Why has no media outlet condemned Celtic F.C. ???

[Guest JamboRobbo]

Your NO Hearts fan!!

 

Top debating as usual. Don't understand why these sort of attacks on fellow fans are tolerated on here?

[sjh1874]

Let me guess? The alians are out to get HMFC? I don't know and I don't care. Motherwell v Rangers has nothing to do with HMFC.

 

Still waiting to hear how a man dying can be considered "bait".

 

Was it "bait" when we had a tribute to Wallace Mercer versus the Hobos?

 

Nice mature answer that one.

 

I suppose "bait" could be when authorities or a person knows something is undoubted going to happen and lets it go ahead anyhow.

 

Celtic removed the bait from the hook Saturday.

 

Wallace Mercer's was chairman of HMFC PLC and hence had a tribute at the next home game. He was not some religious leader without connection to football.

[Gizmo]

Whilst it's irritating we should really focus on the things we can directly control. Our own fan base. Once we've wiped out the nonsense that a minority perpetuate we can then look to condemn others.

 

I agree, and I'm not trying to gain any moral highground whilst we still have bigoted/sectarian attitudes prevalent within a percentageof our own supporters.

 

My point was more in relation to the authorities within the game giving Celtic and Rangers the opportunity to avoid highlighting the behaviour of the bigoted element of their supporters (the option of a minute's applause for Remembrance weekend, not having Celtic hold a minute's silence for the Queen Mother passing, not having Rangers hold a minute's silence for the Pope etc), yet they did not protect our club in a similar fashion.

[Drylaw Hearts]

And again I will repeat there is NO need to ask fans within a football arena to pay respects to a religious leader. None what-so-ever.

 

As much as I agree with this...

 

The Club agreed to request of a minutes silence and the Hearts fans should have shown a bit more respect and bit more common sense by either staying quiet or staying outside until it was over.

 

I have no feelings for many of the people we've been asked to have a minutes silence for but I've always managed to show a bit of respect.

 

IIRC, I had to participate in a minutes silence for Princess Diana - what did she have to do with football ?

 

It's 60 seconds of your life to show a bit of repect for someone who has died - it's not a big ask.

[djf]

Big man, as I said on Saturday, this place is infested with Hobo's and other infiltrators, Half the arguments on the Silence for remembrance day are beyond a Joke....It's OUR Fault they never had a minutes silence, because some Hearts supporters didn't stay silent for a religious leader who died 2 weeks before!!

 

I wouldn't be surprised if some on here didn't actually AGREE with the

S C U M walkout!!

 

Your reading comprehension skills could really do with some work.

 

Where has anybody said it is Hearts fault Celtic didn't host a silence?

 

Or is this one of those occasions where you make a load of hyperbole up to suit your agenda and hope nobody bothers to read back in the thread.

 

I think the argument is, we lost our right to take the moral high ground over such an issue a few years back due to the actions of a minority of morons in our support.

 

And whilst I don't agree with their walk-out, I certainly support their right to do so. After all, what was the point in people sacrificing their lives if we don't have true freedom of expression?

[sjh1874]

You'll need to enlighten me as to how the silences are authorised.

 

I'm assuming Celtic requested a silence for the Pope and that was granted.

 

By the same token i'm assuming Rangers didn't.

 

In all honesty, the reasons for the silence and the decision to host it are really none of my concern. The actions of the Hearts fans present are.

 

For one, I do wonder how the Catholic Hearts' players felt when their own support was boo-ing their religious leader. Must have been quite difficult for them.

 

As your post states, you are ass-u-ming.

 

No where in my previous posts have I agreed with the booing of the pontiffs death.

[Victor Meldrew]

I think there are people on here with agendas and they will have a go at Celtic regardless.

 

When a small amount of numpties booed during a minutes silence for the Pope, they claimed we were set up by making us go through that minutes silence, and that the minutes silence shouldn't have taken place at that game as it was always going to result in booing.

 

I'm sure it's the very same people, who are now saying it's wrong that Celtic weren't made to go through the same thing. It would appear the real issue here, is that some are dissapointed the Celtic bigots weren't allowed to make fools of themselves the same way our bigots did.

 

In a sense, I can't blame Celtic FC for trying to avoid the problem: just look at the outcry there was when some of our fans booed the Pope.

 

However, Remembrance Sunday is a national event where we remember our war dead. We all do it together, in the same. Not by applauding, but by keeping silent.

 

By having applause, Celtic have tried to skirt around the issue - disguising the problem they have with their fans. Whilst it is unpalatable, the right thing for them to have done would have been to have the minute's silence, make sure that there were sufficient stewards and police and tell the fans that those disrupting the silence would be banned from Parkhead.

 

Instead, the Club chose the cowardly way out. It does them no credit, and does not honour those who werebrave enough to lay down their lives for their country.

 

Don't get me wrong - I condemn those who disrupted the minute's silence for the Pope. But there is a difference: the Pope is someone with whom many in Britain have no connection whatsoever. Neiher is he a football figure, and therefore it seems to me that it was highly doubtful whether there should have been a minute's silence for him any way. wouldn't expect one if the Archbishop of Canterbury or the moderator of the Church of Scotland were to die.

 

The war dead, however, are those who fought and died to keep us free. It's only becaue of them that we are able to watch football on a saturday. Celtic FC and their fans should think about that.

[sjh1874]

Big man, as I said on Saturday, this place is infested with Hobo's and other infiltrators, Half the arguments on the Silence for remembrance day are beyond a Joke....It's OUR Fault they never had a minutes silence, because some Hearts supporters didn't stay silent for a religious leader who died 2 weeks before!!

 

I wouldn't be surprised if some on here didn't actually AGREE with the

S C U M walkout!!

 

Too true mate.

[sjh1874]

In a sense, I can't blame Celtic FC for trying to avoid the problem: just look at the outcry there was when some of our fans booed the Pope.

 

However, Remembrance Sunday is a national event where we remember our war dead. We all do it together, in the same. Not by applauding, but by keeping silent.

 

By having applause, Celtic have tried to skirt around the issue - disguising the problem they have with their fans. Whilst it is unpalatable, the right thing for them to have done would have been to have the minute's silence, make sure that there were sufficient stewards and police and tell the fans that those disrupting the silence would be banned from Parkhead.

 

Instead, the Club chose the cowardly way out. It does them no credit, and does not honour those who werebrave enough to lay down their lives for their country.

 

Don't get me wrong - I condemn those who disrupted the minute's silence for the Pope. But there is a difference: the Pope is someone with whom many in Britain have no connection whatsoever. Neiher is he a football figure, and therefore it seems to me that it was highly doubtful whether there should have been a minute's silence for him any way. wouldn't expect one if the Archbishop of Canterbury or the moderator of the Church of Scotland were to die.

 

The war dead, however, are those who fought and died to keep us free. It's only becaue of them that we are able to watch football on a saturday. Celtic FC and their fans should think about that.

 

 

Spot on.

[djf]

As your post states, you are ass-u-ming.

 

No where in my previous posts have I agreed with the booing of the pontiffs death.

 

As I said, enlighten me.

 

How does the decision of when and where to hold silences take place?

 

You're clearly educated on the subject.

[Guest casper]

Wallace Mercer's was chairman of HMFC PLC and hence had a tribute at the next home game. He was not some religious leader without connection to football.

 

Are you saying there should only be silences for football connected mourning. There have been many silences for non-footballing mourning - the Dunblane school children for example. Should that not have happened?

[spacerjoe]

Lets try to get a few important facts straight.

 

The one minutes silence for the pope at the semi-final was a full two weeks after his passing and indeed after his burial. Why did the SFA feel it was appropriate to hold the silence after his burial when surely all people who felt they needed to mourn and pay respects had ample opportunity to do so.

 

Why did the SFA feel it was appropriate to NOT hold a minutes silence at the Motherwell v Rangers match the day AFTER his passing.

 

Why oh why do we insist on having a minutes silence for religious leaders at a football match when the majority of one half of the crowd have no allegiance to the deceased person.

 

Why were Celtic fans at this Sunday lunchtime kick off in the first place if they put some much fervour into paying their respects surely they should have attended Chapel instead to pay the appropriate respects.

 

We were set up and sadly we took the bait.

 

As for Saturdays match, Celtic were asked to pay respect to the fallen over two world wars and current conflicts. Maybe it has bypassed their narrow minds but the great wars did not differentiate on religion when taking the lives of millions.

 

Anyone who cannot see the difference here really needs to have a word.

 

Great facts, all of them. Well done on the facts.

 

However, why did this make it necessary for people to boo? I'm not sure I understand?

 

Could somebody not have presented a reasoned argument to the SFA? Or would they rather just boo and let everybody quite rightly guess that it was nothing else than a bigeotted dig at Celtic and their Catholic roots.

 

Those who chose to boo on that day made us all look like c ****.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

In a sense, I can't blame Celtic FC for trying to avoid the problem: just look at the outcry there was when some of our fans booed the Pope.

 

However, Remembrance Sunday is a national event where we remember our war dead. We all do it together, in the same. Not by applauding, but by keeping silent.

 

By having applause, Celtic have tried to skirt around the issue - disguising the problem they have with their fans. Whilst it is unpalatable, the right thing for them to have done would have been to have the minute's silence, make sure that there were sufficient stewards and police and tell the fans that those disrupting the silence would be banned from Parkhead.

 

Instead, the Club chose the cowardly way out. It does them no credit, and does not honour those who werebrave enough to lay down their lives for their country.

 

Don't get me wrong - I condemn those who disrupted the minute's silence for the Pope. But there is a difference: the Pope is someone with whom many in Britain have no connection whatsoever. Neiher is he a football figure, and therefore it seems to me that it was highly doubtful whether there should have been a minute's silence for him any way. wouldn't expect one if the Archbishop of Canterbury or the moderator of the Church of Scotland were to die.

 

The war dead, however, are those who fought and died to keep us free. It's only becaue of them that we are able to watch football on a saturday. Celtic FC and their fans should think about that.

 

All fair enough.

 

For me, I see little reason to give the morons their moment of fame if we know it's gonna happen. Seems to me Celtic knew fine the morons in their support couldn't behave, so they worked out a solution which was acceptable to the SPL/SFA or whoever.

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out.

 

It's a shame that our morons got their moment of fame, but I don't see that as a reason to encourage the problem by giving Celtics morons their moment of fame also? Their club is getting a bit of stick for taking the option they did (applause), but it seems to me like the sensible option given the circumstances.

[gorgie rd eh11]

The original question hasn't been answered, why have the media not made such a fuss about the celtic fans walk out as they did about the pope booing thing.

No points scoring, no one thing is better than the other.

 

Was what some Hearts fans did worse than what some celtic fans did. Given the difference in coverage it would appear so.

[sjh1874]

Great facts, all of them. Well done on the facts.

 

However, why did this make it necessary for people to boo? I'm not sure I understand?

 

Could somebody not have presented a reasoned argument to the SFA? Or would they rather just boo and let everybody quite rightly guess that it was nothing else than a bigeotted dig at Celtic and their Catholic roots.

 

Those who chose to boo on that day made us all look like c ****.

 

Many thanks for the sarcastic congrats on the facts. Appreciate that.

 

Sometimes like at Celtic Park on Saturday people in power take an alternative route. Wrongly in my mind.

 

For the record IT WAS wrong of Hearts fans to boo the silence. It was also WRONG IMHO to have the silence in the first place.

[Broxburn Jambo]

And we?re trying to take the moral high ground. Some need to look in the mirror.

 

I have kept quiet about this whole debate until now. This always come back to the minutes silence for the pope.

 

We should never have had that silence in more than 40 years of watching football we have never had a silence for

 

THE CHIEF RABBI

THE ARCHPISHOP OF CANTEBURY

THE DALAI LAMA

MODERATOR OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND

THE AYATOLLAH WHOEVER

 

WHY THE POPE?

[Guest juvehearts]

sellik are a vhile club

 

so is ALL of their mhanky fhans & anyone who assosiates themselfs with that shower.

 

the extended fhamily, sheep, ahdrhie, mhothersellik,saint mhirren, & hibs, dhundhee united.

[Colonel Kurtz]

All fair enough.

 

For me, I see little reason to give the morons their moment of fame if we know it's gonna happen. Seems to me Celtic knew fine the morons in their support couldn't behave, so they worked out a solution which was acceptable to the SPL/SFA or whoever.

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out.

 

It's a shame that our morons got their moment of fame, but I don't see that as a reason to encourage the problem by giving Celtics morons their moment of fame also? Their club is getting a bit of stick for taking the option they did (applause), but it seems to me like the sensible option given the circumstances.

 

i believe the then head of security at Hearts,told the SFA he had concerns.

So did the SFA ,that is why there was no minutes silence at Motherwell v Rangers.

The SFA were put under pressure directly by Mcconnell.

Look at the make up of Scottish labour and where their pwerbase is,this was a case wherer the more fundamentalist element in the Celtic support decided they would impose a minutes siilence on a non catholic country.

There had never been a silence for a previous pope and given the current incumbants early membership if the Hitler youth ,I doubt there will be soon.

This was no desire for remberance or gesture of faith,this was a flexing of muscles and a disgracefulexemple of religious fascism.

A small band of extremists exercised political influence on a weak government

[Tazio]

sellik are a vhile club

 

so is ALL of their mhanky fhans & anyone who assosiates themselfs with that shower.

 

the extended fhamily, sheep, ahdrhie, mhothersellik,saint mhirren, & hibs, dhundhee united.

 

Airdrie?? Oh dear. Not generally classed as a catholic minded club.

[Guest casper]

I have kept quiet about this whole debate until now. This always come back to the minutes silence for the pope.

 

We should never have had that silence in more than 40 years of watching football we have never had a silence for

 

THE CHIEF RABBI

THE ARCHPISHOP OF CANTEBURY

THE DALAI LAMA

MODERATOR OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND

THE AYATOLLAH WHOEVER

 

WHY THE POPE?

 

I agree with you - but it happened and we had to deal with it in a respectful, if grudging, manner. Unfortunately some couldn't deal with it and it now leaves us open to the accusation of double standards when talking about what happened at parkheed on Saturday.

[Guest juvehearts]

they come from the west coast.

 

anything to get it up traynor!

[Victor Meldrew]

To be fair to the media, in addition to the article in the Times that has been mentioned, a google search on "Celtic Fans Remembrance" brings up an article in the Telegraph and one in the Scotsman, both of which note the possibility of a protest as the reason for applause.

 

As I have said, Celtic FC have taken steps to avoid their fans having th opportunity to embarrass the club in the wa that some of our fans did in 2005.

 

I think that it is for that reason that there isn't more of an outcry.

[Victor Meldrew]

All fair enough.

 

For me, I see little reason to give the morons their moment of fame if we know it's gonna happen. Seems to me Celtic knew fine the morons in their support couldn't behave, so they worked out a solution which was acceptable to the SPL/SFA or whoever.

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out.

 

It's a shame that our morons got their moment of fame, but I don't see that as a reason to encourage the problem by giving Celtics morons their moment of fame also? Their club is getting a bit of stick for taking the option they did (applause), but it seems to me like the sensible option given the circumstances.

 

I agree with you that it's a shame for the morons to get their moment of fame, but with something like this, it is difficult to see what the alternative is: we all kno that a minute's silence is the way in which we commemorate our war dead. Doing something different to avoid it being spoiled sort of has the same effect - we all know why they're doing it, after all.

 

In my view, Celtic will never sort out their problems if they are allowed to deny they exist. For example, they always refer to a small minority of fans at away games as being the prblem, when we all know that simply isn't true. Had there been a minute's silence at Celtic Park and it had been interrupted, I think there would have been condemnation of the Celtic fans, and rightly so. Had that been the case, the club couldn't have got away with ignoring the problem.

 

Instead, they had their minute's applause and can say the event passed off without any problems. They'll continue to deny they hve any real sectarian problems, and their fans will go on singing about the IRA with the Club turning a blind eye, along with their friends in the media.

 

It is a difficult issue - it would be awful for a silence in honour of our war heroes to be disrupted, but can we honestly say that Saturday's event was any more respectful?

[ChemicalJambo]

All fair enough.

 

For me, I see little reason to give the morons their moment of fame if we know it's gonna happen. Seems to me Celtic knew fine the morons in their support couldn't behave, so they worked out a solution which was acceptable to the SPL/SFA or whoever.

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out.

 

It's a shame that our morons got their moment of fame, but I don't see that as a reason to encourage the problem by giving Celtics morons their moment of fame also? Their club is getting a bit of stick for taking the option they did (applause), but it seems to me like the sensible option given the circumstances.

 

 

Totally agree, Hearts have a small number of bigotted fans, bet they were delighted with the CNN fame.

They shouldn't have been given the platform for it, and its the SFA who set that up for them

[Guest Dipped Flake]

In our case, our morons went ahead with their moronic booing.

 

In Celtics case, their morons booing was pre-empted by having a minutes applause instead. So the booing didn't actually happen.

 

Did you expect a headline speculating that "Celtics fans would've booed had they had a minutes silence rather than a minutes applause?"

 

You know you really do deserve so much of the flak you get don't you. If you actually read what I posted, I said that the media were ignoring the fact that celtic were the only club in Britain not to hold a minutes silence. Any chance you can comment on that

[ChemicalJambo]

I agree with you that it's a shame for the morons to get their moment of fame, but with something like this, it is difficult to see what the alternative is: we all kno that a minute's silence is the way in which we commemorate our war dead. Doing something different to avoid it being spoiled sort of has the same effect - we all know why they're doing it, after all.

 

In my view, Celtic will never sort out their problems if they are allowed to deny they exist. For example, they always refer to a small minority of fans at away games as being the prblem, when we all know that simply isn't true. Had there been a minute's silence at Celtic Park and it had been interrupted, I think there would have been condemnation of the Celtic fans, and rightly so. Had that been the case, the club couldn't have got away with ignoring the problem.

 

Instead, they had their minute's applause and can say the event passed off without any problems. They'll continue to deny they hve any real sectarian problems, and their fans will go on singing about the IRA with the Club turning a blind eye, along with their friends in the media.

 

It is a difficult issue - it would be awful for a silence in honour of our war heroes to be disrupted, but can we honestly say that Saturday's event was any more respectful?

 

I agree its a very difficult issue, what do you do when a large group of people have views that differ from the rest?

 

I think all minute silences/applauses should be optional, the clubs could then decline the option and say there's other places where people can pay their respects

[mickmaroon]

Unfortunately there are similarities between the 2.

 

2 seperate minutes of silence ruined by a bunch of morons.

 

Not often I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with you D.H. ... but on this one you are absolutely right.

[Guest JamboRobbo]

You know you really do deserve so much of the flak you get don't you.

 

Cheers for your valuable input to the debate.

[jamboron]

For not having a minutes silence on saturday? A friend of mine who is a season ticket holder at the piggery was disgusted that there was no silence!!

 

I said the same thing, but yesterdays Sunday Post had a spread with a picture of the worlds greatest fans disgusting attention seeing actions on page 3 both displaying posters and a banner calling the directors hypocrites.WTF was that about everyone knows who the hypocrites are , & it isn`t the directors

[Tynie b]

Your reading comprehension skills could really do with some work.

Where has anybody said it is Hearts fault Celtic didn't host a silence?

 

Or is this one of those occasions where you make a load of hyperbole up to suit your agenda and hope nobody bothers to read back in the thread.

 

I think the argument is, we lost our right to take the moral high ground over such an issue a few years back due to the actions of a minority of morons in our support.

 

And whilst I don't agree with their walk-out, I certainly support their right to do so. After all, what was the point in people sacrificing their lives if we don't have true freedom of expression?[/QUOTE]

 

Now you've Just hurt my fellings!!

 

Sorry to have bothered you with my opinions!!

 

I certainly know now that you support Celtic supporters veiws on this matter!!)Reading comprehension again!!)

[Diego10]

The media can ignore it because by having a minute's applause Celtic fans could look like they 'respected' it. If there had been a minute's silence, some morons would have disrupted it probably ,though not definitely, and then the media would have had to cover it. Celtic not having a minute's silence was covered by the BBC fairly extensively on Saturday afternoon but it's in effect not really a story.

 

As for Celtic, it is pretty poor for them to pander to the lowest common denominator in this case. They should have been brave enough to trust their fans although the reasons behind not doing so are understandable. Hearts pandered to idiots in the Hibs end by not having a minute's silence after Mercer died, and that was a poor show for me as well, although on an entirely different scale. The sad fact is that there are morons in the world who take some sort of pleasure in disrupting these moments of respect.

[Gizmo]

...

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out...

 

I really, honestly do not believe you are that naive. Perhaps you are choosing to ignore the obvious bias with which the SFA clearly treat us since VR took us over, in order to have yet another subtle dig at Hearts?

 

Infact, with the benefit of hindsight, the decision to allow Celtic FC the opportunity to hold a minutes silence, was probably the first chance the game's authorities had to put the boot into VR (albeit ably assisted by our own idiots).

[Guest Dipped Flake]

Cheers for your valuable input to the debate.

 

As another poster has already said, you choose wee bits from posts and totally ignore the majority of them, in order to support your viewpoint. In my original post I stated that the actions of Hearts fans during the silence for the Pope were disgraceful, you chose to ignore that. I stated that it was also disgraceful that rangers were the only club in Britain not to have a minutes silence for the death of the Pope, you chose to ignore that also.

You then chose to attempt to ridicule my other point, that celtic were the only club in Britain not to hold a minutes silence and that the media were very quiet about this, again totally ignoring the point I was making.

This was after me starting my post with agreeing with most of what you had posted before; it's like you just love arguing with posters rather than their points.......any chance you can comment on my points???

[Guest JamboRobbo]

As another poster has already said, you choose wee bits from posts and totally ignore the majority of them, in order to support your viewpoint. In my original post I stated that the actions of Hearts fans during the silence for the Pope were disgraceful, you chose to ignore that. I stated that it was also disgraceful that rangers were the only club in Britain not to have a minutes silence for the death of the Pope, you chose to ignore that also.

You then chose to attempt to ridicule my other point, that celtic were the only club in Britain not to hold a minutes silence and that the media were very quiet about this, again totally ignoring the point I was making.

This was after me starting my post with agreeing with most of what you had posted before; it's like you just love arguing with posters rather than their points.......any chance you can comment on my points???

 

If you honeslty feel their should be newspaper headlies because Celtic had a minutes applause rather than a minutes silence, you're entitled to your opinion. To me, it's a non story - had they booed - there is a story. Given they pre-emted it, and dealt with the problem before it reared it's ugly head, resulting in their being no booing, there's not that much of a story for the media to write IMO.

 

Doesn't seem there is much to debate there.

[the jambo poet]

what would have happened had it been the week before and it was Hearts v Sellick at Tynie?....

 

I doubt Hearts being in the position we're in re our glorious history would've have succumbed to a minutes applause....we would have had the minutes silence...would Sellick have pressurised the SFA for a minutes applause or would they have been shown up during a minute's silence...?

 

I can't remember all this fuss in previous armistace weekends?....is this all new?

[Guest Dipped Flake]

If you honeslty feel their should be newspaper headlies because Celtic had a minutes applause rather than a minutes silence, you're entitled to your opinion. To me, it's a non story - had they booed - there is a story. Given they pre-emted it, and dealt with the problem before it reared it's ugly head, resulting in their being no booing, there's not that much of a story for the media to write IMO.

 

Doesn't seem there is much to debate there.

 

Thanks for replying to my post in a resonable manner. Yes, I think it is a big story that celtic were the only team in Britain to refuse to hold a minutes silence this weekend and I also think it is a big story that the main weegie media have ignored this.........IMO I agreed earlier that there are quite a few posters that are jumping up and down with glee as it is a chance to vent their anti-celtic spleen (although that really should be anti-catholic spleen). I hope you can agree that I, in no way, fall into that camp....

[Guest Dipped Flake]

what would have happened had it been the week before and it was Hearts v Sellick at Tynie?....

 

I doubt Hearts being in the position we're in re our glorious history would've have succumbed to a minutes applause....we would have had the minutes silence...would Sellick have pressurised the SFA for a minutes applause or would they have been shown up during a minute's silence...?

 

I can't remember all this fuss in previous armistace weekends?....is this all new?

 

Must admit I was thinking that too; is the minutes silence a new thing???

[Francis Albert]

The outrage about the applause vs silence smacks of the same synthetic outrage of Celtic fans after the Pope silence/booing. They really ought to have had other things on their mind than the rousing chorus of "Dirty Orange ********" and so should we. The applause seems to have been respected by the vast majority of Celtic fans and the planned walk out a bit of a flop.

 

I hesitate to say this but I think it is also true that Remembrance for the fallen in wars has about as much to do with football as the Pope's death. Our club was of course exceptional, but football in general responded no better, and in some cases distinctly less enthusiastically, than people in other professions. Indeed it was the (politically inspired and again somewhat synthetic) outrage about people continuing to enjoy playing and watching football that led to some pressure on Hearts players to join up- as readers of Jack Alexander's book will know it was not quite the wholly spontaneous gesture of legend.

[MacDonald Jardine]

All fair enough.

 

For me, I see little reason to give the morons their moment of fame if we know it's gonna happen. Seems to me Celtic knew fine the morons in their support couldn't behave, so they worked out a solution which was acceptable to the SPL/SFA or whoever.

 

I don't know if HMFC asked the SFA NOT to have a minutes silence for the pope? Perhaps HMFC were guilty of having too much faith in their own fans with re to the semi with Celtic? I'm sure if HMFC had approached the SFA and said "hold on, a minority of moron in our support won't be able to contain themselves for a whole minutes silence without feeling the need to show disrespect to a man who just died, so could we work out something that doesn't end up a national embarrasment", then I'm sure something would've been worked out.

 

It's a shame that our morons got their moment of fame, but I don't see that as a reason to encourage the problem by giving Celtics morons their moment of fame also? Their club is getting a bit of stick for taking the option they did (applause), but it seems to me like the sensible option given the circumstances.

 

You are kidding aren't you?

[spacerjoe]

 

As I have said, Celtic FC have taken steps to avoid their fans having th opportunity to embarrass the club in the wa that some of our fans did in 2005.

 

 

And what brilliant steps they took!

 

Instead of flushing the toilet, they simply lit a scented candle.

 

This would have been a great opportunity to identify trouble makers within their ground and get them banned, but once again they bottled it.

 

We're lead to believe that the waiting list for season tickets at Celtic is 20 miles long, yet they seem to be **** scared of even banning a single fan...

[Guest Fabuloso]

Firstly what happened at Parkhead on Saturday was disgraceful and no right-minded individual could justify it, however, the real issue is more about why Celtic find themselves in this position. To me it shows how little the club have done to rid the club of their vile element (and I include the other half of the OF in this too). Until the two clubs are strong enough to take direct action against the morons (not for what happened at the weekend but in general) then we'll have this type of situation for many years to come.

 

...and while I'm at it the SPL could start to take some direct action which would help.

[Guest Fabuloso]

And what brilliant steps they took!

 

Instead of flushing the toilet, they simply lit a scented candle.

 

This would have been a great opportunity to identify trouble makers within their ground and get them banned, but once again they bottled it.

 

We're lead to believe that the waiting list for season tickets at Celtic is 20 miles long, yet they seem to be **** scared of even banning a single fan...

 

Unfortunately you can't ban fans for having a difference of opinion - horrible as it may be. Protesting isn't against the law.

[Malinga the Swinga]

They were certainly ripped into by Talksport this evening. Adrian Durham, ian Wright and teh show producer all couldn't understand what Celtic had done, even though some of the so called greatest supporters tried to justify it.

 

Evn real radio with EC condemned them.

[spacerjoe]

Unfortunately you can't ban fans for having a difference of opinion - horrible as it may be. Protesting isn't against the law.

 

Doesn't your post above contradict this one?

[Vlad's Dad]

Some self righteous crap being spoken on here tonight!

 

Face it, very few of the 'disgrace' crew care whether it's silence or applause. It's just another chance to have a go.

 

That this issue is being hijacked is horrible. For me - and this is hard to say about that lot - Celtic did the right thing; why give 200 bigoted idiots the oxygen they crave by allowing them to boo through a minute to honour our dead - one which the other 59,800 folk were happy to observe? They wore poppies and applauded the dead ffs? What do folk here want?

 

I know the answer - 'Celtic fans in shame' headlines, that's what.

 

This isn't about what's RIGHT.

 

Some of the folk here would have having Scotland shown up for the angry, bitter, insular dim-witted little country we are on every newspaper front page from here to Singapore.

 

But that would be okay eh? Because it would equal out the Pope's death storm....Pathetic.

 

All this thread did today was give that half-brained numbnut Ewan Cameron the Dutch courage to dedicate yet another phone-in to matters other than football. That shock jock clown thinks he's a social commentator. He's not - he's a social menace, giving the bigot boys breathing space to pollute the airwaves.

 

Do us all a favour Ewan. Get back to football please. Just occasionally

[jimallheart]

with the usual spl well thought out fixture list do not be surprised if celtic are away to hearts next remembrance day. now that could be embarrassing for celtic.

[Fozzyonthefence]

Explain why the same authorities who approved the silence at Hampden did not do so for the Motherwell v Rangers match? How can that be?

 

 

Wasn't the same authorities. Hearts v Celtic was a Scottish Cup semi, under the jurisdiction of the SFA. The other semi also had a minute's silence. Motherwell v Rangers was an SPL game under the jurisdiction of the SPL - they didn't have a minute's silence.

 

Would the SFA have forced a minute's silence on Rangers had they been involved in the SC? We'll never really know but I think we can draw our own conclusions...

[Ron Burgundy]

Similarities yes, still plenty differences though.

 

Huge differance.

 

A silence for all those who fell fighting for their country in a horrific war,and a silence for a single man who was head of an organisation that promotes poverty and the spread of HIV throughout the world.

 

I personally can understand why many non catholics or people who are not religious would find a tribute to him as distasteful.

[john brownlee]

the ironic thing about all this is I wonder how many tics stood silent in protest of the applause.

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

I think there are people on here with agendas and they will have a go at Celtic regardless.

 

When a small amount of numpties booed during a minutes silence for the Pope, they claimed we were set up by making us go through that minutes silence, and that the minutes silence shouldn't have taken place at that game as it was always going to result in booing.

 

I'm sure it's the very same people, who are now saying it's wrong that Celtic weren't made to go through the same thing. It would appear the real issue here, is that some are dissapointed the Celtic bigots weren't allowed to make fools of themselves the same way our bigots did.

 

Celtics fans at Parkhead are the best in the world dont you know?

 

Also after Bhoys against Bigotry im sure there are no bigots left in Parkhead.

 

Please note, i will be taking this comedy act to the stage in the festival.