Techfullpost

Ross County 0-2 Celtic commentary

Ross County 0-2 Celtic commentary

Ross County 0-2 Celtic commentary, Although Celtic dominating the first half, County managed to pull through until Alex Iacovitti handled just before halftime, allowing Jota to score from the spot.

Due to this, Malky Mackay’s team was compelled to attack during a second 45-minute period in which both teams had opportunities.

After Ross Callachan’s injury reduced County’s number of players to 10, Alexandro Bernabei fired a late settler.

This means that since the Glasgow rivals drew at Ibrox at the beginning of January, Ange Postecoglou’s team has won 15 straight games going into Saturday’s derby at home against second-placed Rangers.

After suffering their eighth straight loss to Celtic, County is now in last place and four points behind Kilmarnock.

Both coaches gave their generally stable teams unexpected first starts, and Mackay started 16-year-old Dylan Smith in the middle of defence when captain Keith Watson was only cleared to sit on the bench.

The tall adolescent, who had just served with the Scotland Under-17 team, was naturally at the centre of the action as Celtic established their anticipated dominance of possession.

Tomoki Iwata, the on-loan Yokohama F Marinos midfielder who had been brought in to replace injured fellow Japan international Reo Hatate, was in charge of the play as Smith showed assurance beyond his years and captain Callum McGregor had moved further forward.

The anticipated Celtic blitz didn’t materialise, and even though a fierce Greg Taylor shot missed the far post, the breakthrough didn’t occur until a County miscalculation.

Iacovitti called for a handball when he challenged the opposing center-half Carter-Vickers, and referee Willie Collum was already on his way down the tunnel to provide a happy halftime team talk.

The ensuing spot kick was emphatically executed by Jota through the middle, which altered the atmosphere in both locker rooms.

Whatever was said turned the match into a back-and-forth contest, with Celtic goalkeeper Joe Hart having to scramble to stop a low drive from on-loan Wigan Athletic midfielder Gwion Edwards as the home team finally presented an attacking threat.

With only Ross Laidlaw to beat, Kyogo Furuhashi missed the target with his effort, and the hosts’ goalkeeper then made two outstanding saves to save substitute attacker Oh Hyeon-gyu from scoring while Jota’s attempt hit the underside of the crossbar.

Celtic supporters could finally breathe easy as Bernabei’s missile reached the back of the goal late in stoppage time.

County bravery almost pays off – analysis

As County had let up 20 goals in their previous seven consecutive losses to Celtic, it was not surprising that Mackay initially chose a cautious strategy as his team sought to earn their first victory against the champions since February 2021.

It was a risky decision to start the young defender Smith at the centre of the defence, but aside from a few instances in which his inexperience shone during a dramatic finish, he did well to live up to his manager’s faith in him.

The bottom line is that, as a result of Kilmarnock’s victory over Heart of Midlothian on Saturday, Mackay’s team has lost ground in the race for a relegation play-off spot. Mackay’s bold move to throw bodies forward in search of an equaliser nearly paid off, despite the fact that his team had to finish the game with one man down.

Postecoglou will be content with the fact that his team survived one of its toughest home tests this year and that they were able to react after Rangers’ victory the day before.

Although Iwata will face tougher competition, he demonstrated that the Celtic manager has another excellent option in a midfield that is already loaded with ability.

Postecoglou will also be aware that against their championship rivals at Celtic Park, their finishing and deliveries into the penalty box will need to be more accurate.

West Ham vs Southampton LIVE Premier League

ADVERTISEMENT
RECOMMENDED
NEXT UP

Google has introduced a refreshed version of its iconic multicolored “G” logo, marking the first significant update in nearly a decade. This subtle yet impactful redesign transitions the familiar red, yellow, green, and blue hues into a seamless gradient, aligning with modern design trends and the company’s evolving visual identity.

A Modern Twist on a Classic Brand Symbol

The new gradient “G” logo was first spotted in an update to the Google app on iOS and Pixel devices, as reported by 9to5Google. Unlike the previous version, which featured distinct color blocks, the updated design blends the four primary colors smoothly, creating a more dynamic and contemporary look.

This change follows Google’s last major logo overhaul in September 2015, when the company shifted to a sans-serif typeface and introduced a simplified “G” emblem that retained its signature color scheme. While the latest update is more understated, it reflects Google’s ongoing commitment to a cohesive and forward-thinking brand aesthetic.

Why the Gradient Shift? Aligning with Google’s Broader Design Language

The new gradient treatment isn’t just a stylistic choice—it’s a strategic alignment with Google’s broader design philosophy. Notably, the updated “G” now mirrors the gradient used in the Gemini logo (Google’s AI-powered assistant), reinforcing brand consistency across products.

Key Observations About the Logo Update:

  • Currently Limited Rollout: The gradient “G” is only visible on iOS and Pixel phones as of now. The traditional block-colored version remains on the web and most Android devices.
  • Subtle Yet Meaningful: While the change may seem minor, it signals Google’s focus on modernization and adaptability in its branding.
  • Potential Wider Implementation: If this update follows Google’s past patterns, we may see the gradient logo expand to other platforms soon.

What This Means for Google’s Brand Identity

Google’s logo evolution reflects its commitment to innovation while maintaining brand recognition. The gradient effect adds a touch of sophistication, making the logo feel more integrated with today’s digital design trends.

Why This Matters for Users & Marketers:

  • Visual Continuity: A unified logo style strengthens brand recall.
  • Adaptive Design: The gradient may hint at future design changes across Google’s ecosystem.
  • AI & Brand Synergy: The resemblance to Gemini’s logo suggests deeper integration of AI into Google’s identity.

Final Thoughts: A Sign of More Changes to Come?

While this logo tweak is subtle, it could be the beginning of a broader refresh for Google’s visual branding. As the company continues to innovate—especially in AI and machine learning—its logo may evolve further to represent its cutting-edge advancements.

For now, users can spot the new gradient “G” on select devices, keeping an eye out for potential expansions to other platforms. One thing is clear: Google remains deliberate in its branding, ensuring every change serves a purpose.

The future of Mozilla Firefox hangs in the balance as the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) pushes for sweeping restrictions on Google’s search monopoly. Eric Muhlheim, Mozilla’s Chief Financial Officer, testified in court that the proposed remedies—including banning Google from paying to be the default search engine in third-party browsers—could devastate Firefox’s revenue and potentially force it out of business.

Why Firefox’s Survival Is at Risk

Firefox, the only major browser not controlled by a tech giant, relies heavily on its partnership with Google. According to Muhlheim:

  • 90% of Mozilla’s revenue comes from Firefox.
  • 85% of that revenue is tied to its Google search deal.

If the court enforces the DOJ’s demands, Mozilla would face immediate financial turmoil, leading to deep cuts in engineering, innovation, and user experience improvements. This could trigger a “downward spiral”, making Firefox less competitive and accelerating its decline.

The Domino Effect on Web Competition

The Loss of Gecko: A Threat to an Open Web

Firefox’s Gecko engine is the only independent browser engine not owned by Apple (WebKit) or Google (Chromium). If Firefox collapses:

  • Big Tech’s control over the web grows stronger—exactly what antitrust regulators are trying to prevent.
  • Fewer choices for users—reducing competition in browser innovation and privacy features.
  • Less funding for Mozilla’s nonprofit initiatives, including open-source web tools and AI-driven climate research.

Why Switching to Bing (or Another Search Engine) Isn’t a Viable Solution

Mozilla has explored alternatives, but the reality is grim:

  • Bing doesn’t monetize searches as effectively as Google, meaning lower revenue share for Mozilla.
  • Past experiments with Yahoo as the default led to mass user abandonment.
  • Without Google’s bids, Mozilla would have less leverage in negotiations, further reducing income.

The DOJ’s Dilemma: Fixing Google’s Monopoly Without Killing Competitors

The DOJ’s goal is noble—breaking Google’s stranglehold on search—but the unintended consequences could be catastrophic. If Firefox disappears:

✅ Google Chrome’s dominance grows—fewer competitors mean less incentive for privacy and performance improvements.
✅ Apple’s Safari remains the only alternative, further consolidating power in the hands of tech giants.
✅ Innovation suffers—Firefox has been a pioneer in privacy features like Enhanced Tracking Protection.

Can Mozilla Survive Without Google’s Money?

Muhlheim’s testimony paints a bleak picture:

“We would be really struggling to stay alive… waiting on a hypothetical future where more search competitors emerge.”

The harsh truth? Regulators must act carefully—if they dismantle Google’s monopoly too aggressively, they might inadvertently strengthen it by eliminating its biggest rival.

The Path Forward: Balancing Antitrust Enforcement & Browser Survival

To preserve a diverse, competitive web, regulators should consider:

  1. Phasing out Google’s default deals gradually—giving Mozilla time to adapt.
  2. Mandating revenue-sharing transparency—ensuring fair competition in search monetization.
  3. Supporting independent browsers—through grants or antitrust settlement funds.

Final Thoughts: Why Firefox’s Survival Matters

Firefox is more than just a browser—it’s a guardian of an open, decentralized internet. If it falls, the web becomes a duopoly of Google and Apple, with fewer choices for users and developers.

The DOJ’s case against Google is necessary, but the remedy must protect competitors, not destroy them. Otherwise, the cure could be worse than the disease.

ADVERTISEMENT
Receive the latest news

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Get notified about new articles