Comment Moderation Thread


Hi DP I referenced an example of a player that had …

Comment on Comment Moderation Thread by Gabby.

I referenced an example of a player that had deliberately dived to hide a foul he had committed that resulted in the other player being sent off falsely. It was the worst example I could think of at the time, upon reflection perhaps I should have used the Ronaldinho in the World Cup (against France IIRC) rather than a Celtic player.
The example was for illustrative purposes only. It was factually correct in fact the incident is still on You Tube. I was just trying to highlight how players contribute to poor refereeing decisions.

Gabby Also Commented

Comment Moderation Thread was indicated by brackets.Other people who read the post couldn’t tell the post was edited so clearly that method is not effective.

2. I didnt use that term in this post, in fact I deliberately took emotive terms from the post. Does is mean I am not allowed to mention Lennon ever again? Or should I preceed his name with “the infallable”, “the great”?
3. I understand, that makes sense. Why not add a note to say the post was edited by mods? No names, but still acountabilty?
4. It isnt 100%,I had no idea why. I still think the example is valid. Would it have been edited if I had said Ronaldinho instead?
5. I am sure they are acting in good faith, refereesact in good faith all the time and yet they are getting criticism for poor judgement. pot, kettle, black.
6. Maybe you should actually look at the validity of the claims instead if trying to earn10p from them.
7. Me too!

Comment Moderation Thread
Oh so this is where requests for explanations why my posts were edited and removed go to be ignored. Cant have pesky little explanations getting in the way, especially when there is serious debate about why the SFA et al should be more transparent and accountable.
I understand, I should not have suggested that a Celtic player took a dive to get a player sent off. Be reassured that I shall never make that mistake again. Perhaps it might be useful if a list of clubs/players could be provided that better fits with the tastes of the Mods?
I cant help be think how many other opinions are being deleted by the gatekeepers? No wonder there is such a consistent message in the site, dissenting opinions seem to be discarded. Keeping the Mainstream media honest? Whois keeping this site honest?

Comment Moderation Thread

How can we ask for more accountabilty and transparency from the SFA,SPFL et al, if we are not prepared to apply it to this site?

Recent Comments by Gabby

End of the Road for King?
Sub Editors write the headlines. They also determine where in the newspaper the article will appear and the length of the article.
The problem is, some organisations are outsourcing this work.

End of the Road for King?
The definition of relegation is at the crux of this case.  Not just the football meaning of relegation either. The Punter is trying to argue an everyday use of relegation and Coral have made a clumsy attempt to argue the football definition of relegation.
Reading through the excellent reporting from James Doleman it is obvious that Coral have handled this badly.  The letter sent to the Punter explaining their decision apparently says Rangers were “demoted” rather than relegated.

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
Yes Homonculus, it is your religious bias on show.
Whether a person decides to post a blog on Christmas Day is entirely up to them.
However if JJ is in Oz, as he claims, the he may well have posted Boxing Day Melbourne time but still Christmas Day in your time zone.
By all means critisise the content, tone of his blogs but criticing the date of his blog is ridiculous.
My understanding was this is football site, not a religious site.

Peace – Not War
you miss the point entirely.
yes, Celtic are a business as are the other clubs. Each of these clubs have an equal share in another business called the SPFL.
However not all these shareholders are remunerated the same even though the their shareholding is of equal value.
as a result all revenue from the SPFL from TV and other commercial arrangements should be shared equally with the shareholders.
Remember, without the SPFL, Celtic as a business has no access to any revenue.  They can’t play themselves 36 times a season.
Don’t even get me started on joining an English League, the economics just don’t add up. What would they add that would be of benefit to England? Unless they can add an extra 0 to the TV rights then it wont happen.
I have read the people believe a financial explosion at the EPL would benefit Scottish Football, it won’t. There will be no British League, unless the rest if the kingdom is happy to give up their home nations.
while Celtic fans are happy to be the big fish in a small pond, what is in it for fans of other clubs? This is a failing model evidenced by the lack of a descent TV deal in recent seasons (since the Setanta debacle).
So where does the Scottish game see itself in 10 years? If the answer is more of the same then the game will go backwards.

Peace – Not War
I disagree with your assessment of financial redistribution.
Many professional sports do this very successfully.  The first thing to be acknowledged is that all clubs contribute to the game.  As a result all money dispersed by the governing bodies should be divided equally amongst clubs in the league, afterall, they are equal shareholders.
Paying clubs according to where they finish in the league perpetuates the status quo. Same club wins everytime. The reward for winning the title is the prestige of winning the title plus Euro qualification.
I don’t believe in gate sharing becuase this is a club organised activity and clubs should be rewarded for their efforts.
This is not a quick fix.  
It is easy to see we clubs appear to be not supporting Res 12, when they don’t stand up for a deal that is clearly inequitable.  This doesn’t mean it is Communism, it is about Shareholder all being treated and rewarded the same.

About the author