Aleksandar Tonev

Next time we play Aberdeen let's get Ambrose to report that one of their players called him a "Black *". Let's see how that pans out given the precedent that's just happened.

 

And here was me thinking you were a *

 

Welcome to the 21st century mate, since you are not offended by words, if I call you a * you will be fine with that

 

yet you are believing his accuser on his word alone, a person is always innocent until proven guilty, and no one has proven that Tonev made a racist comment.

 

He isn't Hungarian ffs

 

So, do you think it's wrong him wanting the Hungarian FA to
show some solidarity with the Bulgarian FA.

They both end in GARIAN.

It wouldn't hurt for the rest of the south American FA's to stick together

 

Not all law cases are based on probability bud, and to be fair what he was done for would not be laughed out of court.

All you would need is for a lawyer to cause reasonable doubt nothing else, just look at Barry George he was convicted with probability and then the case chucked out a few years later also the most famous case in british history regarding footwear R vs T that changed british law with probability not being used for any footwear cases.

Probability is not the be all and end all it can be challenged.

 

That sounds like he is just willing to accept it, and is not interested in taking the matter further. If it was me, and I know I hadn't said the phrase in question, I would be doing all I could to clear my name.

This makes it look like he is indeed guilty, and if so, he can quickly pack his bags.

 

You really should re-read the stories about this and try and understand what is being discussed. They are saying that Tonev 'most likely' used language containing racist abuse and neither he or his defense team have been able to provide a viable alternative to what Logan claims to have heard.

Sometimes, a person is actually asked to prove he is innocent when the evidence is against him; and using the weather as a reason for Logan mishearing. That seems pretty desperate to me.

First of all, if it was a simple as that then why have Celtic lost this case against an authority who is quite renowned for acting tough and then backing down whenever a club stands firm against them, especially a club with the resources of ourselves? I presume the SFA is 100% confident that this case is watertight. They will have had legal advice and, from what I can gather, the case was judged by an independent panel of respected specialists who are probably as much aware of the Barry George case as they are of the Andrew Mitchell and Ched Evans cases, which were also based partly on probability.

As far as challenging, regardless of what you believe would you seriously risk what our clubs stand for by defending an on-loan player accused of racism. In fact, we have defended him but the fore-mentioned Court has decided he is guilty based on the evidence. If we couldn't have it thrown out despite the lack of evidence what chance would we have at any legal level?

Also, defending a man accused of casual racism in a world where casual racism is used often by a large percentage of the population - just look at the Suarez incident and the rise of UKIP - is it reallyso hard to believe that he used black whilst offending Logan? Whether he meant to be racist is another question.

 

Kevin Harper “If the biggest club in Scotland stand by a player who has been found guilty, what chance do we have?”



*.

 

See Clark Carlisle sticking his oar in today. Why do all these fuckingnon entities come out the woodwork at the mearest suggestion of racism?
Surely a guy has a right to defend himself? Seems like thes * were at the game, heard it, and are hanging him for it already !! FFS

 

Some of the responses in here are ridiculous.

So called Celtic fans siding with the SFA.

 

Let's just say it was clear cut, and the SFA punished Tonev. Should we still be defending Tonev purely because he is a Celtic player?

 

NO. If he said it and it was clear cut, hes * and rightly so. The point is, the SFA seem to be taking only one witness as evidence, who in this case happens to be the accuser.

Tonev completey denies all comments. Where do we go?

 

Bang on

 

So, next time we play Aberdeen and Stokes says Logan called him a * *, bang, 7 game ban!

 

That's not how it come across though. He was basically saying that anyone siding with the SFA are not Celtic fans, which is complete nonsense.

As I said a wee while ago, reading between the lines, Tonev is not interested in taking the case further, going by his statement anyway. Surely if you knew that you were innocent, you would be taking it as far as possible to try and clear your name, especially considering the seriousness of this. I'm sorry, but if he doesn't take the matter further, then it reeks of guilt, and he can swiftly leave if that is the case.

 

I completely agree. So if Tonev is indeed innocent, he will be taking the matter further you would think?