bighusref Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Never ceases to amaze me how ignorant the BBC are.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/f/falkirk/7840934.stm S'pose, at least they never referred to him as Number 26. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GhostHunter Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Racists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterEgo Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 The also refer to Patrick Cregg as Patrick Craig later on. Giesa job mate, I can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerd Muller Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Its so blatantly obvious what the SFA are doing. Successful appeal by Rangers but unsuccessful by Falkirk. This is just one of many reasons why Scottish Football is pish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigO Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Its so blatantly obvious what the SFA are doing. Successful appeal by Rangers but unsuccessful by Falkirk. This is just one of many reasons why Scottish Football is pish. I agree it's as bent as a ten bob note, but i'm not sure on this occasion... Papac was NEVER a sending off whereas Cregg's is slightly debateable. Look again and watch his right foot..... Anyway, thats not really the point. The ref should not be involved in the appeal process (imagine a polisman batters you so you go to the police and he's the one who deals with your allegation). Mind you - who would be on the committee!?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inside right Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 I agree it's as bent as a ten bob note, but i'm not sure on this occasion... Papac was NEVER a sending off whereas Cregg's is slightly debateable. Look again and watch his right foot..... Anyway, thats not really the point. The ref should not be involved in the appeal process (imagine a polisman batters you so you go to the police and he's the one who deals with your allegation). Mind you - who would be on the committee!?!?!?! Got to disagree with you, Papac definitely went to take out the man whereas Cregg played the ball half a meter before colliding with Mendes. The appeals should have gone the other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupaJT Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Never ceases to amaze me how ignorant the BBC are.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/f/falkirk/7840934.stm S'pose, at least they never referred to him as Number 26. Is changed to Zali now, what was it before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Is changed to Zali now, what was it before? think it was marius zaluska previously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 think it was marius zaluska previously Yeh, thats the goalie boy from United is it not ? Not going to get my knickers in a twist about this one. To be honest I'd have been more upset if they had simply spelt his name wrong. Probably just some lass with a very short skirt anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.