The Official Scottish Football Thread (Vol. 2)
Discussion
Interesting joint statement from several clubs, the independent review seems to be an utter shambles.
The balls on these idiots to receive an independent review on there governance, edit it(presumably to make themselves look better) then send it out to the member clubs who paid for the review
Total charlatans who are running Scottish football into the gutter.
The balls on these idiots to receive an independent review on there governance, edit it(presumably to make themselves look better) then send it out to the member clubs who paid for the review
Total charlatans who are running Scottish football into the gutter.
Strocky said:
TBF to Hart he made two good saves in the 2nd half
The problems are if we don't score early we get nervous and the opposition get a 2nd wind for the 2nd half (bare in mind Aberdeen didn't have even ONE
touch in the opposition box in the 1st half)
We're passing up too many chances and not feeding Kyogo, Rodgers needs to start getting a tune out of the team quicksmart
For the Aberdeen game, see last night The problems are if we don't score early we get nervous and the opposition get a 2nd wind for the 2nd half (bare in mind Aberdeen didn't have even ONE
touch in the opposition box in the 1st half)
We're passing up too many chances and not feeding Kyogo, Rodgers needs to start getting a tune out of the team quicksmart
Katzenjammer said:
How Rangers did not end up with 9 men yesterday shall remain a semi-mystery. The Scottish cup has served up a pretty dreadful series of matches this weekend.
I've watched Scottish football for a long time, but I genuinely can't remember a period of so many controversial decisions all going in the favour of one team. Goldson and Silva should have been off against Ayr. Stewart summed it up well when he said Collum bottled it. Collum has been put in an impossible position with the pressure from Rangers. The Ayr player was too desperate to set up a goal scoring chance. That tackle by Goldson was a shocker. That has always been a red card. Nobody disputes over the ball with force tackles, but it was ignored.
I can't understand the Rangers' managers observation that they should have won 6-0. Both Rangers goals were fortunate including the first one that was a scuffed shot heading 5 yards wide. It was a very unlucky own goal. Silva should have been off the park before scoring the second.
Goldson escaped another handball against Aberdeen. He stopped a goal scoring opportunity with his hand outside his body. They are usually given. That's now 3 times in just a few weeks Aberdeen v Rangers games have ended with highly controversial/wrong decisions all benefitting Rangers.
Goldson also had the decision against Livingston last week. To get away with 3 highly controversial decisions for 1 player in a week is something else.
I was bemused by the comments after the Hibs v Celtic game. Apparently a very late challenge nowhere near the ball, with no chance of winning the ball, that knocked the player out cold and fractured bones isn't a foul. They happen numerous times in every game apparently. I'm not sure what games some people are watching.
That was also justification used to show that controversial decisions don't just favour Rangers.
Hearts won reasonably easy today. A few well taken goals. Shankland on form again. He's doing very well recently.
The St Mirren v Celtic game was enjoyable. St Mirren really went for it. Celtic's makeshift defence can't defend, but Celtic did create more then enough chances to win the game.
Edited by Driver101 on Sunday 11th February 20:27
Driver101 said:
I've watched Scottish football for a long time, but I genuinely can't remember a period of so many controversial decisions all going in the favour of one team.
Goldson and Silva should have been off against Ayr. Stewart summed it up well when he said Collum bottled it. Collum has been put in an impossible position with the pressure from Rangers. The Ayr player was too desperate to set up a goal scoring chance. That tackle by Goldson was a shocker. That has always been a red card. Nobody disputes over the ball with force tackles, but it was ignored.
I can't understand the Rangers' managers observation that they should have won 6-0. Both Rangers goals were fortunate including the first one that was a scuffed shot heading 5 yards wide. It was a very unlucky own goal. Silva should have been off the park before scoring the second.
Goldson escaped another handball against Aberdeen. He stopped a goal scoring opportunity with his hand outside his body. They are usually given. That's now 3 times in just a few weeks Aberdeen v Rangers games have ended with highly controversial/wrong decisions all benefitting Rangers.
Goldson also had the decision against Livingston last week. To get away with 3 highly controversial decisions for 1 player in a week is something else.
I was bemused by the comments after the Hibs v Celtic game. Apparently a very late challenge nowhere near the ball, with no chance of winning the ball, that knocked the player out cold and fractured bones isn't a foul. They happen numerous times in every game apparently. I'm not sure what games some people are watching.
That was also justification used to show that controversial decisions don't just favour Rangers.
Hearts won reasonably easy today. A few well taken goals. Shankland on form again. He's doing very well recently.
The St Mirren v Celtic game was enjoyable. St Mirren really went for it. Celtic's makeshift defence can't defend, but Celtic did create more then enough chances to win the game.
Here we go for your weekly greet about rangers, will you ever give it a rest? Six paragraphs for god sake Goldson and Silva should have been off against Ayr. Stewart summed it up well when he said Collum bottled it. Collum has been put in an impossible position with the pressure from Rangers. The Ayr player was too desperate to set up a goal scoring chance. That tackle by Goldson was a shocker. That has always been a red card. Nobody disputes over the ball with force tackles, but it was ignored.
I can't understand the Rangers' managers observation that they should have won 6-0. Both Rangers goals were fortunate including the first one that was a scuffed shot heading 5 yards wide. It was a very unlucky own goal. Silva should have been off the park before scoring the second.
Goldson escaped another handball against Aberdeen. He stopped a goal scoring opportunity with his hand outside his body. They are usually given. That's now 3 times in just a few weeks Aberdeen v Rangers games have ended with highly controversial/wrong decisions all benefitting Rangers.
Goldson also had the decision against Livingston last week. To get away with 3 highly controversial decisions for 1 player in a week is something else.
I was bemused by the comments after the Hibs v Celtic game. Apparently a very late challenge nowhere near the ball, with no chance of winning the ball, that knocked the player out cold and fractured bones isn't a foul. They happen numerous times in every game apparently. I'm not sure what games some people are watching.
That was also justification used to show that controversial decisions don't just favour Rangers.
Hearts won reasonably easy today. A few well taken goals. Shankland on form again. He's doing very well recently.
The St Mirren v Celtic game was enjoyable. St Mirren really went for it. Celtic's makeshift defence can't defend, but Celtic did create more then enough chances to win the game.
Edited by Driver101 on Sunday 11th February 20:27
Goldson would have been off had he made contact or even if the boy had even went down, stupid silly lunge from an experienced player.
If silvas was a red card then the challenge that nawrocki made on Miovski while on a booking was attempted murder, never in a million years was it a red.
Collum hasnt been put in an impossible position he’s just a poor ref, he missed an absolute stonewall penalty on Cortez. Unsurprisingly you’ve not mentioned that as it doesn’t fit the agenda.
A basic understanding of the handball rules would show that your aberdeen claim isn’t anything of the sort, if a ball bounces off another player that close then it’s not considered a handball, the second as he is falling is hitting the arm he is putting out to cushion/support his fall. Also not considered handball in that context.
Both the hibs player and the reptilian were looking at the balls when challenging for it, was in Johnstons favour but doesn’t mean the hibs player couldn’t challenge for it. It’s not even a booking if you look back to the injury Danilo got earlier in the season or even the one the reptilian did on sima. The kyogo incident was a pen.
You should honestly try and get along to parkhead and take in a game, it would mean that you would miss watching the rangers game but it would save you having to write out six paragraphs of utter garbage everyweek
dalzo said:
Here we go for your weekly greet about rangers, will you ever give it a rest? Six paragraphs for god sake
Goldson would have been off had he made contact or even if the boy had even went down, stupid silly lunge from an experienced player.
If silvas was a red card then the challenge that nawrocki made on Miovski while on a booking was attempted murder, never in a million years was it a red.
Collum hasnt been put in an impossible position he’s just a poor ref, he missed an absolute stonewall penalty on Cortez. Unsurprisingly you’ve not mentioned that as it doesn’t fit the agenda.
A basic understanding of the handball rules would show that your aberdeen claim isn’t anything of the sort, if a ball bounces off another player that close then it’s not considered a handball, the second as he is falling is hitting the arm he is putting out to cushion/support his fall. Also not considered handball in that context.
Both the hibs player and the reptilian were looking at the balls when challenging for it, was in Johnstons favour but doesn’t mean the hibs player couldn’t challenge for it. It’s not even a booking if you look back to the injury Danilo got earlier in the season or even the one the reptilian did on sima. The kyogo incident was a pen.
You should honestly try and get along to parkhead and take in a game, it would mean that you would miss watching the rangers game but it would save you having to write out six paragraphs of utter garbage everyweek
Reptilian????Goldson would have been off had he made contact or even if the boy had even went down, stupid silly lunge from an experienced player.
If silvas was a red card then the challenge that nawrocki made on Miovski while on a booking was attempted murder, never in a million years was it a red.
Collum hasnt been put in an impossible position he’s just a poor ref, he missed an absolute stonewall penalty on Cortez. Unsurprisingly you’ve not mentioned that as it doesn’t fit the agenda.
A basic understanding of the handball rules would show that your aberdeen claim isn’t anything of the sort, if a ball bounces off another player that close then it’s not considered a handball, the second as he is falling is hitting the arm he is putting out to cushion/support his fall. Also not considered handball in that context.
Both the hibs player and the reptilian were looking at the balls when challenging for it, was in Johnstons favour but doesn’t mean the hibs player couldn’t challenge for it. It’s not even a booking if you look back to the injury Danilo got earlier in the season or even the one the reptilian did on sima. The kyogo incident was a pen.
You should honestly try and get along to parkhead and take in a game, it would mean that you would miss watching the rangers game but it would save you having to write out six paragraphs of utter garbage everyweek
Deflection, whataboutery and gaslighting. Your responses are so predictable.
My weekly greet? The rest of Scottish football is talking about the exact same things. Again your standard defence is gaslighting. You want to shut down the talk as you know Rangers are being officiated differently.
Do you not think it's bad that Rangers fans are left having to fight so hard against decisions playing a lower league team at home, Livingston and Aberdeen in the same week? It's relentless.
If he made contact? The contact was obvious. Pretending otherwise is an odd defence. Where does the rules say the player has to go down? Surprisingly the Rangers forum agrees he was very lucky. That is unusual.
Your supporting arm is not handball. Goldson's arm was not supporting him. It was outside his body. I'm not sure what the foul the referee saw. That handball is also a different incident from the handball everyone is talking about.
Stonewall penalty on Cortez? Why is it at one side of the field you judge incidents on netball levels, but nothing Rangers do is a foul? I struggle to understand how someone can be so biased.
I can't believe you're defending that challenge on Johnstone. If you challenge with your foot and you're late it's a foul. If you challenge with your head and it's late it's a foul. The Hibs player wasn't booked. Danilo scored against St Johnstone. The referee could hardly award the goal and a foul. Your comparisons are invalid.
You argued on this thread that the handball in the Celtic v Ross County game when it ricocheted from no distance at all on to the underside of O'Riley elbow tight against his body was a penalty.
Now you don't see this incident as a penalty?
Does that not highlight how warped your opinions are?
Edited by Driver101 on Sunday 11th February 23:36
Edited by Driver101 on Sunday 11th February 23:38
Driver101 said:
Deflection, whataboutery and gaslighting. Your responses are so predictable.
My weekly greet? The rest of Scottish football is talking about the exact same things. Again your standard defence is gaslighting. You want to shut down the talk as you know Rangers are being officiated differently.
Do you not think it's bad that Rangers fans are left having to fight so hard against decisions playing a lower league team at home, Livingston and Aberdeen in the same week? It's relentless.
If he made contact? The contact was obvious. Pretending otherwise is an odd defence. Where does the rules say the player has to go down? Surprisingly the Rangers forum agrees he was very lucky. That is unusual.
Stonewall penalty on Cortez? Why is it at one side of the field you judge incidents on netball levels, but nothing Rangers do is a foul? I struggle to understand how someone can be so biased.
I can't believe you're defending that challenge on Johnstone. If you challenge with your foot and you're late it's a foul. If you challenge with your head and it's late it's a foul. The Hibs player wasn't booked. Danilo scored against St Johnstone. The referee could hardly award the goal and a foul. Your comparisons are invalid.
You argued on this thread that the handball in the Celtic v Ross County game when it ricocheted from no distance at all on to the underside of O'Riley elbow tight against his arm was a penalty.
Now you don't see this incident as a penalty?
Does that not highlight how warped your opinions are?
I’m not wrong anyway every single post you make in this thread has some sort of anti rangers and refereeing moan. Tiresome pishMy weekly greet? The rest of Scottish football is talking about the exact same things. Again your standard defence is gaslighting. You want to shut down the talk as you know Rangers are being officiated differently.
Do you not think it's bad that Rangers fans are left having to fight so hard against decisions playing a lower league team at home, Livingston and Aberdeen in the same week? It's relentless.
If he made contact? The contact was obvious. Pretending otherwise is an odd defence. Where does the rules say the player has to go down? Surprisingly the Rangers forum agrees he was very lucky. That is unusual.
Stonewall penalty on Cortez? Why is it at one side of the field you judge incidents on netball levels, but nothing Rangers do is a foul? I struggle to understand how someone can be so biased.
I can't believe you're defending that challenge on Johnstone. If you challenge with your foot and you're late it's a foul. If you challenge with your head and it's late it's a foul. The Hibs player wasn't booked. Danilo scored against St Johnstone. The referee could hardly award the goal and a foul. Your comparisons are invalid.
You argued on this thread that the handball in the Celtic v Ross County game when it ricocheted from no distance at all on to the underside of O'Riley elbow tight against his arm was a penalty.
Now you don't see this incident as a penalty?
Does that not highlight how warped your opinions are?
Edited by Driver101 on Sunday 11th February 23:12
If contact was obvious he would have been off. I didn’t say there was any rule I said if the ayr player went down he’d probably be off also.
Have you seen the Cortez incident? Rather than deflecting give us your thoughts on it
like I said it doesn’t quite fit the agenda but an interesting flash point. Like I said two players challenging for the ball, more in the reptilians favour, hibs player has every right to go for it and Johnstone gets a sore one, head knock.
He awarded the goal but there was zero booking for a challenge that had him worrying for his eyesight , precedent was set. If the ball has went over the bar would you have awarded Danilo a penalty?
Can’t even recall the Celtic vs Ross county you’re talking about.
The point is you’re constantly on here trying to make tiresome arguments from absolutely any incident. It was only the last two pages you had several people mocking you for how ridiculous it was. My last post I’ve pointed out a missed penalty for rangers , a lucky getaway for nawrocki with his challenge on Miovski so this constant waffling about decisions only going one way is false. Honestly don’t know why you tune in. Give it a rest
dalzo said:
I’m not wrong anyway every single post you make in this thread has some sort of anti rangers and refereeing moan. Tiresome pish
If contact was obvious he would have been off. I didn’t say there was any rule I said if the ayr player went down he’d probably be off also.
Have you seen the Cortez incident? Rather than deflecting give us your thoughts on it like I said it doesn’t quite fit the agenda but an interesting flash point.
Like I said two players challenging for the ball, more in the reptilians favour, hibs player has every right to go for it and Johnstone gets a sore one, head knock.
He awarded the goal but there was zero booking for a challenge that had him worrying for his eyesight , precedent was set. If the ball has went over the bar would you have awarded Danilo a penalty?
Can’t even recall the Celtic vs Ross county you’re talking about.
The point is you’re constantly on here trying to make tiresome arguments from absolutely any incident. It was only the last two pages you had several people mocking you for how ridiculous it was. My last post I’ve pointed out a missed penalty for rangers , a lucky getaway for nawrocki with his challenge on Miovski so this constant waffling about decisions only going one way is false. Honestly don’t know why you tune in. Give it a rest
You are repeating reptilian. Do you think that is an acceptable manner to describe a person? What has Johnstone done to upset you?!If contact was obvious he would have been off. I didn’t say there was any rule I said if the ayr player went down he’d probably be off also.
Have you seen the Cortez incident? Rather than deflecting give us your thoughts on it
like I said it doesn’t quite fit the agenda but an interesting flash point. Like I said two players challenging for the ball, more in the reptilians favour, hibs player has every right to go for it and Johnstone gets a sore one, head knock.
He awarded the goal but there was zero booking for a challenge that had him worrying for his eyesight , precedent was set. If the ball has went over the bar would you have awarded Danilo a penalty?
Can’t even recall the Celtic vs Ross county you’re talking about.
The point is you’re constantly on here trying to make tiresome arguments from absolutely any incident. It was only the last two pages you had several people mocking you for how ridiculous it was. My last post I’ve pointed out a missed penalty for rangers , a lucky getaway for nawrocki with his challenge on Miovski so this constant waffling about decisions only going one way is false. Honestly don’t know why you tune in. Give it a rest
Several people mocking me? Yet more gaslighting. Your relentless gaslighting and lying on this thread is unacceptable. It is a terrible way of "winning" an argument. When you have a reputation of constantly reporting other people on this thread you really need to address your own conduct.
Yes I've seen the incident with Cortez. It was analysed during the game and deemed a fair challenge. Before tonight I've never seen anyone claim it was a penalty.
Every player has the right to go for a ball. If your tackle is late, dangerous or excessive force it's a foul. When you are really late and you knock a player unconscious I'm struggling to see why you can't see it's a foul. Two players aren't challenging for the ball. The Hibs player never has a chance of winning the ball. The ball was above Johnstone and he went into the side of his head. Hibs fans are very open to admit it was a foul. Why is it only Rangers fans that think it wasn't?
The further comparison with the Danilo incident is also invalid.
Tiresome arguments? This is this week's controversial incidents. They are currently and not old news.
You've repeated the O'Reily incident a few times. A quick Google of the incident will give you a reminder.
You're happy with your club trying to bully and shame referees, but a member of PH should give it a rest watching controversial decisions on a weekly basis?
Like I've said before, I think you want to shut down any conversation as you know what you're watching isn't right.
Strocky said:
This, an embarrassing appointment by Aberdeen
He's up here for 4 months to have a laugh and a giggle, an absolute caricature of a manager and turns the Scottish game into a circus
I can't say I've been impressed with him so far. His conduct has been as if he isn't taking the job seriously. Everything is a joke. He's up here for 4 months to have a laugh and a giggle, an absolute caricature of a manager and turns the Scottish game into a circus
There has been a couple of times he's referred to the payers and clubs as as they. He doesn't sound like he's part of the club.
Aberdeen were poor yesterday. The stats against Bonnyrigg Rose were very even.
I predict his humorous arrogance won't work.
Driver101 said:
You are repeating reptilian. Do you think that is an acceptable manner to describe a person? What has Johnstone done to upset you?!
Several people mocking me? Yet more gaslighting. Your relentless gaslighting and lying on this thread is unacceptable. It is a terrible way of "winning" an argument. When you have a reputation of constantly reporting other people on this thread you really need to address your own conduct.
Yes I've seen the incident with Cortez. It was analysed during the game and deemed a fair challenge. Before tonight I've never seen anyone claim it was a penalty.
Every player has the right to go for a ball. If your tackle is late, dangerous or excessive force it's a foul. When you are really late and you knock a player unconscious I'm struggling to see why you can't see it's a foul. Two players aren't challenging for the ball. The Hibs player never has a chance of winning the ball. The ball was above Johnstone and he went into the side of his head. Hibs fans are very open to admit it was a foul. Why is it only Rangers fans that think it wasn't?
The further comparison with the Danilo incident is also invalid.
Tiresome arguments? This is this week's controversial incidents. They are currently and not old news.
You've repeated the O'Reily incident a few times. A quick Google of the incident will give you a reminder.
You're happy with your club trying to bully and shame referees, but a member of PH should give it a rest watching controversial decisions on a weekly basis?
Like I've said before, I think you want to shut down any conversation as you know what you're watching isn't right.
drivel once again.Several people mocking me? Yet more gaslighting. Your relentless gaslighting and lying on this thread is unacceptable. It is a terrible way of "winning" an argument. When you have a reputation of constantly reporting other people on this thread you really need to address your own conduct.
Yes I've seen the incident with Cortez. It was analysed during the game and deemed a fair challenge. Before tonight I've never seen anyone claim it was a penalty.
Every player has the right to go for a ball. If your tackle is late, dangerous or excessive force it's a foul. When you are really late and you knock a player unconscious I'm struggling to see why you can't see it's a foul. Two players aren't challenging for the ball. The Hibs player never has a chance of winning the ball. The ball was above Johnstone and he went into the side of his head. Hibs fans are very open to admit it was a foul. Why is it only Rangers fans that think it wasn't?
The further comparison with the Danilo incident is also invalid.
Tiresome arguments? This is this week's controversial incidents. They are currently and not old news.
You've repeated the O'Reily incident a few times. A quick Google of the incident will give you a reminder.
You're happy with your club trying to bully and shame referees, but a member of PH should give it a rest watching controversial decisions on a weekly basis?
Like I've said before, I think you want to shut down any conversation as you know what you're watching isn't right.
Grow a sense of humour
Yes, mocking you, it’s what happens when you come on and make silly statements like you did in the livi game. I know it’s your favourite buzzword but no one is gaslighting you, you’re a fully grown man/women.
I think the games a bogey if you think you can boot a players legs and trip him in the box and not think it’s a penalty. Like I’ve been trying to show you, it’s not just rangers “getting away with things” it’s poor refereeing.
The Danilo comparison is a fair question to ask , would you have gave a penalty had his shot went over the bar?
It could be a different “incident” but it’s the same old pish you serve up everyweek , waffling on about rangers and refs as though there is some conspiracy when by just about every metric it’s not the case yet it’s pointed out you just repeat the same stuff everyweek.
Rangers fan media came out and said that, if the club did or not we’ll never know, but as far as bullying and shaming refs you only need to look at the recent Celtic agm so I’d pipe down rather than go down that route. If rangers did voice there concerns about collum being a poor ref then it seems pretty justified with you on here greeting about his decisions at the weekend
Im trying to shut the conversation down as what I’m watching isn’t right
gies peace.I remember why I try to stay away from this thread. Jeezo, whether a player has a right to go for a ball or not doesn't mean they can put the opposition player out the game because they're a bit slow and can't get there in time. Knocked out cold by a horribly timed challenge that would earn you a red card on a rugby pitch and get called reptilian for your troubles. Stay classy.
True (blue) colours indeed.
True (blue) colours indeed.
scoopdydoo said:
I remember why I try to stay away from this thread. Jeezo, whether a player has a right to go for a ball or not doesn't mean they can put the opposition player out the game because they're a bit slow and can't get there in time. Knocked out cold by a horribly timed challenge that would earn you a red card on a rugby pitch and get called reptilian for your troubles. Stay classy.
True (blue) colours indeed.
True (blue) colours indeed.
Sorry to offend, hope it hasn’t upset you too much.
The more things change the more they stay the same......
thecurrantbun said:
Europe's governing body issued a financial fair play warning to the Light Blues in September 2022 and the Ibrox club's spending was monitored for a period of time.
But Taylor, son of former SFA chief executive and Uefa general secretary David, says that is no longer a serious concern as Uefa's rules have since 'progressed'.
He insists Rangers were "perfectly within the rules" at the time and has explained how the club are "comfortable" with the current financial fair play conditions and requirements, despite "worries".
Taylor said: "As a football club, we were on a financial watchlist with regards to UEFA from the CFCB in relation to last year or a couple of years ago and it was specifically around a particular accounting adjustment.
"It was perfectly within the rules but it was something that was bringing revenue back from a Covid position that automatically, effectively, makes you go onto a watchlist.
"That was the case and I think Uefa rules are moving forward, they have progressed.
"The regulation within Uefa has changed now from what we define as FFP to something that is along the lines of Uefa club licencing and Uefa monitoring.
"From a licensing standpoint, as long as we have a positive balance sheet, then from a purely financial angle, and there are a number of other things that go into it, but from a financial angle that would tick that box and we are comfortable there with regards to our balance sheet as it stands today.
"In terms of the Uefa monitoring, the word ‘worry’ has been mentioned and that is something that I want to make sure doesn’t go away from my vocabulary because I need to be on top of these things.
"This is something, the accountability, is something that I take very seriously. From a monitoring standpoint, there are three pillars and we are effectively covered by all three.
"The first one is overdue payables so we need to ensure that there are no football debts outstanding – transfer fees, contingent transfer fees, what have you."
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/11963829/rangers-finance-uefa-fair-play-ibrox-blow-out/But Taylor, son of former SFA chief executive and Uefa general secretary David, says that is no longer a serious concern as Uefa's rules have since 'progressed'.
He insists Rangers were "perfectly within the rules" at the time and has explained how the club are "comfortable" with the current financial fair play conditions and requirements, despite "worries".
Taylor said: "As a football club, we were on a financial watchlist with regards to UEFA from the CFCB in relation to last year or a couple of years ago and it was specifically around a particular accounting adjustment.
"It was perfectly within the rules but it was something that was bringing revenue back from a Covid position that automatically, effectively, makes you go onto a watchlist.
"That was the case and I think Uefa rules are moving forward, they have progressed.
"The regulation within Uefa has changed now from what we define as FFP to something that is along the lines of Uefa club licencing and Uefa monitoring.
"From a licensing standpoint, as long as we have a positive balance sheet, then from a purely financial angle, and there are a number of other things that go into it, but from a financial angle that would tick that box and we are comfortable there with regards to our balance sheet as it stands today.
"In terms of the Uefa monitoring, the word ‘worry’ has been mentioned and that is something that I want to make sure doesn’t go away from my vocabulary because I need to be on top of these things.
"This is something, the accountability, is something that I take very seriously. From a monitoring standpoint, there are three pillars and we are effectively covered by all three.
"The first one is overdue payables so we need to ensure that there are no football debts outstanding – transfer fees, contingent transfer fees, what have you."
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff