Send him back. Then, next game at the Hill O' Dung, Stokes says Logan called him "a tottie picking fenian left fitter cawnle-eater" and Efe Ambrose claims he uses a term used by European blacks to describe African blacks (haven't thought it up yet - bootyscratcher??) Logan has his career ruined, whole Celtic squad posts instagram picture of him kissing their baws. Seems fair to me.
The one word against another doesn't seem fair and just but its what we agreed to so not much can be done. What was Tonevs defence? Just that he never said it? There was no claim Logan might have misheard as his defence? I've know reason to think Logan was lying or would make it up. Luckily Tonev denied it so we had to appeal on his behalf and trust him, guy will be tarnished with this even if appeal went with him. But only so far we could go, we have as little proof that he never said than Sfa and Dons have saying he did!! Luckily he's **** so we can send him back....wonder what we'd say if it was Guidetti mind?!
I agree, it's mental - the only witnesses were secondary witnesses (McInnes and Reynolds who both admit they never heard it but Logan had told them about it) - there's the "typo" thing in the report where the two versions of what Logan said he heard are completely different except for the words "black c**t" at the end. The weird thing is, Kevin Harper is being wheeled out now and his case was a good perpendicular. Gary MacKay was on camera in an Edinburgh derby clearly calling him all the names under the sun and MacKay got hee haw despite clear evidence. Nothing happened to Andy Goram with Van Hooijdonk and, if I remember correctly, Amoruso only had to apologise (could be wrong). All of these were with video evidence but Tonev has effectively a 2 month ban with only one guy's word (no-one else on the pitch claims to have heard it) backed up by his manager and captain. What can you do with a guy who's been found guilty of this, though? Whether Celtic disagree with the marsupial court method, it's all within the current rules and we have to punt him back. The thing that's got me on this is how certain some folk are. Blind tims absolutely certain he's innocent. Blind sheep and huns convinced he's guilty. Nobody knows for sure but, while the charge sticks, we need to punt him on and that's a real, real, real shame if he's innocent. Similarly, he can sling his hook if he's guilty.
