Exiled AusJag

First Tasmania, then Mooloolaba

The shops are really busy with Christmas in the summer, and the heat just makes it worse.

And I think it was a certain Mr Dalglish that persuaded Rod Stewart to become a celtic supporter that very year. I wonder if his love affair with that team would have happened if he hadn't supported them before our great win. Maybe we'd have seen a red and yellow rod. I work with 2 celtic supporters, and reminded them today of the anniversary. (One's my boss)

As usual, every year on this date, we all remember the 4-1 league cup final win. I wonder how many of us who were there are still around?

I knew I'd find it. This law changed in 1997 http://www.fifa.com/newscentre/news/newsid=70199/

The law makers http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/ifab/ law changes throughout the years http://www.fifa.com/classicfootball/history/the-laws/from-1863-to-present.html

An offence is a breach of the laws of the game, resulting in a free kick, penalty kick, or a throw in to the opposition, and if severe enough, a red or yellow card. If a player makes a mistake that doesn't breach the laws of the game, then no action is taken. e.g. if he mis hits a free kick, then play continues, no offence has been committed. If the ball slips from his hand when taking a throw in, and as a result it's thrown incorrectly, then the throw is given to the other side. The player in this instance has the responsibilty to take the throw properly. At a dead ball, usualy a free kick, but also a throw in, corner kick, goal kick, penalty kick, if the player taking the kick/throw touches the ball a second time once the ball is in play (see the relevant laws for a throw in, goal kick, free kick to the defence in their own penalty area, and penalty kick, as well as free kicks in the rest of the field) after he's taken the kick/throw, even by mistake, then an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposition. In these two instances a breach of the laws has taken place.

The restart was an IFK because the ball was played twice from the corner before another player had touched it. There are a few of problems as I see it. When the corner was 'taken' and the AR was told thats what had happened, in law the ball had been kicked and had moved so was therefore in play. The ball does NOT have to travel it's circumferance or leave the arc. The ball having to travel it's circumference changed so many years ago I can't remember when it last applied. If the AR had deemed the corner had not been taken, then then he would have been correct in ordering Craigen back 10 yards, but should have flagged IMMEDIATELY the ball was played a second time. He would possibly also have told the ref as well through the mike. If he had thought the corner was taken correctly, then he was wrong to order Craigen back. If he had been allowed to challenge then who knows what the outcome would have been. He would have been allowed to challenge as soon as the ball was in play. He doesn't need to wait for another player to touch it. If a team is trying a move to catch their opponents out, as long as it's within the laws of the game, play can't be pulled back just because it doesn't SEEM right. We see that type of thing happening so often when a team takes a quick free kick, and if they stuff up, then that's their problem.

fearchar, here's the link for you http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/footballdevelopment/technicalsupport/refereeing/laws-of-the-game/index.html the laws are universal. The only things that differ in different countries and diferent levels are the rules of competition, which are a different entity to the laws

I've noticed with interest both on this site and the PTFC facebook page some lively debate regarding the laws of the game, the latest being the corner in the ICT game. I've made my opinions as a referee known on that particular match thread. What is concerning are posters making statements which they believe to be facts concerning the laws of the game, when they are incorrect. This is universal for both fans and even tv pundits worldwide. These beliefs are founded on old laws which were changed years ago. This leads to frustration and anger, but if fans , coaches, players etc actually knew the laws, then the dabate would be be even, and their enjoyment of the game would be enhanced, and they could see and understand WHY officials make certain decisions.

BR, you've taken that from a really old laws book. The ball having to travel the distance of it's circumferance at a free kick and corner kick was changed years ago. The ball only needs to be kicked and move, which it did. It doesn't even have to leave the arc or travel in a certain direction. I'm as happy as the next Jags fan that the goal was disallowed, but there's no question the corner was correctly taken but the AR stuffed up. FYI Procedure • The ball must be placed inside the corner arc nearest to the point where the ball crossed the goal line • The corner flagpost must not be moved • Opponents must remain at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the corner arc until the ball is in play • The ball must be kicked by a player of the attacking team • The ball is in play when it is kicked and moves • The kicker must not play the ball again until it has touched another player

The ball was kicked and moved, therefore it was in play. It doesn't need to leave the arc. The ICT player also told the AR the corner had been taken. Craigen should then have been allowed to come towards the ball and defend it. The AR was wrong on two counts, 1, telling Craigen to move back, and 2, not flagging straight away when he thought the corner had been incorrectly taken. In the second half when the ICT goal was disallowed, Fox had actually committed a foul, so the goal should have stood, or if the ref wasn't going to play advantage, it should have been a penalty. I'd be very interested to see the assessor's report. Somtimes it's difficult being a ref as well as a Jags supporter

We were really lucky to get that win, but I'll take it

brilliant goal, terrible defending

I've just watched the replay and the AR was wrong. The corner was taken because the ball had moved, and the AR was told by thye ICT player. The ball only has to be kicked and moved for the corner to be taken. It doesn't have to leave the arc. He was then incorrect to tell Craigen to move away because the ball was live. If the AR had thought differently then he should have flagged immediately. That's not to say I'm relieved.

I e mailed the Scottish government last year about the referendum and received the following reply: Thank you for your email of 16 October regarding eligibility to vote in the referendum on Scottish independence, and your citizenship status in the event of independence. This has been passed to me for reply. Firstly, I will address your question about your eligibility to vote in the upcoming referendum. The Scottish Government consultation document Your Scotland, Your Referendum (published on 25 January 2012) explained that eligibility to vote would be based on who can vote at Scottish Parliament and Scottish local government elections. That means broadly that those resident in Scotland would be eligible to vote. This follows the precedent of the 1997 referendum on establishing a Scottish Parliament, and is in line with the internationally accepted principle that the franchise for constitutional referenda should be determined by residency. Secondly, you ask about your potential citizenship status in the event of independence. During the period leading up to the referendum there will be opportunities for widespread discussion about the detailed implications of independence. As part of the process the Scottish Government will set out full details of the offer to the people of Scotland in a comprehensive white paper on independence. The Government plans to publish this in November 2013. I realise that does not answer your specific questions, however it is not possible to do so until the details have been finalised and published. In the meantime, however, you can find information on the Scottish Government’s earlier proposals for independence and the referendum in the following publications: Your Scotland Your Referendum (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2012/01/1006/) Your Scotland Your Voice (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/11/26155932/0) Choosing Scotland’s Future (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/08/13103747/0) Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ www.scotland.gov.uk I refer you in particular to Your Scotland Your Voice, section 8.22, regarding The Scottish Government’s vision of Citizenship in an independent Scotland. I hope you find this information can give you an idea of the basis on which the detailed proposals will be based.

Just watched the video. and I'm surprised at the (non) decisions by the ref. To quote from the laws. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. I'd like to see where Butcher DIDN"T do the above. This is failure to enforce the laws! Also a definate penalty for the push in the first half and Butcher's two footed lunge in the second. How he got away with NO card baffles me!

I would have to agree with Partick Panther. I've lived in Melbourne (the best city in OZ, and I've worked in all the major cities here) for 30 years and had a better lifestyle here than I could have had back in Glasgow. Obviously there are things I miss (mainly Firhill), but I've found Oz a better place to raise a family. I came back on holiday eight years ago, but after a few weeks was looking forward to returning down under.

Celtic came out here a couple of years ago and played Melbourne Victory at AAMI park in Melbourne. I was at the game which Celtic won 1-0 in front of a crowd of about 30,000 but they wouldn't have the pulling power to fill the MCG. I think they were surprised by Victory who took the game to Celtic, and I'm watching the Liverpool game as I type, and again, Victory seem to be holding their own. I'll find out tomorrow night at training what the atmosphere was like on the pitch in front of 95,000 because I'm in the same training group as one of the ARs.

I was pleasantly surprised today by someone who asked if my umbrella was a Jags umbrella. I was inspecting the pitch before my match this afternoon in heavy rain, sheltered by my red and yellow umbrella when one of the players (an Australain) asked me that question. It turned out that his dad was from Maryhill, and this player had frequented Firhill, saying it was a 'nice little stadium'. The bubble burst when he said he supported sevco, but was going for the Jags in the SPL. I suppose everyone has to have a big team as well! (the game didn't get played due to a waterlogged pitch)

Heart in mouth stuff, but the late goal from Josh Kennedy is taking us to Brazil. Huge boost for football in Australia!! http://www.foxsports.com.au/football/socceroos/live-socceroos-blog-australia-aiming-for-third-successive-world-cup-finals-on-tuesday-night/story-e6frf4l3-1226665688310

Went to a game at ANZ stadium a few years ago but can't get excited about rugby league, turned over from channel 9 when it started. Watched the Japan v Australia world cup qualifier last night though.

I know we complain about the rain here, but after we had such a long drought we should welcome it. (As long as it stays dry on saturday afternoons)

Glasgow uni's medicine faculty's scarf is black with longitudonal red and yelloe stripes