Celtic 2014-15: Exit Red Thunder

Status
Not open for further replies.

5050HindSight

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,390
Upstate NY
Infield Infidel said:
It would be easier if they told the team that a) he's suspended and b) they have 22 slots for those matches instead of 23 (or whatever the number is). 
 
The part I'm curious about is what it means to be "registered" for a match. In other words, Legia wasn't docked a substitute slot, but the claim is that Bereszynski wasn't "registered".
 
Anyway, a few things I've seen reported, that I don't think have been brought up here yet, are:
 
1. Legia can apparently appeal the decision. Whether UEFA actually cares or not is another story.
 
2. Apparently something like this happened in 2010, and the result was a £15,000 fine.
 
 
According to BBC Scotland: "In an attempt to explain the situation the BBC have decided to compare the case of Hungarian side Debrecen fielding an ineligible player in a European tie four years ago. Uefa fined Debrecen £15,000 but rejected a protest from opponents Litex Lovech, who wanted the Hungarian side kicked out of the tournament for fielding an ineligible player.

“Debrecen argued that they fielded Peter Mate in good faith as a substitute in Bulgaria when they were leading 4-1 on aggregate.

“Uefa ruled that Debrecen had “no interest in fielding this player for the three last minutes of additional time, when the score was so clearly in its favor.”"
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
A few things a wee bit of research has turned up
 
* Legia submit their list of players to their own Polish FA who verify it and pass to UEFA
* UEFA pass in writing a list of all suspended players to both the Country FA AND the individual clubs - Legia were informed in writing the player was suspended
* A player can only serve a suspension in a competition if he is part of the squad that is listed to compete in that competition.
* The exact same offence has occured 3 times in recent years - each time it was punished by awarding the opposition a 3-0 win - Maccabi Haifa, NK Zepce and PAOK FC - all guilty of playing    players that had not served the full suspension.
 
From UEFA rules :
 
18.01 In order to be eligible to participate in the UEFA club competitions, players must be registered with UEFA within the requested deadlines to play for a club and fulfil all the conditions set out in the following provisions. Only eligible players can serve pending suspensions.

18.05 The club bears the legal consequences for fielding a player who is not named on list A or B, or who is otherwise not eligible to play.
 
I'm sorry but if Legia wanted Bereszynski to play at any stage in UEFA competition this season - then all they had to do was include him in the squad list submitted for the competition for the opening two rounds, not play him in the openng 3 matches  then his suspension was served. They submitted a list of 23 players on their registration (they can name up to 25) - it smacks of total incompetence at Legia.
 
If Celtic had made this mistake - all the fan anger would be rightly directed at incompetence within the club (and maybe a degree to the Scottish Football Association - who also should have picked up on the error) but certainly not at UEFA as they are merely applying the rules.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
5050HindSight said:
 
The part I'm curious about is what it means to be "registered" for a match. In other words, Legia wasn't docked a substitute slot, but the claim is that Bereszynski wasn't "registered".
 
Anyway, a few things I've seen reported, that I don't think have been brought up here yet, are:
 
1. Legia can apparently appeal the decision. Whether UEFA actually cares or not is another story.
 
2. Apparently something like this happened in 2010, and the result was a £15,000 fine.
 
 
The Debrecen case involved a player not correctly registered NOT a player serving a UEFA suspension - its a different scenario . Bereszynski had not served the suspension as handed down by UEFA. Different scenarios and have different punishments attached.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
I am hearing (unconfirmed) that Fraser Forster has signed for an EPL club for a fee in excess of £10 Million.
 
All the best big Lurch.
 
Hello Craig Gordon.
 
Edit - Southampton being the club - he will replace ex Celtic and ironically Legia Warsaw Legend Artur Boruc.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,906
The Pine Street Inn
Biggreenone said:
A few things a wee bit of research has turned up
 
* Legia submit their list of players to their own Polish FA who verify it and pass to UEFA
* UEFA pass in writing a list of all suspended players to both the Country FA AND the individual clubs - Legia were informed in writing the player was suspended
* A player can only serve a suspension in a competition if he is part of the squad that is listed to compete in that competition.
* The exact same offence has occured 3 times in recent years - each time it was punished by awarding the opposition a 3-0 win - Maccabi Haifa, NK Zepce and PAOK FC - all guilty of playing    players that had not served the full suspension.
 
From UEFA rules :
 
18.01 In order to be eligible to participate in the UEFA club competitions, players must be registered with UEFA within the requested deadlines to play for a club and fulfil all the conditions set out in the following provisions. Only eligible players can serve pending suspensions.

18.05 The club bears the legal consequences for fielding a player who is not named on list A or B, or who is otherwise not eligible to play.
 
I'm sorry but if Legia wanted Bereszynski to play at any stage in UEFA competition this season - then all they had to do was include him in the squad list submitted for the competition for the opening two rounds, not play him in the openng 3 matches  then his suspension was served. They submitted a list of 23 players on their registration (they can name up to 25) - it smacks of total incompetence at Legia.
 
If Celtic had made this mistake - all the fan anger would be rightly directed at incompetence within the club (and maybe a degree to the Scottish Football Association - who also should have picked up on the error) but certainly not at UEFA as they are merely applying the rules.
 
 
You know the old line, "Don't hate the player, hate the game"?  It's usually launched at people who complain that some unworthy has won.
 
Your last paragraph makes the disconnect here pretty clear: You think the criticism here is hating on the player--i.e., Celtic.  To be candid with you, people by and large don't give a shit about Celtic.  Most people root for them to win the Old Firm derby because Rangers are a horrible, sleazy club, but Celtic is a mediocre club in a shit league that no one pays attention to.  No one is hating the player.  At worst, they're indifferent to the player.
 
The hate is for the game.  Look at the posts above.  You see a lot of complaining that the rules are stupid.  You see comments about the interpretation of the rules.  No one is hating on Celtic.  And yet you're responding by quoting the rules.  But it's the rules that are the problem.  It's the rules that need to change.
 
Look at rule 18.05.  The club is responsible for the consequences of fielding an ineligible player.  But why are they allowed to field an ineligible player in the first place?  How does he get on the field?  Why doesn't UEFA, with the hundred of millions of euros it's swimming in, train its officials at every sanctioned match to only let eligible players on the pitch?  Why let things get to this point, where the integrity of the competition is compromised?
 

SoxFanInCali

has the rich, deep voice of a god
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 3, 2005
15,758
California. Duh.
Am I remembering this wrong, or isn't this the second time recently that Celtic have snuck back in after being beaten by a team that was subsequently DQ'd?
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
DLew On Roids said:
 
 
You know the old line, "Don't hate the player, hate the game"?  It's usually launched at people who complain that some unworthy has won.
 
Your last paragraph makes the disconnect here pretty clear: You think the criticism here is hating on the player--i.e., Celtic.  To be candid with you, people by and large don't give a shit about Celtic.  Most people root for them to win the Old Firm derby because Rangers are a horrible, sleazy club, but Celtic is a mediocre club in a shit league that no one pays attention to.  No one is hating the player.  At worst, they're indifferent to the player.
 
The hate is for the game.  Look at the posts above.  You see a lot of complaining that the rules are stupid.  You see comments about the interpretation of the rules.  No one is hating on Celtic.  And yet you're responding by quoting the rules.  But it's the rules that are the problem.  It's the rules that need to change.
 
Look at rule 18.05.  The club is responsible for the consequences of fielding an ineligible player.  But why are they allowed to field an ineligible player in the first place?  How does he get on the field?  Why doesn't UEFA, with the hundred of millions of euros it's swimming in, train its officials at every sanctioned match to only let eligible players on the pitch?  Why let things get to this point, where the integrity of the competition is compromised?
 
Firstly - I detect no Celtic hate in any posts thus far. What I do detect is a failure to understand the way football operates under UEFA.
 
The rules you see as 'stupid' I see as totally necessary to govern a game with 54 member associations representing thousands of individual member clubs - how can you govern such a diverse membership without competition rules ?
 
If individual clubs cannot or will not comply with the simple competition rules - then all they have to do is simply ask their member association not to nominate the club for UEFA competitions - this never happens because the clubs want to compete in UEFA competitions and are willing to accept the rules and regulations associated.
 
The rules and subsequent punishments for failure to comply are known and understood in advance, clubs and associations are fully informed regarding all active suspensions etc - if a club fails to complete a simple registration process then that is 100 % the clubs fault not UEFA. UEFA did not let things get to this point Legia Warsaw and the Polish FA did.
 
If Rory McIlroy handed in his final round British Open scorecard without his signature - would that have been his fault or the R&A ? Of course it would be his and he full well knows the consequences. No Sport can be governed without competition rules. when you enter any competition you agree to abide by the rules - simple.
 
As for people being indifferent to Celtic - feel free - living where I do I am well used to the hate towards the club and its support. Celtic supporting for me was not a choice - its a hereditary thing and I couldnt give a flying toss if  anyone else is indifferent or even outright detest Celtic. They are the club I support and like generations of my family before me I always have done and always will do. The league may be shit and the club may be medicore - and I could start supporting Real Madrid or Manchester City tomorrow - but that is not what football fans do.
 
Hail Hail
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
SoxFanInCali said:
Am I remembering this wrong, or isn't this the second time recently that Celtic have snuck back in after being beaten by a team that was subsequently DQ'd?
 
You are correct In September 2011, Swiss club FC Sion were expelled from the Europa League for fielding ineligible players. Sion beat Celtic 3-1 on aggregate, but following an appeal from Celtic, UEFA awarded Celtic a 3-0 victory for each of the home and away legs of the tie which sent them into the group stages.
 
As I keep saying - these things are not new and clubs are totally aware of the rules and the consequences of non compliance.

 
 

Infield Infidel

teaching korea american
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,463
Meeting Place, Canada
It's not like a golfer not signing a card. It's more like having a rule where the golfer must sign in black, and he signs it in blue, and he's disqualified. That would be a bad rule. He signed it and that should be the end of the story
 
UEFA suspended the player 3 games. The player sat out 3 games. But for UEFA's purposes, he didn't fulfill the suspension. That's not a good rule. He sat out the required matches, that's should be the end of the story
 
It should be the sanctioning body's job to see that the sanctions are followed through. They shouldn't get to pass the buck on to smaller sanctioning bodies, especially when translations can make subtle differences in interpretations. 
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
At least UEFA aren't making up as they go along...unlike the SPL and SFL <cough>
 
If that rumour is true about Lurch and 10M,  the other irony is that he  becomes the most expensive keeper to transfer from a Scottish club, to be replaced by the previous most expensive keeper. What's the sell on, 20% to New Utd?
 
It will take a few more registration  blunders to make up for the Rapid Vienna fiasco.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
Infield Infidel said:
It's not like a golfer not signing a card. It's more like having a rule where the golfer must sign in black, and he signs it in blue, and he's disqualified. That would be a bad rule. He signed it and that should be the end of the story
 
UEFA suspended the player 3 games. The player sat out 3 games. But for UEFA's purposes, he didn't fulfill the suspension. That's not a good rule. He sat out the required matches, that's should be the end of the story
 
It should be the sanctioning body's job to see that the sanctions are followed through. They shouldn't get to pass the buck on to smaller sanctioning bodies, especially when translations can make subtle differences in interpretations. 
How can a player serve a suspension in a tournament in which his club has not registered him to actually play in ?

You can say 'It should be the sanctioning body's job' but the reality is that it is the responsibility of the club and each and every club are 100 % aware of this when entering UEFA competitions.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
CodPiece XL said:
At least UEFA aren't making up as they go along...unlike the SPL and SFL <cough>
 
If that rumour is true about Lurch and 10M,  the other irony is that he  becomes the most expensive keeper to transfer from a Scottish club, to be replaced by the previous most expensive keeper. What's the sell on, 20% to New Utd?
 
It will take a few more registration  blunders to make up for the Rapid Vienna fiasco.
100 % :D
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,196
Cambridge, MA
Polish FA chief joins in the chorus placing the blame on Legia Warsaw, calling them incompetent as Bartosz Bereszynski himself raised the issue of his suspension with his club before the game.
 


Bereszynski said: “I will not confirm or deny this information as these are matters which will stay within club walls. Who has to know at the club knows.”
 
But when asked to confirm the story involving Kuciak, who had encountered a similar case during his spell with Romanians Vaslui, Bereszynski said: “I was convinced the suspension was completed but I can confirm Dusan was first to react.
 
“He told me there had been a similar situation in Vaslui and I should check it out. Then I started to get interested.”
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
So it's kick off time for the SPL Champions tonight at St Johnstone.
 
I hear Leigh Griffiths isnt in the squad - his days must be numbered if this is the case of forward line looks so powderpuff as it is.
 
Game is Live in UK on SS5 at 19.45 GMT
 
On the CL fiasco - Legia appealed today. Word is (I know)  that UEFA have informed Celtic that if they voluntarily withdraw from the Maribor tie then Maribor will get a bye into the group stages (Legia could not take Celtic's place) and that Celtic would not be allowed to drop into the Europa league. Suggestions that Celtic give up their place for 'sporting integrity' are clearly nuts!!!
 
Boniek from the Polish FA confirms what I have said all along - Legia were incompetent beyond belief and to hear the player himself raised the isssue with the club prior to the game at Murrayfield and club officials told him it was OK only underlines how bungling they were in this affair. Their social media campaign ever since has been totally cringeworthy.
 
Anyhow - Here We Go 10 in a row :banana:
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Biggreenone said:
So it's kick off time for the SPL Champions tonight at St Johnstone.
 
I hear Leigh Griffiths isnt in the squad - his days must be numbered if this is the case of forward line looks so powderpuff as it is.
 
Game is Live in UK on SS5 at 19.45 GMT
 
On the CL fiasco - Legia appealed today. Word is (I know)  that UEFA have informed Celtic that if they voluntarily withdraw from the Maribor tie then Maribor will get a bye into the group stages (Legia could not take Celtic's place) and that Celtic would not be allowed to drop into the Europa league. Suggestions that Celtic give up their place for 'sporting integrity' are clearly nuts!!!
 
Boniek from the Polish FA confirms what I have said all along - Legia were incompetent beyond belief and to hear the player himself raised the isssue with the club prior to the game at Murrayfield and club officials told him it was OK only underlines how bungling they were in this affair. Their social media campaign ever since has been totally cringeworthy.
 
Anyhow - Here We Go 10 in a row :banana:
 
I thought the real issue was if UEFA back peddled and said "we will fine you instead" which is a breach of their clearly defined rules. It never once crossed my mind that Celtic would withdraw from the CL voluntarily. Hell, no chance of Petel Lawwell doing that, I have more chance of withdrawing from Keira Knightley. Fiduciary responsibility to shareholders etc.
 
Anyway, still....I'll wait until an official announcement is made.
 
About an hour ago I just signed up for Fox Soccer Plus ( $14.99) a month since it appears not only are they showing the St Johnsone game but also Dundee UTD this weekend. Hopefully they are showing most Celtic games. The only problem with Fox Soccer plus is 50% of the content is darts, rugby etc. It's a bit of a rip off but mugs like me will pay.
 
I think Griffiths is the best striker they have but I was watching friendly games and RD kept playing him out wide right. It sounds to me like there is some off the field antics going on. I sure wish they had kept Hooper. No tabloid press similar to Griffiths and Stokes.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
Celtic open with a welcome 3-0 win over St J.
 
Pretty poor 1st half tbh and we created little. Second hald Commons robs the defender and sets up Stokes to give us the lead. St J denied a penalty (rightly so) and we get a soft one for a foul on Boerrigter (ST J player sent off)  which fan favourite Nir Biton converts. Callum McGregor nets a third as Manus lets a shot go through his body.
 
Played a lot better in 2nd half and 3-0 is a decent score at McDiarimid Pk.
 
A decent start but the lack of a potent goalscorer is a worry.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Maribor V Celtic on Fox Sports 2 for people this side of the pond. Geez, I guess it's not an HD channel for me.
 
Team: Gordon; Lustig, Denayer, van Dijk, Izaguirre; McGregor, Mulgrew, Kayal, Johansen, Berget; Stokes
 
Looks like an extra man in midfield....thanks for that. Kayal over Bitton, Denayer over Ambrose? Denayer looked decent against Dundee Utd but still had a few scares, I don't think he won any balls in the air either. Risky....
 
Why this fascination with Mulgrew in midfield, pet peeve. The midfield looks light in general.   Oh well, keep it tight, Maribor likes to counter attack.
 
Ibraimi and Tavares are the ones to neutralize.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,308
Glasgow, Scotland
Well Celtic at least have an away goal. it never occured to me to ask, but why was Samaras not offered a new deal and woul he get a game? By that i mean do Cletic have better options? Or was it about money?
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
fletcherpost said:
Well Celtic at least have an away goal. it never occured to me to ask, but why was Samaras not offered a new deal and woul he get a game? By that i mean do Cletic have better options? Or was it about money?
 
I'm not sure, he had become a Lennon "Binky" that he would roll out when Celtic played away in Europe and needed a lone striker or throw on for the last 15 minutes. Actually, today would have been the type of game he played in. I don't think he wanted to leave and I don't belive money was the issue. He had become more of a luxury than an every day player. Given the new manager, perhaps he wants to bring in his own style of striker and was not fussed about resigning him. That would be my guess. I found him infuriating at times especially when he would cut inside but there were some games he was at his marauding best.
 
Today's game was weird, I don't think I have ever seen a home team playing so deeply, it was hard to tell who was the home team. I thought Kayal played his best game in well over a year, I'm really impressed with McGregor with each game. He showed an old head on his shoulders when he pulled back the Maribor player when they were on the break. A "good" foul to give. I thought Maribor were hopeless at defending corners, something to consider for the 2nd leg.
 
Barring some suicidal defending they should go through, are you listening Ambrose? Johansen and McGregor had a good game. BUT this team will get pumped if they don't make some decent signings by the group stage,  if they make it that far. Any half decent team that closes them down so they can't dwell on the ball and force Celtic to pass will have a field day. Plenty of work to do but there are definite improvements.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
CodPiece XL said:
 
I'm not sure, he had become a Lennon "Binky" that he would roll out when Celtic played away in Europe and needed a lone striker or throw on for the last 15 minutes. Actually, today would have been the type of game he played in. I don't think he wanted to leave and I don't belive money was the issue. He had become more of a luxury than an every day player. Given the new manager, perhaps he wants to bring in his own style of striker and was not fussed about resigning him. That would be my guess. I found him infuriating at times especially when he would cut inside but there were some games he was at his marauding best.
 
Today's game was weird, I don't think I have ever seen a home team playing so deeply, it was hard to tell who was the home team. I thought Kayal played his best game in well over a year, I'm really impressed with McGregor with each game. He showed an old head on his shoulders when he pulled back the Maribor player when they were on the break. A "good" foul to give. I thought Maribor were hopeless at defending corners, something to consider for the 2nd leg.
 
Barring some suicidal defending they should go through, are you listening Ambrose? Johansen and McGregor had a good game. BUT this team will get pumped if they don't make some decent signings by the group stage,  if they make it that far. Any half decent team that closes them down so they can't dwell on the ball and force Celtic to pass will have a field day. Plenty of work to do but there are definite improvements.
It's all about getting to the group stage and collecting the money. Actually investing to compete at that level just ain't happening. Group stage gubbings will become the norm for clubs such as Celtic.

Samaras - his return simply wasn't worth the money he'd have been looking for and tbh I wouldn't have renewed his contract - simply didn't do it often enough to warrant it. It'll be interesting to see how he does at WBA. Best of luck to the big guy.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Biggreenone said:
It's all about getting to the group stage and collecting the money. Actually investing to compete at that level just ain't happening. Group stage gubbings will become the norm for clubs such as Celtic.

Samaras - his return simply wasn't worth the money he'd have been looking for and tbh I wouldn't have renewed his contract - simply didn't do it often enough to warrant it. It'll be interesting to see how he does at WBA. Best of luck to the big guy.
 
 
See, this is what I have a huge problem with. If it is ALL about getting to the group stages then invest in decent strikers and a squad that will get you there. Their signings contradict this. Every year is ground hog day. It's due to a dumb ass clerical error that even have a chance of getting there this year, and then there was the Karagandy debacle last year when they scraped in.  Then were soundly thrashed in the later stages.
 
Seriously, if they want to keep signing dross players like Pukki, Balde, Griffiths, Lassad, Miku, Bangura, Boerrigter ( did I miss any?) then the chances of making the group stages will continue to go from slim to virtually zero. I find this signing policy at odds with the overall goal of getting to the CL. Hell, I would have taken my chances on Stevie May than that lot. I'm not saying go out and spend 8-10 million on one player but the crap they are signing is not going to work in the short or long term and pretty soon fans will be voting with their feet. It's all making too much sense that Lennon walked away.
 
Anyway, I hear less than 1000 tickets left to be sold for tomorrow's game. It looks like Parkhead will be rocking and sold out. Lawwell better stop making stupid assumptions or else his team will be playing in front of a half empty stadium. He needs to step up, the support deserve it.
 
Game is live on Fox Sports 1 over here...HD ! ITV over there.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,906
The Pine Street Inn
Maribor score to go up 0-1, 1-2 on aggregate.
 
Seems to be against the run of play, but considering how Celtic got here, it'd be hard for their fans to complain.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
This is the worst squad I've seen at Celtic in almost 2 decades. I can't say I am surprised, predictable almost.
 
Fans can't blame the players and certainly not the coach. This one is on Lawwell and the board. Screw you PL.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
fletcherpost said:
Only caught the last half but what I saw was woeful.
 
 
The fist half was dire, as expected Maribor pressed harder and quicker when Celtic had the ball, compared to the first leg. Their passing game folded like a cheap tent, even when they had the ball Stokes was the only one they could knock the ball to, the midfield support were not helping to give him options. I think that's why Commons came on for Kayal, at least he can hold the ball and create something which he did.  Stokes would have been gassed otherwise.  The opening 15 minutes of the second half was their best spell, after the 2nd and 3rd subs, they completely lost their shape. They would get murdered in the group stages.
 
So, what's the bet that Lawwell sells Van Dijk to make up for this lost revenue further depleting a poor squad. That's my bet. I feel sorry for the fans, living in the U.S I dont spend a penny on Celtic. I feel bad for the home fans watching a board of directors line their pockets without much thought to Celtic as a football club. Well at least with Suarez gone I'll be rooting for Liverpool without feeling dirty.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
CodPiece XL said:
 
 
The fist half was dire, as expected Maribor pressed harder and quicker when Celtic had the ball, compared to the first leg. Their passing game folded like a cheap tent, even when they had the ball Stokes was the only one they could knock the ball to, the midfield support were not helping to give him options. I think that's why Commons came on for Kayal, at least he can hold the ball and create something which he did.  Stokes would have been gassed otherwise.  The opening 15 minutes of the second half was their best spell, after the 2nd and 3rd subs, they completely lost their shape. They would get murdered in the group stages.
 
So, what's the bet that Lawwell sells Van Dijk to make up for this lost revenue further depleting a poor squad. That's my bet. I feel sorry for the fans, living in the U.S I dont spend a penny on Celtic. I feel bad for the home fans watching a board of directors line their pockets without much thought to Celtic as a football club. Well at least with Suarez gone I'll be rooting for Liverpool without feeling dirty.
 
Agree with all of this (Apart from the Liverpool part)
 
We would get absolutely shagged stupid in the CL group stages. I dont blame Deila - he was the cheap appointment and the blame for the current failure lies with those that appointed him.
 
Year upon year of selling our better players and replacing them with inferior replacements has led to us losing to the likes of Maribor.
 
Interestingly  there was a vocal crowd outside the main stand at full time loudly expressing their concern at the direction the club is going - no chance Lawwell et al will acknowledge them.
 
It's all quite depressing tbh - from Larsson to Stokes.
 
No way we deserved a place at the top table following the Legia scenario and tonight just simply underlined the situation.
 

mic99

New Member
Jul 18, 2005
491
I just finished watching on tape....truly depressing.  Van Dijk is certainly out the door.
 
2 shots on goal?  
 
They obviously needed the money but I can't even imagine the absolute thrashings Celtic would have received in the group stages.  
 
Instead they will get destroyed in the UEFA Cup.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
One notable downside of our participation in Europa League football - Sunday effing football.
 
At least four home Saturday fixtures will now be on a Sunday - meaning any value on my season ticket has disappeared as I can't make Sunday games.
 
I read we won't have a home Saturday 3pm kick off until November.
 
More matchday income down the drain Mr Lawwell.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,308
Glasgow, Scotland
I reckon the cash gets spent as soon as the Gers get promoted, which might not be this season. Not sure what to make of the coach, he doesn't have much to work with. In the second hald i thought Celtic looked quite flat, there wasn't much passion out there, no one geeing up the troops. A lot of Sunday league football.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,906
The Pine Street Inn
That's been the irony I've been thinking about while reading the Celtic results lately.  A big part of their downward trajectory has been caused by Rangers being gone.  
 
Celtic and Rangers: the Ian McKellen and Derek Jacobi of football.
 
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Sorry, what am I missing here? I don't see the logic. As a result of Rangers going tits up, Celtic have been given an opportunity to automatically qualify and participate in the CL ( initial rounds), they then have to negotiate 3 rounds ( up from 2) of qualifying against pretty lousy teams. By Rangers going bust, they don't have any real challenge for the domestic league and can afford to rest players before crucial CL games.
 
If anything this should be a blessing to Celtic. By making the CL ( League proper), they are guaranteed a minimum of 15 Million. Why would you not invest in your squad to get it to a standard where that should be a minimum requirement rather than a forlorn hope? Instead, the board have been downgrading the squad bringing in inferior replacements when, with a little investment they can recoup that money and more by making it to the CL.
 
I understand the whole league is not as attractive without Rangers, less sponsorship money, less TV rights money, coefficient drops SPL winner plays 3 rounds not two or one blah blah.  However, by Celtic getting to The CL stages they make far more money than all that combined by some margin. The board should be dealing from a position of strength not doing the opposite. I work and I'm part owner of the most successful company in our field.  the one thing I know is that you have to invest in a product to keep it competitive and to keep your customers happy enough to keep buying the product. I see the complete opposite here. I have never seen such a complete disconnect beween Celtic and their fans.
 
I don't know...to get knocked out of the CL is bad enough, twice in the same competition? Shit, they barely got past Karagandy last year, then were humiliated, 12 months on, the squad is smaller, they have not spent a penny, other than loans. Yet, they know they are guaranteed a place in the CL, they know they will win the league, they know they can rest players before big matches. Sorry, I think this is fxxx all to do with Rangers. This is about lining pockets in the hope that your fans will be gullible to keep paying for an inferior product. They have the cash, they need to stop treating the club and their fans as stooges. If someone has some hard core numbers that contradict this please share it...I may be missing something.
 

The Talented Allen Ripley

holden
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 2, 2003
12,770
MetroWest, MA
CodPiece XL said:
I understand the whole league is not as attractive without Rangers, less sponsorship money, less TV rights money, coefficient drops SPL winner plays 3 rounds not two or one blah blah.  However, by Celtic getting to The CL stages they make far more money than all that combined by some margin. The board should be dealing from a position of strength not doing the opposite. I work and I'm part owner of the most successful company in our field.  the one thing I know is that you have to invest in a product to keep it competitive and to keep your customers happy enough to keep buying the product. I see the complete opposite here. I have never seen such a complete disconnect beween Celtic and their fans.
 
I think all this plus the lack of competition that Rangers would otherwise provide is very damaging. That doesn't mean that the Celtic board isn't taking the money and running; they clearly are. It's why Lennon left. I happen to believe that the board wouldn't dare to use the same approach if Rangers were a viable rival within the league.
 

DLew On Roids

guilty of being sex
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
13,906
The Pine Street Inn
Rip is exactly right.  Celtic might not have any domestic competition for the CL, but they are much less likely to make the CL group stages because they don't have a talented enough squad to get through qualifying.  It'd be one thing if they were forced to go through multiple qualifying rounds like Liverpool in 2005 and could dismiss the dross of European competition easily.  But Celtic got pimp-slapped by a team from Poland and then lost at home to a team from Slovenia.  They'd be far better off with a robust Rangers that forced them into a coin flip for CL playoff qualification that they'd be likely to advance through.  And it's only going to get worse as the talent exodus continues this season.
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
14,542
Honestly, the changes to the CL qualifying format a few years ago in theory really benefit clubs like Celtic, who are proportionally stronger relative to their league than most.  Even if Celtic have to play three qualifying rounds -- which is the case for almost all champions that don't directly qualify for the CL [the top three non-qualifiers get a bye to the 2nd round: Cyprus, Denmark, and Austria this year] -- they still are segregated into the Champions Route bracket and avoid all of the difficult clubs in the Non-Champions Route.
 
The qualification segregation is hugely valuable.  Based on the seeding pools, they could have wound up with Maribor, Slovan Bratislava, Ludogorets Razgrad, Malmö and AaB Aalborg.  You really can't ask for a situation better than that.
 
If the 10 non-champions and 10 champions were thrown together in the final playoff round, Celtic would have the 13th high coefficient and would have been unseeded, meaning they could have been drawn against Arsenal, Porto, Zenit, Leverkusen, Athletic Bilbao, et al.
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
DLew On Roids said:
Rip is exactly right.  Celtic might not have any domestic competition for the CL, but they are much less likely to make the CL group stages because they don't have a talented enough squad to get through qualifying.  It'd be one thing if they were forced to go through multiple qualifying rounds like Liverpool in 2005 and could dismiss the dross of European competition easily.  But Celtic got pimp-slapped by a team from Poland and then lost at home to a team from Slovenia.  They'd be far better off with a robust Rangers that forced them into a coin flip for CL playoff qualification that they'd be likely to advance through.  And it's only going to get worse as the talent exodus continues this season.
 
 
The reason they don't have enough of a talented squad is because the board refuses to sanction spending funds they clearly have. If they are choosing not to based on the fact they have no viable domestic competition then they are showing a complete lack of ambition (which has just bitten them in the ass, twice in a month). The CL is the holy grail, not the SPL. So far, they have just signed a couple of players on loan, that's it. If people want to argue that's it's due to a lack of Rangers, fine...but I don't see it as a viable reason not to improve the squad. They are making Celtic worse, not better.
 
Here is what the great leader said earlier this year.
 
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2554412/Celtic-spend-8m-summer-big-signing-boost-Neil-Lennons-Champions-League-hopes-says-Peter-Lawwell.html
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Titans Bastard said:
Honestly, the changes to the CL qualifying format a few years ago in theory really benefit clubs like Celtic, who are proportionally stronger relative to their league than most.  Even if Celtic have to play three qualifying rounds -- which is the case for almost all champions that don't directly qualify for the CL [the top three non-qualifiers get a bye to the 2nd round: Cyprus, Denmark, and Austria this year] -- they still are segregated into the Champions Route bracket and avoid all of the difficult clubs in the Non-Champions Route.
 
The qualification segregation is hugely valuable.  Based on the seeding pools, they could have wound up with Maribor, Slovan Bratislava, Ludogorets Razgrad, Malmö and AaB Aalborg.  You really can't ask for a situation better than that.
 
If the 10 non-champions and 10 champions were thrown together in the final playoff round, Celtic would have the 13th high coefficient and would have been unseeded, meaning they could have been drawn against Arsenal, Porto, Zenit, Leverkusen, Athletic Bilbao, et al.
 
Which is my point, Celtic have never had it so good as far as ease of qualifying. Stroll through the SPL but have a squad capable of beating the likes of Legia and Maribor.
 
Celtic would never beat Arsenal, Porto, Zenit, Leverkusen, Athletic Bilbao, et al as they stand now, however, with a little ambition and spending they should at least expect to beat Legia and Maribor and recoup their investment easily. The odds are stacked in their favor, the board is not taking advantage of it. That's what sticks in my craw.
 
It's like an MLB team in a shit division. They know they will make the playoffs but don't make the trades that will at least give them a chance of getting through the first round. I don't expect Celtic to win the CL, I do however expect the board to make the right moves that will give them a good chance of making it to the group stages.
 

fletcherpost

sosh's feckin' poet laureate
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,308
Glasgow, Scotland
Scathing piece on the BBC website.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28954247
 
Celtic didn't need to spend the kind of money that would have given themselves a shot at the last 16. That would have been financial madness. They needed to spend to improve a team that came perilously close to not making the last 32.
 
But they didn't. Peter Lawwell, the club's chief executive, failed to learn the lesson. He argues that much of the money that has been raised in television revenue and transfer fees has been reinvested in the team. It's hard to see where.
 
Cod Piece, i think if Rangers were in the same League as Celtic, Celtic would have to invest in order to compete with Rangers. If they didn't, if they don't, the fans will go apeshit. However at the moment, I think the board have figured the fans have short memories. The pain of getting a midweek drubbing in Europe will be forgotten when they inflict a similar scoreline on Falkirk or Hamilton or Thistle. Well that's fine if you're winning the league at a canter, (actually it's not fine but I'm trying to think from the board's perspective) but it won't wash if Rangers are Ten points in front in the League and the natives really get restless. 
 
The murmurings (and they might be just gormless murmurings) I hear on the street, in Glasgow support the view that the board are scrimping until Rangers get promotion because they know they'll have some actual competition to deal with. I don't agree with the board's policy at all. I think Celtic had a chance to really build a good squad and try and cement a relatively strong position in Europe. We all know the real money comes in when you get to the group stages and this ought to have been Celtic's realistic target each season. The board has got it all wrong, we agree on that. Sure they run a solvent relatively debt free club, but at what cost later down the line.
 
The next few months will be interesting to see how the fans react. Personally I'd love to see them being challenged this year in the league cos that would show the board just how far the team has fallen in terms of quality and might force some sort of change in the boards approach to running the club. I dunno though. They can shout from the rafters, we are not in debt and we win league titles...but it's not enough, cos the football on the park is drek. 
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
fletcherpost said:
Scathing piece on the BBC website.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28954247
 
Celtic didn't need to spend the kind of money that would have given themselves a shot at the last 16. That would have been financial madness. They needed to spend to improve a team that came perilously close to not making the last 32.
 
But they didn't. Peter Lawwell, the club's chief executive, failed to learn the lesson. He argues that much of the money that has been raised in television revenue and transfer fees has been reinvested in the team. It's hard to see where.
 
Cod Piece, i think if Rangers were in the same League as Celtic, Celtic would have to invest in order to compete with Rangers. If they didn't, if they don't, the fans will go apeshit. However at the moment, I think the board have figured the fans have short memories. The pain of getting a midweek drubbing in Europe will be forgotten when they inflict a similar scoreline on Falkirk or Hamilton or Thistle. Well that's fine if you're winning the league at a canter, (actually it's not fine but I'm trying to think from the board's perspective) but it won't wash if Rangers are Ten points in front in the League and the natives really get restless. 
 
The murmurings (and they might be just gormless murmurings) I hear on the street, in Glasgow support the view that the board are scrimping until Rangers get promotion because they know they'll have some actual competition to deal with. I don't agree with the board's policy at all. I think Celtic had a chance to really build a good squad and try and cement a relatively strong position in Europe. We all know the real money comes in when you get to the group stages and this ought to have been Celtic's realistic target each season. The board has got it all wrong, we agree on that. Sure they run a solvent relatively debt free club, but at what cost later down the line.
 
The next few months will be interesting to see how the fans react. Personally I'd love to see them being challenged this year in the league cos that would show the board just how far the team has fallen in terms of quality and might force some sort of change in the boards approach to running the club. I dunno though. They can shout from the rafters, we are not in debt and we win league titles...but it's not enough, cos the football on the park is drek. 
 
 
I think generally we are on the same page as far as " I don't agree with the board's policy at all. I think Celtic had a chance to really build a good squad and try and cement a relatively strong position in Europe. We all know the real money comes in when you get to the group stages and this ought to have been Celtic's realistic target each season. The board has got it all wrong, we agree on that. Sure they run a solvent relatively debt free club, but at what cost later down the line"
 
If we talk specifically about signing policy here's my deal. Other than loan deals with option to buy which worked out quite well with Forster, any money spent usually is a 2-4 year investment. The problem with Celtic's recent signings is that they have signed a bunch of poor quality players and if they don't work out you punt them at a loss. They are not signing any players that are "quality" who will improve the squad and who subsequently can be turned into a nice profit 3 years down the line when they are established. It's not only the lack of action, it's the type of player they have brought in.
 
Getting back to Rangers, I think most people here equate Celtic with Rangers historically. However, from a football perspective within the context of this discussion, most people are assuming that Celtic will spend when Sevco come back. I think people tend to forget that there were many years when Celtic could not spend the money, people tend to forget that there were seasons when Rangers were not Celtics closest competitor and were shit for years. As were Celtic for a period of time, it was a natural ebb and flow. I don't think they should go hand in hand.
 
Seriously, will Sevco get promoted this year? I'm sure the refs will have their fair share of "honest mistakes' but promotion is not a given, and even if they they get promoted will  Sevco really be their closest challangers next year or the year after? I'm not a typical Celtic rabid Celtic fan, I never was, I never lived in the Glasgow "fish bowl" of the Old Firm and maybe 20 years of being in the U.S has made it easier for me to disassociate the two. In fact, as a kid I would visit my uncle who was in the CID in Liverpool and he took me more to the Kop than the amount of times I went to Parkhead. Although, out of guilt, he would take me to Goodison now and again more out of respect to my dead father who had played for Everton. As a kid I was actually both a Liverpool AND Everton fan , but since I grew up in Scotland Celtic were my #1 team. Anyway, I digress. I've always been able to see Celtic not as part of the Old Firm. 
 
The Champions league games give me more pleasure than watching any Celtic-Rangers game and always have done. I see that as the priority not the SPL league although obviously without winning the SPL the CL is out of the question. So....getting back to your quote: " I don't agree with the board's policy at all. I think Celtic had a chance to really build a good squad and try and cement a relatively strong position in Europe. We all know the real money comes in when you get to the group stages and this ought to have been Celtic's realistic target each season. The board has got it all wrong, we agree on that. Sure they run a solvent relatively debt free club, but at what cost later down the line"
 
You nailed it. I just feel this should be the case regardless of the presence or absence of "Rangers". If as you say the board "may be hoarding cash until they return" then it's a very parochial and myopic approach which not only cost them about 15M , it will cost them a half empty stadium. I would not want them sitting on my board of directors, put it that way. And yes I know Dermott Desmond is very successful. Now, if on the other hand, they spend money in the next few days, and RD is given a full season with a squad he can work with, the Europa League may not be such a bad thing. After all, wasn't that what happened in Lennon's first season?
 
Anyone know if Celtic can be drawn against Warsaw in the Europa league?
 

Titans Bastard

has sunil gulati in his sights
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 15, 2002
14,542
CodPiece XL said:
 
Anyone know if Celtic can be drawn against Warsaw in the Europa league?
 
It's possible.  The pots won't be set until we know who makes it through the playoff rounds, but Celtic and Legia are far enough apart in terms of coefficient that they definitely won't be in the same pot.
 

Biggreenone

New Member
Mar 10, 2012
63
Peter Lawwell will be appearing on Radio Clyde Super Scoreboard on Fri evening in an effort to try and ease fans fears.
 
More BS and more and more fans will see it as just that,
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,501
Scottsdale, AZ.
Heck, I was just coming to post here after a hefty happy hour and you posted, I'm looking at the keyboard twice to make sure I''m hitting the right key.
 
BGO, you're obviously a season ticket holder, how do you feel about what Celtic are doing? Evidently you go to games, rub shoulders with other Celtic fans, do you think that Celtic are holding out investment wise for the return of Sevco? Do you think a lack of Rangers is holding them back? How do most Celtic fans treat the absence of Rangers? A good thing or a bad thing? Personally, I dont think it should matter.
 
By the way, a big shout out to Titans Bastard, thanks for doing the all the leg work regarding the CL and Europa league draws and scores and commentary. Much appreciated, it's not unnoticed.
 
Getting back to Big, how the hell is PL going to "ease fans fears" without pulling out the check book. More of the same shit? What effing excuse is he going to trot out?
 
a) Financial security of the club is paramount, we dont care,  we won't get into debt even though we have made shitloads of money from the last 2 seasons.
b) We won't take unnecessary risks with the club's finances, even though yet again, we made a shitload of money.
c) The Scottish market remains 'prohibitive' to generating money, therefore we ain't spending shit. Despite making a fair amount of cash from player sales and the CL
d) We will continue a policy of developing young players to sell for profit, even though we signed crap players over the last 18 months and we have little chance of selling them for hee-haw.
e) I'm Peter Lawwell, I get paid a million pounds a year regardless of the shit squad I put out. You punters will lap it up because "we are Celtic" you will show up in droves no matter how shit the team is. That's the way it works you imbeciles now move along. AND...AND, I dont care if the squad is the worst since the Tommy Burns era, times have changed.
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.