that said ban is consistent with those issued to the septic players involved in the indisputable Dubai covid breaches. If the Dubai crew are not similarly (and prior to our players) punished, then we should contest this to the bitter end.
 
Virgil Hilts said:
Inconsistent application of the rules.
Click to expand...
Whilst I don't disagree with the point you make the - easy - counter-argument from the SFA point of view is that their deterrent punishments are not deterring, so they get ramped up each time:

Aberdeen Eight - 3 games, all suspended
Bolingoli - 5 games, 2 suspended
Jones/Edmundson - 7 games, none suspended.
Covid 5 - ??

They could argue these 5 get MORE than Jones/Edmundson.:eek:
 
Last edited:
bearsmarsbars said:
Are we allowed to appeal and free him up for the game tomorrow? Cheers.
Click to expand...
I’d be surprised if these was heard and dealt with before the end of the season. League will be wrapped up before they get their (inevitable) ban. They’d need to hold hearings etc and the players/club make representations. I understood that there were no “outsiders” involved and everyone there was within the players personal bubbles but that might be wrong. If it is right then that at least provides mitigation that Dubai and Jones/George didn’t have.

6 game ban coming at the start of April I think.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Whilst I don't disagree with the point you make the - easy - counter-argument from the SFA point of view is that their deterrent punishments are not deterring, so they get ramped up each time:

Aberdeen Seven - 3 games, all suspended
Bolingoli - 5 games, 2 suspended
Jones/Edmundson - 7 games, none suspended.
Covid 5 - ??

They could argue these 5 get MORE than Jones/Edmundson.:eek:
Click to expand...

In all likelihood Stewart Robertson would shíte it from kicking up a fuss anyhows.

I have no problems with players getting sanctioned, if the disciplinary process is seen to be equitable, it’s clearly not.

Re the ramping up of sanctions angle; drink driving would be a crime punishable by death if we reacted to breaches in line with spikes in failed breathalyser test. :))

Any M D / CEO worth their salt would be asking for a personal hearing re the elephant in the room. Don’t need to question our playets’ sanction, just play the TLB “ i’m amazed we come back with so few infections “ and the Duffy / pints at th pool snapshots.

Did fly played in games that he should’ve been banned from, the mgolf st egregious breach thus far.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Whilst I don't disagree with the point you make the - easy - counter-argument from the SFA point of view is that their deterrent punishments are not deterring, so they get ramped up each time:

Aberdeen Seven - 3 games, all suspended
Bolingoli - 5 games, 2 suspended
Jones/Edmundson - 7 games, none suspended.
Covid 5 - ??

They could argue these 5 get MORE than Jones/Edmundson.:eek:
Click to expand...
A fair point but also factor in the odd way St Mirren were dealt with, were their players not sharing cars to and from training (some with players from other clubs I'm sure) which is a breach of their "bubble" yet it was the club and not the individual players who were initially punished. I know attending a social gathering is a little different than commuting to work but you'd think maybe each set of players had been made aware of what they can and can't do.

Also between Jones/Edmundson and Patterson etc there lies the massive elephant that is Dubai and the 0 suspensions handed out from that. I get the impression that they are hiding behind the fact that the players sitting at the bar/pool etc wasn't in breach of the regulations of the country they were in at the time but it must surely be in breach of the rules set by the organisation of which they are a part of. The guidelines etc set out by the SFA/SPFL shouldn't end at the Scottish border, pretty sure if we were found to have fallen foul while playing away in Europe we would be subject to sanctions upon return if it affected our domestic game.

These aren't aimed at you btw I know you were only highlighting a potential stance the SFA could take.
 
MelbourneBear said:
I agree we should accept a ban - on the proviso that said ban is consistent with those issued to the septic players involved in the indisputable Dubai covid breaches. If the Dubai crew are not similarly (and prior to our players) punished, then we should contest this to the bitter end.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd say that's a fair shout mate. I was aiming that more at the posters who were saying we should appeal, just to have them available for the games. That would be wrong imo but, of course the punishments do need to have a degree of consistency too.
 
charlie_snowball said:
I don't think they can as it can't be fast tracked. Did they not say on one of the podcasts that they need to deal with Dubaigate first before they get onto Partygate?
Click to expand...
refgate is the biggy.

You need to be cited and then a fast track meeting is scheduled. Paterson is available 100% tomorrow.
 
Ffs do we call celtic or any other players the covid 3, the covid 13, the covid 8? Please do not use that scum papers headline to label these individuals like they were the first footballers involved with a covid scandal where label sticks!
 
douzpwa said:
Ffs do we call celtic or any other players the covid 3, the covid 13, the covid 8? Please do not use that scum papers headline to label these individuals like they were the first footballers involved with a covid scandal where label sticks!
Click to expand...
Covid 60 mate.

Worth remembering they actually brought the fùcking virus back with them!
 
My feeling is that if the SFA were likely to ban these players for a long period, Gerrard either intends to fight this all the way or he is sure to say area the going to be banned. He wouldn’t have put all three in the squad if he knew they were heading for a ban otherwise. Basically if he agreed they were to be banned he wouldn’t have played them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top