sp&cp Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 source : http://twitter.com/#!/STVRaman "STV Understands that Paul Sergio has been foundy guilty on 2 charges, but will receive NO touchline ban" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 It's a conspiracy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Quite right too as he done nothing wrong. I am certain, however, they are saving it for next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 source : http://twitter.com/#!/STVRaman "STV Understands that Paul Sergio has been foundy guilty on 2 charges, but will receive NO touchline ban" That sounds fair enough. Hopefully he has learned his lesson. Hope to see the discipline of the team improve and that should start from the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp&cp Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 Some of the replies to the tweet are laughable from OF fans, it really is a conspiracy seemingly.. if it was Neil Lennon this, if it was Neil Lennon that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilnunb Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Hopefully next time he gets sent to the stand it'll be for something worthwhile....like smashing that **** Kenny Shiels square in the pus! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Juan Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Which reads to me as the gfa realise that they would get ripped apart by Hearts over the Brines lying incident and decided to appease Hearts by not giving Paulo a ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toronto Jambo Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 This is only for the comments made re Ian Brines. The hearing date for being sent to the stands is Nov. 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Gordons Gloves Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 does this mean Hearts will lift the media 'non co-operation' now or will it still be in place due to him being 'guilty'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Getintaethem Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Thought this might be the case this time. I expect a 3 or 4 game ban when the hearing for the Kilmarnock game happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flux Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Reservoir Dog Smiley? Mr Maroon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 "Mitigating circumstances" - Brines is a cheat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 How could you ban this fine looking chap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Which reads to me as the gfa realise that they would get ripped apart by Hearts over the Brines lying incident and decided to appease Hearts by not giving Paulo a ban. That is actually a very good point which I never thought of. Perhaps it get Brines off the hook more than Sergio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 This is a massive blow for those that are convinced the SFA is corrupt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 That is actually a very good point which I never thought of. Perhaps it get Brines off the hook more than Sergio. it better not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Tucker Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 SFA shat it, NAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Sexington Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Paulo's pleased. http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/articles/20111103/paulo-pleased-with-sfa-decision_2241384_2505042 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Good call by the SFA. Hearts still need to push them though on an answer to the Brines debacle. Has he reffed a game since of any meaning? No disrespect to the wee teams if he has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facepalm Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 This is a massive blow for those that are convinced the SFA is corrupt. Explain that one please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Back to 2005 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Good call by the SFA. Hearts still need to push them though on an answer to the Brines debacle. Has he reffed a game since of any meaning? No disrespect to the wee teams if he has. Totally agree. Still waiting for an explanation for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Explain that one please. What part are you struggling with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Good call by the SFA. Hearts still need to push them though on an answer to the Brines debacle. Has he reffed a game since of any meaning? No disrespect to the wee teams if he has. only 1 SPL game i think. dunfermline v rangers (we all know what happened then). i haven't noticed tom murphys involvement in any SPL games since ayr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missusm Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 He'll still end up with a ban for his actions on saturday though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Did the hearing today include Saturday's shenanigans? If not, why would he/we/anyone be expecting a touchline ban? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Did the hearing today include Saturday's shenanigans? If not, why would he/we/anyone be expecting a touchline ban? NO, that hearing is later this month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginten Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 This is only for the comments made re Ian Brines. The hearing date for being sent to the stands is Nov. 17 This is my understanding. To be honest there didn't seem to be any reason for a ban, as DETTY29 says above. When Neil Lennon questioned a similarly contentious and puzzling decision, there were resignations. And that was a decision that had no bearing on the outcome of the match. I think Sergio will get absolutely hammered for last Saturday, though. He had obviously been watching footage of Rudi telling the Hibees where to go in 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 This is a massive blow for those that are convinced the SFA is corrupt. Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Did the hearing today include Saturday's shenanigans? If not, why would he/we/anyone be expecting a touchline ban? No,think it's the 17th they will look at that,THB I would be fecking livid if he didn't get some kind of ban for that,he should never act like that when he is representing Heart of Midlothian Football Club,get a grip Paulo,your actions did not fit in with what the ref did or didn't do,OTT to say the least. There just for you boo hoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Hearts of Midlothian, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Back to 2005 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Yep. When the SFA give us a reason for the disallowed goal that was given by both Brines and Murphy then people may be less likely to think they are corrupt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 No Jambo I've ever known has called us hearts of midlothian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 When the SFA give us a reason for the disallowed goal that was given by both Brines and Murphy then people may be less likely to think they are corrupt. this times 1,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 No Jambo I've ever known has called us hearts of midlothian that plummy bint on stv news did the same last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Reservoir Dog Smiley? Mr Maroon? This needs to be a smiley!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coatbridgejambo Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 ******* sympathy vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 We can all breathe a sigh of relief and return to accepting the OF domination of Scottish Football, the bias of much of the weegie meedjia because, the sages of JKB tell us that, on the back of this decision, there is absolutely no corruption!!! All we need to cement this wonderful news is for Brines to be brought to account! It can only be a matter of time with the paragons of virtue at Hampden cleaning up Scottish football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorgie rd eh11 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Did the SFA not have some problems recently with concurrent and consecutive bans? I'd save the good old SFA stuff till after the second hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huskycol Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 When the SFA give us a reason for the disallowed goal that was given by both Brines and Murphy then people may be less likely to think they are corrupt. The Club has had a reply Paragraph 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The Club has had a reply Paragraph 7 maybe US, means those who witnessed the events at ayr, rather than just the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 The Club has had a reply Paragraph 7 Wonder what the reply was,you would think if it was bunkum then Mr "it's all their fault" would have let everyone know,then again it might have just made to much sense and made him look like an arse,again,will we ever know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Good. And Brines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzyonthefence Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Good. And Brines? Who knows? As has been said earlier the club has already had a reply a while ago but no surprise, as with the wages shambles, there has been no communication from the club to let everyone know what's happening. It's clear Romanov doesn't give a sh1t about the fans or even the shareholders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Who knows? As has been said earlier the club has already had a reply a while ago but no surprise, as with the wages shambles, there has been no communication from the club to let everyone know what's happening. It's clear Romanov doesn't give a sh1t about the fans or even the shareholders. What we actually needed was a "concerned" lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huskycol Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Who knows? As has been said earlier the club has already had a reply a while ago but no surprise, as with the wages shambles, there has been no communication from the club to let everyone know what's happening. It's clear Romanov doesn't give a sh1t about the fans or even the shareholders. That is from the clubs website last month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huskycol Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Wonder what the reply was,you would think if it was bunkum then Mr "it's all their fault" would have let everyone know,then again it might have just made to much sense and made him look like an arse,again,will we ever know? Going By what Sergio said at that press conference the sfa has said Brines gave the handball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Yep. No it doesn't. It actually confirms they are covering Brines stinking fat hairy arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Going By what Sergio said at that press conference the sfa has said Brines gave the handball. So,if vlad/Paulo think is crap then why don't they do what the tims done and PROVE he was lying then,or perhaps they can't,so a media black out is the easiest option to stop people asking to many questions about one thing or another. Pretty sure,after all vlad carping on about the SFA being corrupt this would have been right up his street to prove he was correct,you would have thought that someone with such a hatred towards them (SFA,media,refs) he would have got his teeth and best lawyers to rip them a new one,come on vlad,your the one making all these accusations,back them up now that you finally have the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 So,if vlad/Paulo think is crap then why don't they do what the tims done and PROVE he was lying then,or perhaps they can't,so a media black out is the easiest option to stop people asking to many questions about one thing or another. Pretty sure,after all vlad carping on about the SFA being corrupt this would have been right up his street to prove he was correct,you would have thought that someone with such a hatred towards them (SFA,media,refs) he would have got his teeth and best lawyers to rip them a new one,come on vlad,your the one making all these accusations,back them up now that you finally have the evidence. If Brines said he gave handball then the TV pictures prove he was lying as he is seen to give the goal TWICE, once right away and once after the Ayr players surrounded him. No need for Hearts/Vlad to prove anything because Brines has dropped himself in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 If Brines said he gave handball then the TV pictures prove he was lying as he is seen to give the goal TWICE, once right away and once after the Ayr players surrounded him. No need for Hearts/Vlad to prove anything because Brines has dropped himself in it. Good,then lets see vlad take the SFA all the way,do you think he will,after-all the evidence is there for all to see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.