11th Night Bonfires. Maybe they just dont like Celtic.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 09:41PM

flemishgael wrote: »

You suggested though that I probably shouldn't have.
Merely voicing the opinion that I have on Celtic fans.
A vast majority of them will happily join in sectarian chants without even knowing what they are chanting.

So in Celtic Park on a matchday anything from 45,000 to 60,000 at it, you reckon the VAST Majority will happily join in secterian chants?

You are talking out of your arse!

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 09:43PM

wazky wrote: »

It wasnt an opinion you posted, you posted in manner that suggested it was fact.

And also stating that everyone has been pronouncing it wrong for the past 100 odd years.

That last bit is indeed fact.
I assume that Celtic are named after the Celts of Celtic civilisation.
Those Celts and Celtic civilisation is always pronounced as keltik not as seltik.
Maybe Glasgow Celtic is named after something else pronounced seltik.

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 09:46PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

So in Celtic Park on a matchday anything from 45,000 to 60,000 at it, you reckon the VAST Majority will happily join in secterian chants?

You are talking out of your arse!

If they could get away with it, they would indeed.
Just google Glasgow Celtic or go on youtube and search for it and you'll see that most Celtic fans on the internet happily dab around in sectarianism.
Not every celtic fan is like that, I know, but many are.

And my lower backside can make a lot of noise, but I never heard it talk.

wazky · 14-07-2014 09:47PM

flemishgael wrote: »

That last bit is indeed fact.
I assume that Celtic are named after the Celts of Celtic civilisation.
Those Celts and Celtic civilisation is always pronounced as keltik not as seltik.
Maybe Glasgow Celtic is named after something else pronounced seltik.

Really?, actually the pronunciation of 'Keltic' for the word Celtic is a modern thing. When Celtic FC was founded it was still pronounced as 'Seltic'

In the countries where the Celts originated from (France, Belgium etc) it is still pronounced as Selts as opposed to Celts.

'Keltic' pronunciation is a distortion in the translation into English.

wazky · 14-07-2014 09:48PM

flemishgael wrote: »

If they could get away with it, they would indeed.
Just google Glasgow Celtic or go on youtube and search for it and you'll see that most Celtic fans on the internet happily dab around in sectarianism.
Not every celtic fan is like that, I know, but many are.

You seem to think you know alot about football fans and their actions for someone who said they haven't a clue about football.....

Madam · 14-07-2014 09:48PM

flemishgael wrote: »

That last bit is indeed fact.
I assume that Celtic are named after the Celts of Celtic civilisation.
Those Celts and Celtic civilisation is always pronounced as keltik not as seltik.
Maybe Glasgow Celtic is named after something else pronounced seltik.

From what I understand the club was called Celtic with a soft C from the Scottish pronunciation.

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 09:51PM

wazky wrote: »

Really?, actually the pronunciation of 'Keltic' for the word Celtic is a modern thing. When Celtic FC was founded it was still pronounced as 'Seltic'

In the countries where the Celts originated from (France, Belgium etc) it is still pronounced as Selts as opposed to Celts.

'Keltic' pronunciation is a distortion in the translation into English.

I'm from Belgium and we never ever pronounced it as Selts.
The Oxford Dictionary also does not allow Seltik as a proper pronunciation.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/key-to-pronunciation.
Pronunciation: /ˈkɛltɪk , ˈs-/

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 09:53PM

flemishgael wrote: »

If they could get away with it, they would indeed.
Just google Glasgow Celtic or go on youtube and search for it and you'll see that most Celtic fans on the internet happily dab around in sectarianism.
Not every celtic fan is like that, I know, but many are.

And my lower backside can make a lot of noise, but I never heard it talk.

Ive been at about 5/6 Celtic games a season for each of the last 10 years and can confirm there is a small element of "clowns" who are into sectarian singing/chanting (when I say small element less than 1% of any crowd ive been in, which included over 100,000 in Seville)

To say the VAST majority of Celtic fans are sectarian is one of the stupidest things ive ever heard (I would have said the same if you said VAST majority of Rangers fans are sectarian)

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 09:57PM

wazky wrote: »

You seem to think you know alot about football fans and their actions for someone who said they haven't a clue about football.....

I know a lot about football. not so much about soccer.
I've met enough soccer fans to know what goes on in the stands.
A simple Google search tells me the rest.
So, you are basically saying that Celtic and Rangers fans don't revel in sectarianism and see Celtic as a Republican Club and Rangers as a Unionist Club?
Sounds very noble and enlightened but we all know that the majority of Celtic fans don't mind their club's fascination with sectarianism.

wazky · 14-07-2014 09:57PM

flemishgael wrote: »

The Oxford Dictionary also does not allow Seltik as a proper pronunciation.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/key-to-pronunciation.
Pronunciation: /ˈkɛltɪk , ˈs-/

When the club was founded the word Celtic was pronounced as 'Seltic', it was only after 1900 or so that the word changed gradually to 'Keltic' for one reason or another.

wazky · 14-07-2014 09:59PM

flemishgael wrote: »

I know a lot about football. not so much about soccer.
I've met enough soccer fans to know what goes on in the stands.
A simple Google search tells me the rest.
So, you are basically saying that Celtic and Rangers fans don't revel in sectarianism and see Celtic as a Republican Club and Rangers as a Unionist Club?
Sounds very noble and enlightened but we all know that the majority of Celtic fans don't mind their club's fascination with sectarianism.

Have you asked all these Celtic supporters their political allegiances?, you must be a busy man.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 10:01PM

flemishgael wrote: »

I know a lot about football. not so much about soccer.
I've met enough soccer fans to know what goes on in the stands.
A simple Google search tells me the rest.
So, you are basically saying that Celtic and Rangers fans don't revel in sectarianism and see Celtic as a Republican Club and Rangers as a Unionist Club?
Sounds very noble and enlightened but we all know that the majority of Celtic fans don't mind their club's fascination with sectarianism.

Soccer? I think you will find the sport Celtic and Rangers play is played under a world governing body called FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) Nothing about soccer in the title at all.

Your making a fool of yourself here

Plus Ive seen more scumbag acts on a Gaelic pitch week in week out in Louth, than Ive ever seen at a football match here in Ireland or Scotland

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:08PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Ive been at about 5/6 Celtic games a season for each of the last 10 years and can confirm there is a small element of "clowns" who are into sectarian singing/chanting (when I say small element less than 1% of any crowd ive been in, which included over 100,000 in Seville)

To say the VAST majority of Celtic fans are sectarian is one of the stupidest things ive ever heard (I would have said the same if you said VAST majority of Rangers fans are sectarian)

Now take away the cameras and sanctions imposed on clubs if there is indeed sectarian chanting in the stands? The other 99% of the crowd would join in and sing along. Or how about the political statements made this year by holding up signs commemorating Bobby Sands. Though I admire Bobby Sands and his heroic stand, I do not think that he had any official affiliation with the club. Holding up signs commemorating is therefore a sectarian act. I did not see anyone in the crowd disagreeing with it or asking the signs to be taken down and removed.
Soccer all over the world has lead to extreme rivalries and often sectarian hatred.

Maybe we should go back to the bonfires though which is what the thread is on.
I still find it strange that they commemorate the Battle of the Boyne, but not so much the battle of Aughrim. After all, the siege of Derry and the marching of the apprentice boys are still commemorated yearly.
Personally, I always thought of the bonfires as if you can't beat them, join them. At most bonfires there are two kinds of people: those that just want to have a good night and those that are looking for rioting and fighting. They like to taunt republicans and the bonfires are usually in sight of republican areas so it isn't hard to taunt them at all. I had many nights when youths from Broadway threw stones at those at the bonfire on Sandy Row. I don't condone the images of Republican figures or the Irish flag burned on the bonfires and luckily some of the people in unionist areas think the same way.
Personally I have no real affection for Gerry Adams but I find it very disrespectful to burn election posters with his image on the bonfires.
I'm more concerned about the attacks on Catholic churches though as that seems to have increased a lot in the last few weeks.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 10:11PM

flemishgael wrote: »

Now take away the cameras and sanctions imposed on clubs if there is indeed sectarian chanting in the stands? The other 99% of the crowd would join in and sing along. Or how about the political statements made this year by holding up signs commemorating Bobby Sands. Though I admire Bobby Sands and his heroic stand, I do not think that he had any official affiliation with the club. Holding up signs commemorating is therefore a sectarian act. I did not see anyone in the crowd disagreeing with it or asking the signs to be taken down and removed.
Soccer all over the world has lead to extreme rivalries and often sectarian hatred.

Maybe we should go back to the bonfires though which is what the thread is on.
I still find it strange that they commemorate the Battle of the Boyne, but not so much the battle of Aughrim. After all, the siege of Derry and the marching of the apprentice boys are still commemorated yearly.
Personally, I always thought of the bonfires as if you can't beat them, join them. At most bonfires there are two kinds of people: those that just want to have a good night and those that are looking for rioting and fighting. They like to taunt republicans and the bonfires are usually in sight of republican areas so it isn't hard to taunt them at all. I had many nights when youths from Broadway threw stones at those at the bonfire on Sandy Row. I don't condone the images of Republican figures or the Irish flag burned on the bonfires and luckily some of the people in unionist areas think the same way.
Personally I have no real affection for Gerry Adams but I find it very disrespectful to burn election posters with his image on the bonfires.
I'm more concerned about the attacks on Catholic churches though as that seems to have increased a lot in the last few weeks.

Well if you dont know the reason for the Bobby Sands banner and why the Green Brigade done it, there is no point in you talking about it!

wazky · 14-07-2014 10:12PM

flemishgael wrote: »

Now take away the cameras and sanctions imposed on clubs if there is indeed sectarian chanting in the stands? The other 99% of the crowd would join in and sing along. Or how about the political statements made this year by holding up signs commemorating Bobby Sands. Though I admire Bobby Sands and his heroic stand, I do not think that he had any official affiliation with the club. Holding up signs commemorating is therefore a sectarian act. I did not see anyone in the crowd disagreeing with it or asking the signs to be taken down and removed.
Soccer all over the world has lead to extreme rivalries and often sectarian hatred.

Again, you know alot for someone who claims to have no knowledge of football...

Did 100% of the supporters sing sectarian songs before the cameras and sanctions?
No.

How is holding up placards for someone who isn't officially affiliated with the club a sectarian act?

Does that even make sense in YOUR head?

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:16PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Soccer? I think you will find the sport Celtic and Rangers play is played under a world governing body called FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) Nothing about soccer in the title at all.

Your making a fool of yourself here

Plus Ive seen more scumbag acts on a Gaelic pitch week in week out in Louth, than Ive ever seen at a football match here in Ireland or Scotland

FIFA is indeed the governing body for soccer. The French use the English word football. Many other countries call the sport by other names though.
Plenty of English or Scottish people calling rugby football and soccer football as well and distinguishing the one from the other by calling it association football.
Football or Footy in Australia means Aussie Rules.
Football in New Zealand means Rugby Union.
Football in South Africa means Rugby Union.
Calcio is the Italian word for soccer and they call it rugby football there.

And yes, I have indeed also encountered the occasional scumbag at a gaelic football match, but unlike in soccer fans do not need to be segregated.
In the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany it is quite common for fans to travel via a special train with a police escort leading the fans into a special train reserved just for those fans and then by police escort from the train stain to the stadium. Just to prevent rioting and violent clashes.
I have never seen that in GAA or Rugby.
In Germany unfortunately soccer attracts hordes of neonazis and whenever the German national team plays they go looking for fights.
Ironically many of the German players wouldn't be considered German by those same "fans".

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:18PM

wazky wrote: »

Again, you know alot for someone who claims to have no knowledge of football...

Did 100% of the supporters sing sectarian songs before the cameras and sanctions?
No.

How is holding up placards for someone who isn't officially affiliated with the club a sectarian act?

Does that even make sense in YOUR head?

So they were not holding up these placards as a political statement?
Please enlighten me then, so I can learn from your infinite wisdom.

wazky · 14-07-2014 10:21PM

flemishgael wrote: »

So they were not holding up these placards as a political statement?
Please enlighten me then, so I can learn from your infinite wisdom.

You never mentioned political. You said as he wasn't officially affiliated with the club it was therefore a sectarian act.

Explain that one?

And the displaying of Bobby Sands was in conjuction with William Wallace and the point being made was the one was a terrorist and the other a freedom fighter.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 10:24PM

flemishgael wrote: »

So they were not holding up these placards as a political statement?
Please enlighten me then, so I can learn from your infinite wisdom.

The reason for the Bobby Sands banner, was because the song (which can be bought in any good music store in Scotland) has been deemed Sectarian and fans getting arrested for singing it (The majority of cases dont reach court or judges laugh them out of court)

The point the banner was making is whats the difference between celebrating William Wallace than Bobby Sands? Ones allowed and ones not

https://www.google.ie/search?q=reason+for+the+celtic+bobby+sands+banner&tbm=isch&imgil=ApdBR9249bhq0M%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcTH0Hl5YTPUlE_GGPQ1wY71rSRVonjfNfrF8qjBIJLDSjVEjO7LHQ%253B620%253B387%253BSrLuQAkX8sReIM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%25252Fsport%25252Ffootball%25252Fteams%25252Fceltic%25252F10511850%25252FCeltics-fate-over-Bobby-Sands-banner-delayed-by-Uefa.html&source=iu&usg=__MO2gQK-t3kvz3oMDGPw3wBTWHbs%3D&sa=X&ei=t0nEU-_bJeHR7AbCrYGoDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAg&biw=1280&bih=709#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=OoQeWqnwzaxBgM%253A%3B6y--g4BEA63XRM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.huffpost.com%252Fgen%252F1488950%252Fthumbs%252Fo-CELTIC-BOBBY-SANDS-570.jpg%253F6%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk%252F2013%252F11%252F29%252Fceltic-green-brigade-bobby-sands_n_4359685.html%3B570%3B379

P_1 · 14-07-2014 10:28PM

flemishgael wrote: »

True, I know very little about soccer. Even less about soccer clubs.
Just know that Celtic shouldn't be pronounced seltik and that the majority of Celtic fans in the world associate Glasgow Celtic with Ireland and republicanism.
Gives me a good laugh to see whole internet forums full of Chilean and Thai and Greek Celtic fans going on about the rah and Wolfe Tone and so on.

To be honest most continental folk who I talk to tend to associate Celtic with St Pauli of Hamburg and their social aspects rather than Irish republicanism.

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:29PM

wazky wrote: »

You never mentioned political. You said as he wasn't officially affiliated with the club it was therefore a sectarian act.

Explain that one?

I did mention political.

Or how about the political statements made this year by holding up signs commemorating Bobby Sands. Though I admire Bobby Sands and his heroic stand, I do not think that he had any official affiliation with the club. Holding up signs commemorating is therefore a sectarian act. I did not see anyone in the crowd disagreeing with it or asking the signs to be taken down and removed.

I think even you know what Bobby Sands stood for and what he represents to people. If there was nothing wrong with that I do not know why they were fined for it. Celtic were playing AC Milan. Again, I might be wrong but I do not believe AC Milan fans even know who Bobby Sands was and what he stood for.
While the Green Brigade and the Ultra's are indeed a small part of the crowd but none of the other Celtic supporters came out and condemned the action.
It showed an image of Sands alongside another of Scottish nationalist icon William Wallace and a set of lyrics that included the line: 'The terrorist or the dreamer?' UEFA rules prohibit messages of a political and ideological nature being displayed in a stadium.The fine is the fourth time UEFA has taken action against the club as a result of fan indiscretions in the last two years.
So, it isn't the first time and though it is a small part of the crowd involved in these indiscretions very few, if any, Celtic supporters seem to mind.

wazky · 14-07-2014 10:31PM

So because UEFA (a massively corrupt organisation itself) said it was wrong, means it wrong?

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 10:33PM

flemishgael wrote: »

I did mention political.

I think even you know what Bobby Sands stood for and what he represents to people. If there was nothing wrong with that I do not know why they were fined for it. Celtic were playing AC Milan. Again, I might be wrong but I do not believe AC Milan fans even know who Bobby Sands was and what he stood for.
While the Green Brigade and the Ultra's are indeed a small part of the crowd but none of the other Celtic supporters came out and condemned the action.
It showed an image of Sands alongside another of Scottish nationalist icon William Wallace and a set of lyrics that included the line: 'The terrorist or the dreamer?' UEFA rules prohibit messages of a political and ideological nature being displayed in a stadium.The fine is the fourth time UEFA has taken action against the club as a result of fan indiscretions in the last two years.
So, it isn't the first time and though it is a small part of the crowd involved in these indiscretions very few, if any, Celtic supporters seem to mind.

Unless its Barcelona having political slogans about being Catalina and not Spanish but thats another debate.

Whats these 4 actions they have taken against Celtic

1. Bobby Sands Banner
2. the F**k Uefa Banner
3. Flares and smoke bombs (which every team use nowadays)
4. ???

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:37PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The reason for the Bobby Sands banner, was because the song (which can be bought in any good music store in Scotland) has been deemed Sectarian and fans getting arrested for singing it (The majority of cases dont reach court or judges laugh them out of court)

The point the banner was making is whats the difference between celebrating William Wallace than Bobby Sands? Ones allowed and ones not

https://www.google.ie/search?q=reason+for+the+celtic+bobby+sands+banner&tbm=isch&imgil=ApdBR9249bhq0M%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcTH0Hl5YTPUlE_GGPQ1wY71rSRVonjfNfrF8qjBIJLDSjVEjO7LHQ%253B620%253B387%253BSrLuQAkX8sReIM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%25252Fsport%25252Ffootball%25252Fteams%25252Fceltic%25252F10511850%25252FCeltics-fate-over-Bobby-Sands-banner-delayed-by-Uefa.html&source=iu&usg=__MO2gQK-t3kvz3oMDGPw3wBTWHbs%3D&sa=X&ei=t0nEU-_bJeHR7AbCrYGoDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAg&biw=1280&bih=709#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=OoQeWqnwzaxBgM%253A%3B6y--g4BEA63XRM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.huffpost.com%252Fgen%252F1488950%252Fthumbs%252Fo-CELTIC-BOBBY-SANDS-570.jpg%253F6%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk%252F2013%252F11%252F29%252Fceltic-green-brigade-bobby-sands_n_4359685.html%3B570%3B379

See, that is a good explanation. I did not know that and I did not read that in the papers at the time.
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
It was still a very controversial and political statement.
It is indeed strange that William Wallace is allowed to be revered but Bobby Sands is not, but such is history. Give it a few hundred years and Bobby Sands images will be acceptable to most people.

11th Night bonfires are more than just Anti-Celtic fires though.
Though, like Celtic fans are being smeared with the image of being a republican horde, people attending the bonfires are seen as unionists. Not all people attending would agree to being called loyalists or unionist, but like with Celtic supporters, the actions of a few reflect on all.

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:47PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

The reason for the Bobby Sands banner, was because the song (which can be bought in any good music store in Scotland) has been deemed Sectarian and fans getting arrested for singing it (The majority of cases dont reach court or judges laugh them out of court)

The point the banner was making is whats the difference between celebrating William Wallace than Bobby Sands? Ones allowed and ones not

https://www.google.ie/search?q=reason+for+the+celtic+bobby+sands+banner&tbm=isch&imgil=ApdBR9249bhq0M%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252Fencrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcTH0Hl5YTPUlE_GGPQ1wY71rSRVonjfNfrF8qjBIJLDSjVEjO7LHQ%253B620%253B387%253BSrLuQAkX8sReIM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%25252Fsport%25252Ffootball%25252Fteams%25252Fceltic%25252F10511850%25252FCeltics-fate-over-Bobby-Sands-banner-delayed-by-Uefa.html&source=iu&usg=__MO2gQK-t3kvz3oMDGPw3wBTWHbs%3D&sa=X&ei=t0nEU-_bJeHR7AbCrYGoDQ&sqi=2&ved=0CDgQ9QEwAg&biw=1280&bih=709#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=OoQeWqnwzaxBgM%253A%3B6y--g4BEA63XRM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fi.huffpost.com%252Fgen%252F1488950%252Fthumbs%252Fo-CELTIC-BOBBY-SANDS-570.jpg%253F6%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk%252F2013%252F11%252F29%252Fceltic-green-brigade-bobby-sands_n_4359685.html%3B570%3B379

Sankt Pauli portray themselves as extreme left wing and attracts many pinks in Germany. Their political affiliation, just like that of many republicans, lies with Palestina and against Israel, for example. Which is why HSV supporters display Israeli flags just like Rangers fans.
My brother is a PSV Eindhoven fan, I don't hold that against him, and their fans travel to Sankt Pauli v HSV games in support of Sankt Pauli hooligans.
Strangely enough the Ajax ultras claim their club to be a "Jewish" club, though it was never a Jewish club and they therefore form bonds with HSV, MTK Budapest and Rangers supporters.
Anderlecht and PSG fans for example meet up in woods to fight each other and whenever Anderlecht play you get fans from other clubs joint "the fight".
Like it or not, but soccer around the world is often marred by sectarianism.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 10:51PM

flemishgael wrote: »

See, that is a good explanation. I did not know that and I did not read that in the papers at the time.
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."
It was still a very controversial and political statement.
It is indeed strange that William Wallace is allowed to be revered but Bobby Sands is not, but such is history. Give it a few hundred years and Bobby Sands images will be acceptable to most people.

11th Night bonfires are more than just Anti-Celtic fires though.
Though, like Celtic fans are being smeared with the image of being a republican horde, people attending the bonfires are seen as unionists. Not all people attending would agree to being called loyalists or unionist, but like with Celtic supporters, the actions of a few reflect on all.

Then ya shouldnt be having a conversation about things you have no clue about!

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 10:59PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Then ya shouldnt be having a conversation about things you have no clue about!

The conversation is about 11th Night bonfires, not about Celtic.
If it is, it is in the wrong forum.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 11:01PM

flemishgael wrote: »

The conversation is about 11th Night bonfires, not about Celtic.
If it is, it is in the wrong forum.

Your the one bringing up the Bobby Sands banner calling it sectarian when you had no clue the reasons etc behind it!

flemishgael · 14-07-2014 11:04PM

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

Your the one bringing up the Bobby Sands banner calling it sectarian when you had no clue the reasons etc behind it!

Please read properly.

dundalkfc10 · 14-07-2014 11:05PM

flemishgael wrote: »

Please read properly.

After I gave the reason for the banner, your first sentence was

Originally Posted by flemishgael View Post
"See, that is a good explanation. I did not know that"

11th Night Bonfires. Maybe they just dont like Celtic.

Comments