Forum List | Football Forum
Start Previous 1 -- [ 2 ] -- Next End| Topic: NL and the SFA |
|---|
| 21. Author: General Zod Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:30 Dystopian pish from the SFA again. We all know why Lennon got shafted here and it’s not because anything he said was wrong. Reply |
| 22. Author: KnebworthPar Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:31 Well done on the club having Lennie’s back. Reply |
| 23. Author: parsmad68 Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:33 General Zod, Thu 4 Dec 18:30 You are so very correct unfortunately. Fair play my a**e. Reply |
| 24. Author: kelty_par Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:35 When Brendan Rodgers was hauled up to Hampden on the same charge for calling the referee and VAR incompetent (I think at Tynecastle), he got a one match immediate and one match suspended. What`s good for the goose? Reply |
| 25. Author: wee eck Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:41 I wonder what the Panel`s view was on the AR allegedly making a disparaging remark about one of our backroom staff and what action, if any, was taken against him? Reply |
| 26. Author: Par Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:43 If Neil Lennon was still at Celtic no way would he have got such a lengthy ban for these comments. SFA a total joke Reply |
| 27. Author: Bletchley_Par Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:49 It`s great that we are a football club again and all this passionate mental stuff is happening rather than that "true and living sportsmanship" pash we had to put up with under the German occupation.  Reply |
| 28. Author: Stanza Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 18:58 On the positive side, the severity of the ban might provoke a reaction from the players and a "we`ll show `em" attitude. _________________  Support Dunfermline Athletic Disabled Supporters` Club (DADSC) when you shop online with one of 8000 firms: http://www.easyfundraising.org.uk/causes/dadsc[Reply |
| 29. Author: Jeffery Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 19:00 kelty_par, Thu 4 Dec 18:35 Surely could appeal on those grounds? Reply |
| 30. Author: Bandy Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 20:08 So - let`s get this straight. 1. Man performs job incompetently. 2. Another man gets asked about the incompetent performance and agrees it was incompetent. 3. The same man performs the same job incompetently a few weeks later. 4. The same man gets asked about the performance again and answers honestly providing examples of the incompetence. 5. The incompetent man`s boss agrees that the examples have been correctly interpreted by the man who was asked about them. 6. The incompetent man is promoted to perform the same role in a higher profile setting. 7. The man who was asked about the incompetence and answered honestly is banned for 6 matches. Good process lads. Reply |
| 31. Author: GG Riva Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 20:29 No surprise there. The SFA were always going to make an example of Lennon. He had previous and their rules prohibit any criticism of match officials even when it is perfectly justified. 😒  Not your average Sunday League player. Reply |
| 32. Author: StevenPar77 Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 20:46 It`s mad to think a player can get a 3 game ban for a foul that could ruin a players career but Lennon, although doing it the wrong way, gets a 4 or 6 game ban for speaking the truth. Is it any surprise we have no faith in the powers that be who run (or ruin) the game?! Reply |
| 33. Author: jake89 Date: Thu 4th Dec 2025. 22:26 Referees should be protected from unfair criticism. However, the Lennon examples were both a farce and it was admitted the ref was wrong. I trust Martindale will be getting a ban as well then? Reply |
Post your Reply
Your Message:
By using your account you have implicitly accepted the DAFC.net Forum Rules and agree to be bound by them. You also agree that you will take sole responsibility for your post and indemnify dafc.net on all matters and costs. Refrain from making any potentially libelous comments about anyone
- - -