Aleksandar Tonev

Got to go. However, I have said that before and it didn't happen. I have a feeling with him only being here on loan though, he will made an example of. If we had spent a transfer fee on him, I think we would have kept him until we could maybe offload him for a fee.

 

Celtic appealing the ban. get him to * i say

 

Unless there is clear video evidence or an admission of guilt from Tonev then I would struggle to see how he can be found guilty. However if there is one of those two then he can get directly to *!

 

The best way celtic can distance themselves is putting a lighter to his contract.

 

That's a really good point, surely the evidence in this case is no where near as clear cut as the griffiths incident?

 

I assumed there was some sort of clear cut evidence against him, especially to warrant such a lengthy ban, but apparently that isn't the case.

The SFA’s compliance department contacted Sky to see if there was any footage that backs up Logan’s claim against Tonev, but Sky producers examined hours of uncut material and claimed there is nothing from their various camera angles that can back up the Aberdeen players claim.

It was also claimed that no one was within earshot of the two players when the remark was supposed to have been made.

 

He should sue the SFA if he is found innocent.

I expect the SFA to reject the appeal, remember they never banned McCoist, Bougherra etc after the 'shame game'.

He should take it all the way to CAS and finally put their SFA in it's place.

 

Where did you get the last two paragraphs from

 

If there was video evidence, surely Celtic would know about it? The fact it's been appealed makes me think there is no evidence, as Celtic would not appeal if they knew it wouldn't be worthwhile.

Surely they can't ban him without any proper evidence?

 

A newspapers website. The Evening Times maybe? I basically skimmed the article and summarised what it said.

 

Taken from the Celtic website:

AN SFA disciplinary tribunal has today upheld the complaint that Aleksandar Tonev breached disciplinary rule 202: ‘Excessive Misconduct by the use of offensive, insulting and abusive language of a racist nature,’ during a game at Celtic Park against Aberdeen in September.
The Bulgarian midfielder has been given a seven-match immediate suspension.
A Celtic spokesperson said: "Racism has no place in football and as a Club for all people, Celtic absolutely abhors racism of any kind.
"This was a very unfortunate case, but the Club has accepted Aleksandar’s explanation that he did not say the words that were alleged to have been said and that he is not a racist.
"We are, therefore, very disappointed by the outcome today and can confirm that Aleksandar will be appealing this decision.”

 

Hes * aswell.

 

Is it not just his word against Logans ?

 

Aye, but it also said the "the Club has accepted Aleksandar’s explanation that he did not say the words that were alleged to have been said and that he is not a racist.".

Its a tricky one.....i want to give him the benefit of the doubt, but there is no doubt that the Eastern Europeans are a couple of decades behind us in accepting the intolerance of racism.

 

Do the SFA release minutes of these meetings or even just clarify how they came to the decision?

Seems utterly ludicrous to hammer him with any kind of ban based on one persons word against another.

 

That's what I was thinking.

Even if he did say it, we are supposed to live by the "innocent until proven guilty" credo, which I fear simply isn't being used in this case.

Without video evidence, or the evidence from someone close to him, what other evidence can they use against him? Even if an Aberdeen player claimed to have heard him, he could simply be backing up a team mate, right?

It's * up, because he'll always carry this stigma now regardless of how his appeal goes.

 

Racist

 

Guilty until proven innocent it looks like.

If they were to have given him a two or three match ban, I'd still be uncomfortable but not as uncomfortable with 7 matches for something that can't be proven.

Did he do it? Where there's smoke, there's probably fire. Then again it could have been Shay Logan lying just as easily.

 

I would agree with that. My concern is 7 games is a big ban and suggests there was some convincing evidence along the lines you suggest above as we know the player has denied it himself. If that is the case we need to see this otherwise my lack of trust in the SFA makes me concerned about what has raelly happened here.

 

My thinking exactly we must be shown that there is clear evidence against him as this is a players career at stake here.