DaveyDenoon
-
Posts
1,274 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Tartan Army Message Board News
Media Demo
Posts posted by DaveyDenoon
-
-
2 hours ago, SMcoolJ said:
Currently in the Ivory. About three bus loads of each flavour in attendance. No hassle whatsoever.
As it should be.
I just hope there wasn’t any Dons fans wanting a ticket that never got one. That would be all wrong considering the split wasn’t 50/50.
-
22 hours ago, Lion Rampant said:
It's being played in Portugal.
They were the first to seal their qualification for the NL finals, so I assume that is why they have been awarded it.
Portugal, Italy and Poland all expressed their interest in hosting the finals, so whoever won that group was going to get it.
-
6 hours ago, Scotland Ever More said:
Got you.
Is this because Portugal are current European champions, or just a coincidence?
Portugal, Italy and Poland all put themselves forward to host the finals. So whoever won that group was going to get it.
-
3 minutes ago, mrniaboc said:
I think this was perhaps a crucial typo. You mean 'none' right?
Yup, now amended!
-
6 hours ago, Redondo said:
Is it not the case that if there’s a spare place going in the Group C playoffs because 1 of the initial playoff teams qualifies via normal qualification, then the next best team in Group C gets that slot, And if a Group C team also ends up in the Group B playoffs then it would be a lower ranked Group C team. Seems fairer.
They will fill the spaces for the playoffs starting with league D and working up to league A. That way the lowest ranked space where no team occupies that space would be reallocated to the highest ranked team that needed it (but ensuring no group winner plays or could play a team from a higher league) and so on.
In reality league D should be very straightforward as none of those are likely to qualify via the traditional qualifiers so the playoff spaces would be filled from 1v4 and 2v4 from D as planned. League C also probably reasonably straightforward as all four group winners unlikely to qualify via normal qualifiers although one or two might. Any vacant spaces would go to next ranked league C teams (as group winners cannot play or potentially teams from a higher league).
Group B could get more complicated as several teams will qualify viamoemsl qualifiers and so won’t need their playoff spot. All four group winners realistically would qualify. So there would be more vacant spaces to fill (from league A first if any League A teams never qualified AND if all four group winners qualified as well). League A playoffs almost certainly will contain non group winning teams from league B moving up to fill the vacant spaces as you’d expect all League A group winners to qualify and less than four non group winners to fail to qualify.
Sounds complex, but if you do it League by League, playoff space by play off space then it becomes much clearer.
-
4 hours ago, Toepoke said:
Shelley Kerr seems like a shrewd tactician, she could probably do a job in the mens game.
She could replace McLeish tomorrow as far as I am concerned
-
17 hours ago, Bino's said:
We only need a draw and a win
Play a 541 away then go for it at home
Yes that would be enough to win the group. But there’s more than that to think about.
A draw v Albania and a win v Israel will very likely see us away from home for the first/semi final playoff. We’d struggle to win that. Two wins will probably mean a home tie instead. I’d fancy our chances.
The difference is massive.
We need to win both.
-
16 minutes ago, ProudScot said:
This is all sounding Burley & Levein esque with these players asking not to be picked and making themselves unavailable.
McLeish clearly from the performance in Israel & The call offs and unavailabilities, doesn’t have the backing of the players.
2 more games & it’s bye Alex.
100%
I want him gone now, but appreciate it’s too late before the upcoming games.
If we do somehow win the group (and that’s very much not certain) then it will be despite him being manager not because of him being manager.
Regardless of how we finish, at the end of this group, once Israel game is over, he has to go.
-
On 3/20/2018 at 7:13 PM, Ormond said:
Those same cunts are firing out Loyalist pish and then shortly after pump out the words ‘Rise now and be a nation again’
Just shows the ignorance of these people when they can’t even get the words right...
-
I’m taking my two boys to their first Scotland rugby match as well. Well, in actual fact the elder of the two was at Murrayfield in 2008 to see us v New Zealand but since he was only 9 months old at the time I’m no counting that one!
We've no told them yet but they’ll find out on Saturday morning when we get up and I put their new Scotland tops on them then head into Cardiff.
Can’t wait, they’ve been begging to go to a game for a couple of years now.
Also, I got two spare tickets £45 upper tier if anyone looking...
-
Just now, DaveyDenoon said:
It really ought to be. Anything else would be a disgrace.
Also each side should get half the North stand, half the South (less the corporate etc) and behind one goal.
Couldn’t care less which side gets which end, it should be based on ease of travelling and nothing else. If there’s no real advantage travel-wise which would make life easier for supporters busses then toss a coin to decide.
-
8 minutes ago, Toepoke said:
50:50 split for the final then?...
It really ought to be. Anything else would be a disgrace.
-
2 hours ago, Ally Bongo said:
You can rely on the BBC ...
That alone should’ve been confirmation enough that he wasn’t.
“Is it true, or did you see it on the BBC?”
-
8 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:
Erm, I’ve clearly read it.
A player putting his hands on another can impede another player so using your logic it’s a pen.
Even a few tims I know who are watching the game are pissing themselves laughing because it wasn’t a pen. Your team has won so I’m fecked if I know why you’re trying to justify Christie’s cheating. He was the same at Aberdeen, a diving wee prick and I doubt he will change
Yes a player putting his hands on another CAN impede his opponent. But in Sinclair’s case it didn’t. Hence no penalty. Also by my logic not a pen. Easy really.
Of the four penalty shouts, only one was a pen and it was given.
Could Christie have stayed on his feet? Maybe he could. Nobody but him will ever know for sure. But if he could it still doesn’t mean he wasn’t fouled.
-
1 minute ago, vanderark14 said:
Contraction city in there
Not at all
Try reading and understanding what I’ve said. Understanding the laws might help too.
There is zero similarity in the two incidents so cannot be compared and there cannot therefore be any contradiction.
-
2 minutes ago, JECK said:
Pathetic from hearts, no fight nothing. Far to easy for Celtic yet again.
Bit harsh.
Thought Hearts did well and fought hard up until going behind. But if you’re talking about their reaction to going behind then yes you’re right.
-
3 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:
The defenders hand were all over him, using your own logic that’s a foul and therefore a penalty.
neither incident was a foul
Having his hands all over him doesn't make it a penalty. Football is a game where you’re allowed to put you’re hands on another player. Wasn’t being held and wasn’t being pulled so no foul.
Christie was clipped by the defender, not much in it, but clipped enough to impede him.
Studio qualified ref agrees so that’ll do for me.
-
2 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:
Christie wasn’t fouled, he was clear to move forward but he chose to dive. I get it’s your team and you’ll defend them but that wasn’t a foul, it wasn’t a penalty and he cheated.
He was fouled. A relatively innocuous foul, but a foul.
Anywhere else on the pitch and that would’ve been given with little argument.
Interestingly, the BT studio ref agreed it was a penalty, presumably having seen it a number of times from a number of angles.
-
Just now, Barney Rubble said:
Shocker from the keeper.
On that we’ll agree
Tough on Hearts, they’ve played well enough today and frustrated Celtic for the most part.
-
Just for clarity, it’s my opinion that Sinclair dived and should’ve been booked.
-
4 minutes ago, vanderark14 said:
Ah, I see. Almost on the same wavelength. I’ve no issue with either but slightly favour murrayfield
A daft tackle does not = penalty or even a foul. There wasn’t anywhere near enough contact for Christie to go down and that’s what matters. He cheated, ref bought it and hearts have been cheated
It’s possible to be fouled and not go down. Staying on feet doesn’t equal no foul, neither does going down equal one. These are popular myths.
-
2 minutes ago, Barney Rubble said:
It wasn't a penalty and it was an ill-considered challenge.
Ask yourself what would your reaction be had Lustig done the same at the opposite end?
I’d be annoyed with Lustig for giving away such a cheap penalty.
-
1 minute ago, Jim Beem said:
There is absolutely no way that contact caused Christie to fall to the floor 😂😂 Come on to fuck
You’re quite probably right, but that doesn’t make it not a foul
-
1 minute ago, Barney Rubble said:
It was a daft tackle to attempt for sure as Christie was going nowhere.
That didn't make it a penalty though.
The two don’t depend on each other for both to be true
It was a penalty and it was also a daft tackle
League cup final thread
in Football related - Discussion of non TA football
Posted
Yes, he stood on Lowe’s ankle. Deliberate it certainly wasn’t.