BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Roseanna Cunningham was indeed the Minister to whom I put the point about the "resonable person" test. However, as I said twice in the thread I am 99% sure the Act will not be repealed; if anything it will be strengthened in the light of case law. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hildy 0 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Celtic, today, for their own one-eyed reasons, have done football fans, and the very worthy cause of freedom of expression, a large favour with their very public opposition to this law. There are no circumstances, none whatsoever, where Rangers would dare to take such a bold stand against the government, but Celtic, out of naked self-interest, have created a very interesting situation at a particularly interesting time. If the law holds, the SNP will have won itself a powerful enemy, and with the referendum approaching, they may not be keen to do so. If they bin this law, as they should, Celtic will emerge as a heroic football club to both its supporters and civil liberties groups, and also be seen as a force to be reckoned with throughout the land. Even if Celtic are denied, their stance will win them admirers for standing up to a law which has no place on the stature books of any country that genuinely believes itself to be a mature democracy. Whatever happens next, Celtic will be seen as a club that fights for its fans - and against oppressive laws that discriminate against them. We may not have heard the last of that famous line from twenty years ago - the rebels have won. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Celtic, today, for their own one-eyed reasons, have done football fans, and the very worthy cause of freedom of expression, a large favour with their very public opposition to this law. There are no circumstances, none whatsoever, where Rangers would dare to take such a bold stand against the government, but Celtic, out of naked self-interest, have created a very interesting situation at a particularly interesting time. If the law holds, the SNP will have won itself a powerful enemy, and with the referendum approaching, they may not be keen to do so. If they bin this law, as they should, Celtic will emerge as a heroic football club to both its supporters and civil liberties groups, and also be seen as a force to be reckoned with throughout the land. Even if Celtic are denied, their stance will win them admirers for standing up to a law which has no place on the stature books of any country that genuinely believes itself to be a mature democracy. Whatever happens next, Celtic will be seen as a club that fights for its fans - and against oppressive laws that discriminate against them. We may not have heard the last of that famous line from twenty years ago - the rebels have won. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk Without a doubt it's a very clever move on behalf of Celtic FC. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 I agree with BH that this Act is not for turning. I also agree that CFC has made a clever move. It was argued by many at the time that Irish/Catholic identity (presumably including Republicanism and IRAism) should not be included in the Act. Here's a link to the submissions. http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/31448.aspx I don't reckon for one second that CFC or the Green Brigade want an even handed approach to the problem. They have probably realised that the old way was more effective. Use the media and football authorities to bring pressure for one of our songs/chants to be banned (outwith any legislation) so I would assume that getting rid of the Act would suit them best so that they can continue their IRAoke fest, and have their fun popping off another stalwart or ten from our repertoire. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Just change the name to 'Offensive Behaviour at Ibrox and on Rangers Messageboards Bill' and all will be well. While I have little problem with our own ubers being forced to give up the songbook, I don't see why other people should be allowed to say or sing whatever they like - kind of, I dunno, not very fair. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,678 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Without a doubt it's a very clever move on behalf of Celtic FC. Because their supporters are the biggest offenders? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Because their supporters are the biggest offenders? Regardless of who are the biggest offenders; they must have known they would get no change out of the SG at this time, so they curry favour amongst all supporters (not least their own) by appearing to be the fans' champions at no cost to themselves. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,678 Posted March 4, 2014 Share Posted March 4, 2014 Regardless of who are the biggest offenders; they must have known they would get no change out of the SG at this time, so they curry favour amongst all supporters (not least their own) by appearing to be the fans' champions at no cost to themselves. So why weren't they opposed to this legislation when McConnell's Lhabour introduced it then ? I'll tell you why - because it was primarily introduced to target Rangers supporters whilst other clubs supporters actions would largely be overlooked. Lhabour lost the next Holyrood election and the incoming SNP government tried to apply this law evenly to all clubs resulting where we are today I.e. Celtic supporters probably the worst offenders despite the fact they still seem to get off scot free for their blatant support for Irish terrorist groups every time they play 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,748 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 On a sidenote, I noted that the puppetmaster has been appointed to the Executive Board of the European Club Association. They already have one boardie amongst the commitee for Financial Fair Play (no irony here, please). And what is the first he says about that ... "As we look to the future, I look forward to representing Celtic, Scottish clubs and the other clubs in Europe to ensure that the voice of these clubs and their supporters is heard." How long before the ECA thinks again about us being the same club? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,678 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 On a sidenote, I noted that the puppetmaster has been appointed to the Executive Board of the European Club Association. They already have one boardie amongst the commitee for Financial Fair Play (no irony here, please). And what is the first he says about that ... "As we look to the future, I look forward to representing Celtic, Scottish clubs and the other clubs in Europe to ensure that the voice of these clubs and their supporters is heard." How long before the ECA thinks again about us being the same club? This is where we need a strong, robust CEO to come out and say that in no way does Liewell speak on behalf of us. Liewell and his grotesque club have far too much power in Scottish football at present. One of the biggest challenges facing GW will be to regain some of that power in the next year or so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.