union

“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent. (A player who uses excessive force must be sent off) When deciding whether a challenge is worthy of a sanction i.e. punishable by a yellow or red card, take into consideration the following factors: The position of the ball, what are the chances of playing the ball in a fair manner? A tackle may still be considered reckless (or even with excessive force) even though the ball is played. Where contact is made with the ball and opponent at speed and without consideration for the potential danger to the opponent, it should be punished appropriately. The speed or the intensity of the challenge. Is the player in control of his actions, or is he “off the ground” and out of control when he makes the challenge?

There is no doubt the challenge on Kenny was with excessive force,also a straight red.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39729731

The FIFA site is crystal clear dangerous play is a red,it was the beaks who framed brown's reduced charge as recklessly dangerous,perhaps the beaks don't understand the rule/law the only one that covers dangerous play .

It certainly has looked that way for a long time.

brown had his charge reduced to reckless and dangerous play,the only sanction for dangerous play is a red card by FIFA directive.

I would think that Findlay putting murray's evidence into disrepute would add weight to the disreputable tag.

? Referee John Beaton could have stopped play for the force of the challenge alone. Sometimes you’ll see referees doing this just to calm down the player involved, or the game as a whole. However, that would have put Beaton in an awkward position. People would have asked why he didn’t give a card given that he awarded the foul. • Craig Anderson is a former fully qualified referee. He is also the man behind SPL Stats on Twitter.

We require tens of millions,kings impending CoS appearance for failure to comply leaves all in limbo.

He states , "Brown has looked behind him and seen Miller coming so all he wants to do is get his body in front to create a shield and halt his progress" at the time I thought it was deliberate obstruction with an elbow assault for good measure.I still do.

Isn't that obstruction he is describing at the very least. Brown has looked behind him and seen Miller coming so all he wants to do is get his body in front to create a shield and halt his progress. He brought his elbow up and Miller ran into it.''

Seems mccoist thought neither assault was worthy of a foul.

A small part of Findlay's questioning and disbelieve,murray was also warned by the Lady Judge about trickery in his responses. Findlay also made it clear that protocol would be followed in court, not murray's idea of it. http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/ex-rangers-owner-david-murray-10319183

I doubt that murray has seen the last of the High Court dock after Findlay's dismantling of his evidence last week.

I have just read about murray's lawyer and the note regarding whyte obtaining a possible facility from octopus,murray claims to have no knowledge or have seen the lawyers note. I am with Findlay on this one,I do not believe a word of what murray says.

The shame of last Sunday impossibly became worse today,bullied second to everything not at the races,rudderless in an ever darkening tempest. There is absolutely no defence for the board or king they are finished,a shambles.

Shameful and gutless stood off and never competed,chased instead of tackling and closing down,even this early I fear another manager for whom The Rangers job is far to big.

I have my suspicions that this is an episode the CO would like to forget and quickly,considering the bollockings they have had from judges over their lack of preparation and charges.

Do we yet know what whyte is charged with,or like Findlay stated in the last court fiasco are we still waiting on the CO furnishing the court with charges. I have absolutely no faith in the CO/PF offices to secure anything after this case has collapsed from conspiracy to last man standing. I would think that would be Findlay's main platform of attack,CO incompetence from outset.

Apologies hard to remember at times,the guy has issued an apology to you regarding some sort of name mix-up. Posted on April 16, 2017 Spreadsheets Here, Spreadsheets There, Spreadsheets Fucking Everywhere! First up I’d like to take this opportunity to clear up some confusion. I was threatened by a guy called Franky around 10 months ago. Franky told me he’d posted my home address & business details all over the internet in order that certain people could find me. These threats were made by a guy called Franky an RST Member and not Frankie from Gersnet. I have no issue with Gersnet whatsoever. When RST Franky was challenged about this he deleted tweets and blocked me on twitter. Threats don’t work. I apologise to Gersnet and Frankie for any confusion arising from this.

You are seriously mistaken, I have never quoted said blogger before or ever been warned about doing so.

Thanks m8 appreciated, thought I had done something wrong.

link seems to be blocked,pity everywhere else is reading it.

Don't see much if anything to contradict in this.

His position is already untenable, as many have pointed out his concert party cohorts threw him under the bus in their evidence to the TOP committee,the court of session are only being asked to order enforcement of the TOP ruling. You appear to be suggesting King is working his ticket. Court penalties would ensue if King ignores a court of session order to comply, penalties include prison as it is a criminal not a civil offence to ignore a court of session edict.