Aleksandar Tonev

sorry lad for misinterpreting your post. But i can see where your coming from with the comparison.

I suppose as fans we have no option really but to back the player, giving the lack of evidence, its not a nice situation at the same time, the club been brought into a race row. A club which prides itself in its respect for all races, all colours, all creeds. Thats the only thing i was concerned about. How the media are going to blacken the name of the club over this issue. But on the other hand .. i admire deila for protecting his player. I like tonev as a footballer. He just needs to keep his head down now i think.

 

Whoosh!

 

Change of tact here, but if Tonev is guilty, so * what?<?xml:namespace prefix = "o" ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>
<o></o>
Was Shay Logan’s life put in danger by allegedly being subjected to this bout of petty name calling? If he called Tonev a Bulgarian C*** (my asterisks, don’t know if this site has a moderator), would we have heard another thing about it? <o></o>
<o></o>
Let’s get this clear, this is not an anti racism campaign. This is a lets feel sorry for black people and pretend white people are guilty of something campaign. The entire thing the world over looks like a witch hunt. <o></o>
<o></o>
Is it me or is there ABSOLOUTLEY no problem with racism in football. I remember in 1987 at Tynecastle, Mark Walters had bananas thrown at him just for taking a corner. This may be crass, in poor taste etc, but so are a lot of things football fans chant at opposition players. The point is that, although thankfully you wouldn’t see that sort of thing now, it ultimately done no harm to Mark Walters. What are the real threats to black footballers and black people in society that they need this sort of protection? <o></o>
<o></o>
Whenever anyone speaks of racism (meaning whites against black, no other type, subjective laws are no laws at all) they speak in such grandiose terms as if it the greatest sin the world. <o></o>
<o></o>
<o></o>
We brain teaser. <o></o>
<o></o>
<o></o>
Two fascist states in 1978. One was banned from the World Cup and the was allowed to host and bribe their way to winning the completion A title they has never been stripped of. <o></o>
<o></o>
The brain teasing element isn’t the name of the two countries, South Africa and Argentina respectively, but why were they treated differently. The military Junta killed more people than the Apartheid regime, vile though they were. The reason is politics. That is where the football anti-racism campaign comes from. It is a kind of Corporate Social Responsibility for football. Ideal, because there are alot of black footballers around. Exactly the sort of thing to deflect from, for example corruption at FIFA, the leader in this idiotic witch hunt. This leads to many black people believing that they are above the law. Any petty name calling is somehow in their mind translated to a criminal offence. <o></o>
<o></o>

 

That's a fair leap from your usual quirky input Johnny. guess the super duper font wasn't available tonight.

 

So we are keeping him for the season then ?

 

yup
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footb...aleksandar-tonev-for-rest-of-season-1-3639750

 

Again, hoping this is a wind-up and I am missing the joke entirely, please tell me you are not serious.
<o></o>

<o></o>
<o></o>
No, his life was not in danger but no human being should have to suffer being abused because of the color of his skin. As for Logan using Bulgarian in an insult, that would be up to Tonev on whether to take the case further. However, one difference regarding the Tonev case is that I think it is very rare for a country's name to be used as a form of racist abuse (unless you vote UKIP and use terms like P*l*k). In contrast, there is a history of racism against black people that we are supposed to be challenging, which means when it happens the best thing they can do is report it and hope for a legal result, which is what has happened.

<o></o>
<o></o>
I would advise you to revise that sentence as that is the standard UKIP response to claims of racism; and it is traditionally used by racists. You might also want to look at America and the recent protests that are currently ongoing. Presumably you say the same about claims of institutional racism there, it's just black people demanding special treatment?

It's you. There is still a problem hence the fact that in the the last year alone we have had: multiple instances of black players leaving the field in and around Europe; two players (that I can think of) in the English Premiership being suspended for using racist language; bananas thrown at black players in Russia yet that country is rewarded with the world cup; and similar non-racist prejudices being rewarded, e.g. another World Cup in Qatar.

<o></o>
<o></o>
<o></o>It is not the greatest but it is up there, amongst a collection of the greatest; and to dismiss that shows that you really need to re-evaluate your way of thinking. You speak of Apartheid and call it 'vile' so I assume you have read about at least some of results of that regime? You will also likely have heard of the Civil Right's Movement and the efforts made to ensure equality. What is happening in Israel and Palestine now, which is also a form of racism, albeit not just black people against white people. It is more religion based but it is still racism, just as many Irish have had to put with over decades/centuries whilst living in Scotland and other parts of the UK.

I'm sorry for the full on response to your post and you might have been joking (I still hope) and it went over my head. But I hate racism and it disappoints me when I read posts like this that seem to support it and justify UKIP style attitudes.

If Tonev is guilty then a 7 game ban is actually quite fair; and, as stated by others, if he is innocent then why isn't he fighting this as much as possible. Like I have said before, he has a top notch legal team paid for by the club. He has them in his corner. He also has the support of many fans on hear who believe in his word. By not fighting he allows this to be marked against his name for the rest of his career and, you might be different, but I would never accept being branded a racist if I was not guilty of racism. I would lodge every possible appeal until there was nothing else to do.

 

Exactly how i feel about it. Tonev should be going through every route open to him, to clear his name.

 

How can anyone know the reasons why Tonev is not fighting this? One possible reason is that Celtic have told him to let it be as any further appeals will displease UEFA he will find ways in the future to punish the club for not abiding by SFA rulings. Perhaps he feels that having been disbelieved twice there is no point in prolonging the agony where he might just be disbelieved again.

For me the only certain villain in this scenario is the SFA who have decided to sully a players name without any proof. I personally believe that Tonevs greatest crime in the eyes of the SFA id that of being a Celtic player. Had he played for the huns I think he would have been found not guilty.

 

Whole heartedly agree with the bottom part..

 

Thats exactly what should be done if he's accepting being a rascist when hes said otherwise for weeks.

 

Where has he accepted being a racist? Are you looking for a job at the DR or the Sun perhaps?

 

This is pretty much the my view on the matter, like it or not sometimes it's easier just to get on with it.

 

If he doesnt continue to fight this or he does serve his ban like hes going to , then thats accepting being a rascist. It's not that hard to put together.

 

No it is not. He has not gotten justice from the SFAs kangaroo court who like you have found him guilty without any evidence. Why should he prolong his suffering fighting a losing battle?

 

Not meaning this to be controversial one bit (as I agree Tonev has been disgracefully treated) but..

The rules state he only has to be found "guilty" on a balance of probabilities. This clearly means they don't have to have proof, just to believe he probably did.

It's disgusting, it's wrong, but the "rules" were followed.

If we believe we never deserved to go through against Legia, but they had to go out based on the rules being followed, isn't that similar to the Tonev situation in the sense that it's the wrong outcome but in both cases the rules were adhered to.

I also think that's why Tonev has been told to move on from it. Our legal team have examined it and gave it their best shot, but they don't have a leg to stand on in accordance with the football rules.

I think Celtic's move should be to challenge this rule very publicly and try to force change so that no other footballer has to be shamed in such a way with absolutely zero evidence.

Sorry if this comes across as a bit Devil's Advocate, but I've been thinking about this a few days. Feel free to counter it to death.

 

Yes it is accepting to be guilty,why would a man that has done nothing wrong accept this with the backing of two organisations with the resources to fight it to the last.
this will damage his career greatly and walking away when hes "not guilty" makes no sense in the slightest from his point of view. Hes now marked goods and when his loan here finishes up * struggle to find a club of his standard willing to take him on because of the events of the ladt few months.

You need to look away from your celtic bias and look at it from a neutral point if view.

 

One simple question. If you were on the SFA panel would you have found him guilty based only on the words of his accuser?

 

A fair bit melodramtic here ffs!