Onthefringes Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 I actually like Burrows, and think he's doing a great job, but as has been mentioned, he's not the type to confront and fight. He just doesn't seem to have that in him, unfortunately. You don't know him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 You don't know him... Are we only allowed to pass comment if we know the guy personally? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 If what youre commenting on is his personal qualities, Id say yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 If what youre commenting on is his personal qualities, Id say yes. I'm obviously talking about his professional qualities, aren't I? I'm not meaning that he runs from a square go offering outside a pub, or that he doesn't like arguing with his wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katie Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 But there is a world of difference between what he will say in public and what he will say behind closed doors in his professional capacity. To say he isnt the type to confront and fight when in reality we cant be sure is (in my opinion anyway) a little unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 I don't think he has the stomach to make the required statement. I actually like Burrows, and think he's doing a great job, but as has been mentioned, he's not the type to confront and fight. He just doesn't seem to have that in him, unfortunately. A statement would mean very little in a campaign for change. It would be about working angles, networking and building support with other clubs and supporters, and for me that's probably what he is best at. When it gets to that point when any idea for change is ready to progress to SPFL/SFA board level, thats when the media can no longer ignore it. The demotion of Sevco showed that despite the power, influence and fear the Bigot Brothers bring, provincial fans must appease their own fans first and foremost and that ground-up movement can force the SFA/SPFL's hand. The Old Firm may be the big players, but without the other 46 clubs what are they?! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 But there is a world of difference between what he will say in public and what he will say behind closed doors in his professional capacity. To say he isnt the type to confront and fight when in reality we cant be sure is (in my opinion anyway) a little unfair. Here's the thing, for me the "correct channels" simply means that fuck all will happen. I seriously doubt that by going down the channels dictated by the very organisation we're complaining about that much will happen. Unfortunately, taking the high road doesn't seem to work with this lot. We can point and laugh at the likes of Lennon all we want when he flies into a rage about how his players are being tackled, but the truth is, that kind of behaviour works. Those who shout the loudest and all that. Put it this way, if you're at the head of that organisation and your receptionist buzzes you to tell you that you have a phone call from Neil Lennon, or Peter Lawwell after a dodgy couple of decisions against your side your reaction is going to be one of "christ, here we fucking go". I doubt a phone call from Alan Burrows elicits the same response, because he's known and regarded as a friendly, easy-going young guy. A credit to the game, all that jazz. Unfortunately, in situations like this you need someone who's a bit of a cunt and who's going to make life difficult for those in power, be it directly or through the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al B Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Are you of the view that "having fight" is most productively displayed in the Scottish MSM? Or is it perhaps better within the confined offices where it doesn't add to an already biased journalistic agenda? Everyone seems to be complaining that the media in this country is purely concerned with pandering to the Rangers/Celtic angle and the whole "self preservation" thing. How can it then be the wrong and "weak" stance to decide to completely by-pass the media and cut them out of the equation? If you're actually hoping for any kind of results that is..... Also, why when Steve Robinson keeps his powder dry on the matter in public it's strong, yet when Alan Burrows does it it's weak? If you're of the opinion that the people you want fighting for you are the ones that are the loudest, then I can only assume you've been on the wrong end of a few tankings in your time and aren't sure why. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Are you of the view that "having fight" is most productively displayed in the Scottish MSM? Or is it perhaps better within the confined offices where it doesn't add to an already biased journalistic agenda? I'm only going on what I've seen in the past when it comes to organisations like the SFA. Having fight in the confines of a private office is great, but as we've seen in the past, the SFA tend not to really do much unless they're under quite a bit of pressure. Public perception is what matters to them, which is why it took quite a shitstorm to finally force action from our authorities on the Rangers debacle. If that had been reserved to private chit chats in offices I doubt we'd have seen as much action taken. Also, if taking it to the private offices was the way to go, then surely Sir Brendan would have kept quiet about a lack of penalties and our physical play? Wouldn't he have been better served just requesting some time in a private setting to discuss it with the powers that be rather than provide quotes for the media? Everyone seems to be complaining that the media in this country is purely concerned with pandering to the Rangers/Celtic angle and the whole "self preservation" thing. How can it then be the wrong and "weak" stance to decide to completely by-pass the media and cut them out of the equation? If you're actually hoping for any kind of results that is..... Not everyone. I personally think that the media pander to whatever will shift more copies of their paper each morning. It just so happens that coverage of the Glasgow two attracts more eyeballs, and more profit. Being as we were playing against one of the big clubs in question, it's safe to assume that any noise we'd made publicly about the refereeing decisions would have been given some coverage. We've been fucked over. Why not give the media something to write about, and put the authorities into a slightly more uncomfortable position? Also, why when Steve Robinson keeps his powder dry on the matter in public it's strong, yet when Alan Burrows does it it's weak? Again, I don't think it's strong for him to do that. I think, just like Burrows, he's relatively inexperienced in the position he's in. Nothing wrong with that, of course. Give him another five or ten years and he'll know how the game is played and how you get what you're looking for. He need look no further than his countryman in Glasgow the past few weeks to see how you play the game. The harsh truth is, the powers that be aren't going to look at our reaction and think "Gee, Motherwell were restrained and took the high road, didn't they? Let's look into their complaints and ensure they're given a fair shake in future since they played by the rules and were really nice." They're going to more than likely think "well, our refs fucked them over twice, for whatever reason! Thank fuck they aren't making it a bigger issue, we'll be able to slide by doing nothing about it, which is easier on us as we don't need to upset the main breadwinners in the process" If you're of the opinion that the people you want fighting for you are the ones that are the loudest, then I can only assume you've been on the wrong end of a few tankings in your time and aren't sure why. Nah, like most of the population I've never actually been on the wrong end of a "tanking" mate. Not sure how wanting my club to voice their concerns over us being fucked over instead of giving it the "well, at least we got a point, and the players did really well to even get that, what a week we've had etc" is comparable with high street beat downs or whatever you're on about. My opinion is that unless we do what others do and complain, make noise and set up large fucking neon signs that point right at where the injustice we suffered is situated we're going to keep getting fucked over. That's life I'm afraid. The squeakiest wheel gets the oil and all that shite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Are we only allowed to pass comment if we know the guy personally? That's not what was meant and I suspect you knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 That's not what was meant and I suspect you knew that. Again, the vast majority of us are posting opinions on players, managers, chairmen, referees, owners and all sorts without "knowing them", aren't we? Like everyone else my views are drawn from what I've seen him do and say in his public, professional capacity. If me posting that opinion causes you a problem then simply scroll past and ignore, it's that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al B Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 I can't take the time to reply to all of that whilst I'm at work, I may come back to it later...but there's so much in there that just flits between nonsense and actually wrong. As for my last part, I'm using word-play to refer to the fact that whilst volume and foot-stamping may portray strength, it generally has the opposite effect and hides weakness. But as has been already said, I suspect you knew that. The exception is if you have the entire media and establishment on your side and the strength just comes from sheer numbers and positions of influence, which is why it works for Rangers/Celtic, and is a bad idea for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 I can't take the time to reply to all of that whilst I'm at work, I may come back to it later...but there's so much in there that just flits between nonsense and actually wrong. If you think that saying nothing publicly and not questioning the ridiculous decisions out in the open is the way to go then fair enough, we'll need to agree to disagree. I guess time will tell. If we see closed doors chats using the proper channels actually seeing some sort of positive result then I'll happily hold my hands up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Leave Rangers to write the press releases - they make a cunt of themselves with each one. Hopefully Burrows will have some luck in his closed door discussions. If there is any justice in the game (which there isn't), we will end their unbeaten run on Saturday at their own shithole! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Leave Rangers to write the press releases - they make a cunt of themselves with each one. Hopefully Burrows will have some luck in his closed door discussions. If there is any justice in the game (which there isn't), we will end their unbeaten run on Saturday at their own shithole! Not press releases, that's just daft. But some key people at our club need to learn to be a bit cuter in how they use the media to get a message across. It'll come with experience I'm guessing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yassin Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 As angry as I am about the last few games, I think I do think the corruption/conspiracy claims are a bit far fetched. Both these penalties were given against Celtic last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ankles Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Utter shitebag behaviour from Burrows and a third slap in the face to the fans from the club in a week. The guy has been following Scottish football for decades. He knows the same as us that the SFA don't give a fuck about our club and will only react to public pressure. The choice to play this down is not being made with best intentions for the club. What a pile of shite. The SFA don't react to public pressure on anything. Their whole buisness plan is built round the old firm .As in all walks of life some of them support the old firm and believe in everything they are. The diddy clubs have never and will never gain anything from them againstthose two. As for Burrows your as bad as that numpty who blamed him on twitter for the hot air not defrosting the pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 As angry as I am about the last few games, I think I do think the corruption/conspiracy claims are a bit far fetched. Both these penalties were given against Celtic last season. For me, it has very little to do with Celtic. There fans are just the worst winners when it comes to these things that draws more frustration from opposing fans making it about them - then calling everyone "obsessed". It's about the standard of refereeing in the country, the bias inherent throughout for whatever reason, the complete lack of accountability and the insubstantial review, appraisal and appeals process. The great irony is by Celtic's own perception they have been "victim" to this standard of refereeing more than any other team, and the reaction of their manager, fans and players over the past two games greatly diminishes any momentum to make the clear lack of consistency and integrity from our referees a major talking point in the hope we fix it. When the time comes again when Celtic get a dodgy decision against them, no one associated with their club has any right to complain - and I will politely remind them all about the past two games. "Swings and roundabouts" is the term, and it's true, but year on year they swings and roundabouts are getting bigger and bigger. A complete review and change is needed to the benefit of EVERY single club in Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Back to last night's game. Overall I think Robbo's tactics worked although by no means perfectly. They unfolded much as they should have done last Sunday, Craig Thomson permitting. In the first half the line up was wrong and while we played a reasonable containing game Moult was left too isolated by the formation as he always is when we play those tactics. When not in possession we were far too vulnerable down the flanks as Frear and Petravicius played in the middle. The midfield sat just too deep and invited Celtic onto us much to Carson's displeasure. We created virtually nothing. Cadden looked ineffective in the middle. To his credit though Robbo made changes ie when substituing the unlucky Petravicius. Interesting to see the ineffective McHugh substituted again??? It was great to see us go 4-3-3 late on. The players fought like tigers to a man although the central midfield struggled to win physical battles at times. I thought Carson was MOTM ably supported by Tait, Kipre, Hartley and Campbell. Tanner made a big difference when he came on. We did ride our luck at times but a shocking refereeing decision and not Celtic denied us. Celtic more than held their own physically and got right in our faces - not a part of their game that the media likes to highlight. I'd have taken a point beforehand but the eventual result felt like a defeat. Well done to the team and management. A final word on Alan Burrows - he's doing a great job. I don't agree with everything the club has done but thats life. I'm still seething about the decision not to appeal Kipre's red card and I suspect that there were differing opinions within the club about that just as there was not to contest the findings of the SPFL report about the Rangers play off final. Overall we have a great club and I wouldn't swap it for the world. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clackscat Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Are you of the view that "having fight" is most productively displayed in the Scottish MSM? Or is it perhaps better within the confined offices where it doesn't add to an already biased journalistic agenda? Everyone seems to be complaining that the media in this country is purely concerned with pandering to the Rangers/Celtic angle and the whole "self preservation" thing. How can it then be the wrong and "weak" stance to decide to completely by-pass the media and cut them out of the equation? If you're actually hoping for any kind of results that is..... Also, why when Steve Robinson keeps his powder dry on the matter in public it's strong, yet when Alan Burrows does it it's weak? If you're of the opinion that the people you want fighting for you are the ones that are the loudest, then I can only assume you've been on the wrong end of a few tankings in your time and aren't sure why. Brilliant post Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Back to last night's game. Overall I think Robbo's tactics worked although by no means perfectly. They unfolded much as they should have done last Sunday, Craig Thomson permitting. In the first half the line up was wrong and while we played a reasonable containing game Moult was left too isolated by the formation as he always is when we play those tactics. When not in possession we were far too vulnerable down the flanks as Frear and Petravicius played in the middle. The midfield sat just too deep and invited Celtic onto us much to Carson's displeasure. We created virtually nothing. Cadden looked ineffective in the middle. To his credit though Robbo made changes ie when substituing the unlucky Petravicius. Interesting to see the ineffective McHugh substituted again??? It was great to see us go 4-3-3 late on. The players fought like tigers to a man although the central midfield struggled to win physical battles at times. I thought Carson was MOTM ably supported by Tait, Kipre, Hartley and Campbell. Tanner made a big difference when he came on. We did ride our luck at times but a shocking refereeing decision and not Celtic denied us. Celtic more than held their own physically and got right in our faces - not a part of their game that the media likes to highlight. I'd have taken a point beforehand but the eventual result felt like a defeat. Well done to the team and management. A final word on Alan Burrows - he's doing a great job. I don't agree with everything the club has done but thats life. I'm still seething about the decision not to appeal Kipre's red card and I suspect that there were differing opinions within the club about that just as there was not to contest the findings of the SPFL report about the Rangers play off final. Overall we have a great club and I wouldn't swap it for the world. Agree with most of that apart from unlucky Petravicius. I thought he was lively for the first 10 minutes but largely anonymous after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rinkydink Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 What exactly does he have to do to get booked? Tugs a shirt early on and has at least two more fouls, meanwhile Alan Campbell is shown a yellow for virtually the same offence. The Campbell one was a yellow, but it was exactly the same as what Armstrong got a talking to for after pulling back Cadden. Tactical foul to stop a break, Armstrong even got a wee round of applause from his manager for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Again, the vast majority of us are posting opinions on players, managers, chairmen, referees, owners and all sorts without "knowing them", aren't we? Like everyone else my views are drawn from what I've seen him do and say in his public, professional capacity. If me posting that opinion causes you a problem then simply scroll past and ignore, it's that simple. Certainly doesn't cause me a problem as you are an irrelevance. I've seen different sides to his public and professional capacity that conflicted with your 'opinion' & that's what I alluded to. Your seethe is glorious though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_mfc Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 As angry as I am about the last few games, I think I do think the corruption/conspiracy claims are a bit far fetched. Both these penalties were given against Celtic last season. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRC0L8suV_s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odtMn8jyCjs The difference for me though between these and the recent ones against us is that both decisions that were given against Celtic they came out and created a media circus and if I remember correctly both walker of hearts and the boy from Ross county were subsequently banned. As for the game itself I felt we were very good last night, the fact they needed a dodgy penalty to rescue a point against us shows how far we have came in recent months. I thought Hartley, Kipre and Campbell all played very well. Trevor Carson for me has been the signing of the season, he was outstanding last night. What a difference he has made to to the team having a good goalkeeper and that has been reflected on the defence. On a sour note I was very disappointed with some of our "fans" last night. I was sitting down in the Bois section in the east stand, and I am in no way blaming the Bois or accusing those particular guys for what was going on as I am a huge fan of those guys and they certainly make a better atmosphere at fir park. But some of the chants I heard from that part of the ground were a disgrace and for me have no place at fir park. Things such has the lisbons wont see 10 in a row, singing about Bobby sands and then even on the way out there were a few singing the famine is over! Yes people were upset,angry etc after Sunday and then last night but there's no place for that at firpark in my opinion, if you enjoy chants like that then there's new team from govan who will welcome you with open arms! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grizzlyg Posted November 30, 2017 Report Share Posted November 30, 2017 Disgraceful, embarrassing, couldn't believe what I witnessed. Anyway enough about Tommy Sheridan doing the half time draw, back to the game. For me all this heartbreak and anger will be worth it if come Saturday with Sellik going for 67 unbeaten at Parkhead that we beat them. A Controversial pen or offside would be perfect but that would play right into their hands. Would settle for a Cedric 30 yarder!!! COYW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.