Compliance procedure unfit for purpose

[DiamondBear 45]

8 minutes ago, Negri's lovechild said:

I really need to stop reading the comments on those feeds. Winds me up. Right away those fuckers are on it, with their absolutely chronic patter. Amazes me how they foam at the mouth over a so called new club. 

Agree with this.

 

It almost seems like an organised campaign, as soon as someone posts or tweets about us they have loads of them trying to make out we are “moaning” instead of highlighting the anomalies in the decisions and appeals that are being made.

This is why I believe our, so called, PR dept should be putting our side of the story in a coherent and clear manner. Not having to resort to our fans highlighting incidents one by one and then having a “slabberin sellic shitstorm” divert non Old Firm fans into believing we are just “moaning” about everything and anything.

🤬

[JM1872 1,104]

The only way that something will change with this is when celtic fall foul of the CO... which will be never.

[Sweetheart 2,538]

1 hour ago, Blue Avenger said:

We are being shafted. End of.

Exactly how we go about turning it around, I don't know. The CO system is rigged and needs buried. We are being cheated, but we can't say that, well not without an all out war ensuing. We can say there is inconsistency and cite those inconsistencies, but what will that achieve, as they won't be removing the CO. No one has our back and Liewell still pulls the strings.

They know we are onto them, but we have to prove it and to go down the road of institutional bias, which makes it corruption, with those at the top table culpable. Where do you go with that? The CAS? Going down that route will be bad enough, but lose, we would be worse off than the pariah status we already have. There would be serious consequences imo.

A stand has to be made at some point, but exactly the posture we take as in institutional bias we go to CAS. A lesser posture of inconsistency in the system, what would change as it is dealt with domestically. At best maybe made part of the recent summit announced, which has no teeth nor any guarantee that anything will change. At worst we get another fine for opening our mouths in telling the truth.

Many are crying for the Club to do something, but what can we do? 

Some will know the laws of the game much better than me and I welcome the options we have and the risks we run in an all out war, which is what it would be if we go to CAS.  I'm all for having it and easy for me to say, but I don't know the consequence of failure.

 

 

Agreed. I think the club needs to tread very carefully, so that they are not blamed for bringing the game into disrepute and booted out of the league.  Things need to change at a political level before changes can be pursued in Scotland. The Culture, Sport and Media at Westminster could look into a complaint of corruption, from an  MP through the National Crime Agency and/or the Serious Fraud Office.

[Blue Avenger 10,412]

Maybe someone can cut and paste the full article, but Sutton goes full on against the SFA disciplinary system.................

He particulary cites the McGinn and Power incidents........Astonishing that both got off with it........What does it take for him (Power) to get sent off, decapitate Jack?

CO not up to the job. The whole disciplinary process is a shambles. They are not fit for purpose.

He does have a wee dig at Morelos, though not named........kicking someone's testicles.

Appears a decent article and doesn't do prisoners. An unlikely champion in this?

Scum fc will not like this.

No doubt sometime soon a scum player will be on the receiving end of a sanction as a piece of tokenism and a pathetic attempt at trying to balance the books.

The taig bitch is exactly that.

 

[ger4life_1872 4,544]

1 hour ago, Courtyard Bear said:

The thing you get from that Twitter feed is that no one gives a fuck as long it is Rangers getting it in the neck even if it means their own club is being punished unfairly. 

This country is bonkers. 

I always thought our success had broken a generation of taigs and that's what drives their hatred / obsession,  but it's becoming clear we broke a whole generation of everyone that's not 1 of us 

[sonofbear 391]

Taken from FF.  Vincent Lunny explains Compliance Procedure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/30138407

No wonder the Compliance Procedure is fucked up and not fit for purpose.

[Courtyard Bear 24,422]

3 hours ago, Negri's lovechild said:

I really need to stop reading the comments on those feeds. Winds me up. Right away those fuckers are on it, with their absolutely chronic patter. Amazes me how they foam at the mouth over a so called new club. 

Boils my piss mate. 

I hate everyone of the cunts with a passion, but I would never want to have an advantage to win something what’s the point of that. 

[Courtyard Bear 24,422]

2 hours ago, ger4life_1872 said:

I always thought our success had broken a generation of taigs and that's what drives their hatred / obsession,  but it's becoming clear we broke a whole generation of everyone that's not 1 of us 

They all hate us mate, I can get that jealousy is a very bad thing to let consume you and by fuck they have all been totally consumed. 

But to the point where they are happy to see their own club done over just staggers me, it would appear the saying they hate Rangers more than they love their own is going strong in Scottish football. 

[evenstevens 368]

43 minutes ago, sonofbear said:

Taken from FF.  Vincent Lunny explains Compliance Procedure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/30138407

No wonder the Compliance Procedure is fucked up and not fit for purpose.

Wow. Some Claire Whyte currently decides if she'll take something forward. At least encouraging she took Power and McGinn forward. How a panel decided no red card is astonishing.

As reassuring as her taking forward those cases is, it is even more concenring that she decided to take forward McGregor and Hibs boy forward, yet leave Brown and Simunovic and Burke alone. You don't have to look far to think of a reason. 

[Blue Avenger 10,412]

1 hour ago, sonofbear said:

Taken from FF.  Vincent Lunny explains Compliance Procedure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/30138407

No wonder the Compliance Procedure is fucked up and not fit for purpose.

Even that name gives me the creeps.

[Sweetheart 2,538]

2 hours ago, sonofbear said:

Taken from FF.  Vincent Lunny explains Compliance Procedure.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/30138407

No wonder the Compliance Procedure is fucked up and not fit for purpose.

Just read this 

Quote

 

How does the process work?
If Scottish Professional Football League clubs decide to appeal against a decision, they must prove that an obvious error has been made.

They have until 13:00 on the first working day after the match to lodge their intention to appeal, and their case must be submitted by 17:00 the next day.

The player or any other personnel cannot attend the hearings, which will be a video conference between a tribunal of trained, independent judicial panel members.

As of this season, the SFA's compliance officer plays no part in the proceedings.

In cases of unseen offences of serious foul play and violent conduct, the match referee is no longer asked to provide a statement of opinion.

Instead the compliance officer asks a three-person panel to review whether a sending-off offence occurred. Only where all three individuals agree that a sending-off offence occurred will a notice of complaint be raised.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45527956

 

The CO job is obsolete. That wage should be used for full time refs

[islandblue 318]

The whole idea of a Compliance Officer hasn’t worked. Time to bin it entirely

[gogzy 23,162]

Scunnered by it all.  This is getting beyond the pale.

I get that us and them will be te most televised and most scrutinised teams in th league, I understand that.  THe fact that they have not been pulled up at all and we have been pulled up 9 or 10 times is pretty close to irrefutable proof that us and them are judged to different standards.

[BlueKnight87 2,154]

Just now, gogzy said:

Scunnered by it all.  This is getting beyond the pale.

I get that us and them will be te most televised and most scrutinised teams in th league, I understand that.  THe fact that they have not been pulled up at all and we have been pulled up 9 or 10 times is pretty close to irrefutable proof that us and them are judged to different standards.

What pisses me off is our board doing nothing about it.

The facts are there, they haven't been cited once. We all have an example when they should have been. 

If our board won't go against the SFA then this keeps happening. 

[Robmc1 379]

29 minutes ago, gogzy said:

Scunnered by it all.  This is getting beyond the pale.

I get that us and them will be te most televised and most scrutinised teams in th league, I understand that.  THe fact that they have not been pulled up at all and we have been pulled up 9 or 10 times is pretty close to irrefutable proof that us and them are judged to different standards.

This is the major flaw in the system, for a fair compliance procedure in a competitive league involving livelihood, earning potential and title aspirations, all games involving every league participant have to be reviewed to the same standard. Example, a player in a non televised game (or evidentially any celtic player) gets away with an act that on review would see a ban. The player is then clear to play in the following match/ matches and may be influential in their team taking points off the opponents. There is no parity in the system, all get reviewed as above or none do. As said there would appear to be no doubt that according to the stats that we are very much judged to an alternate standard...

[DMax399 673]

1 hour ago, gogzy said:

Scunnered by it all.  This is getting beyond the pale.

I get that us and them will be te most televised and most scrutinised teams in th league, I understand that.  THe fact that they have not been pulled up at all and we have been pulled up 9 or 10 times is pretty close to irrefutable proof that us and them are judged to different standards.

Bang on.

To add to that, how can it be fair that those teams televised more often than others are immediately under more scrutiny than the rest? It’s a failed concept from the start.

Never mind the fact we are routinely punished more than anyone else.

[DMax399 673]

1 hour ago, BlueKnight87 said:

What pisses me off is our board doing nothing about it.

The facts are there, they haven't been cited once. We all have an example when they should have been. 

If our board won't go against the SFA then this keeps happening. 

We need to fight back on this.  If we don’t, we will keep getting shafted.

[coopsleftboot 2,376]

This last week has exposed the rules for post-game disciplinary process as thus;

1.  If you badly foul a Rangers player and the ref doesn't send you off, then you're fine, we'll look after you.

2.  If a Rangers player badly fouls you and the ref doesn't deal with it (whether he sees it or not), rest assured we'll cite and suspend.

3.  If you badly foul a celtic player you can expect to be sent off and suspended.  If the referee doesn't deal with you as we expect, you'll be cited and suspended.

4.  If a celtic player badly fouls a player from any other team and the referee takes no action then neither will the compliance officer.  If the referee does take action, then the compliance officer reserve the right to reverse the decision.

5.  Citation will be called based on evidence discussed on Sportscene by Michael Stewart, on Sky by Andy Walker, on Radio by Michael Stewart, Tom Currie, Tom English and Stuart Cosgrove or in the press by Chris Sutton or John Hartson.  Other experts such as Tom Boyd or Frank McAvennie may be consulted and ex first class referees such as Conroy or Clarke may also give opinions.

6.  Games involving other teams don't really matter  

prove me wrong 

 

[NeoGeo7 5,212]

12 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

This last week has exposed the rules for post-game disciplinary process as thus;

1.  If you badly foul a Rangers player and the ref doesn't send you off, then you're fine, we'll look after you.

2.  If a Rangers player badly fouls you and the ref doesn't deal with it (whether he sees it or not), rest assured we'll cite and suspend.

3.  If you badly foul a celtic player you can expect to be sent off and suspended.  If the referee doesn't deal with you as we expect, you'll be cited and suspended.

4.  If a celtic player badly fouls a player from any other team and the referee takes no action then neither will the compliance officer.  If the referee does take action, then the compliance officer reserve the right to reverse the decision.

5.  Citation will be called based on evidence discussed on Sportscene by Michael Stewart, on Sky by Andy Walker, on Radio by Michael Stewart, Tom Currie, Tom English and Stuart Cosgrove or in the press by Chris Sutton or John Hartson.  Other experts such as Tom Boyd or Frank McAvennie may be consulted and ex first class referees such as Conroy or Clarke may also give opinions.

6.  Games involving other teams don't really matter  

prove me wrong 

 

Pretty much nail on the head there, that’s certainly what the recent actions of the CO have demonstrated.

[mclovin9091 262]

42 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

This last week has exposed the rules for post-game disciplinary process as thus;

1.  If you badly foul a Rangers player and the ref doesn't send you off, then you're fine, we'll look after you.

2.  If a Rangers player badly fouls you and the ref doesn't deal with it (whether he sees it or not), rest assured we'll cite and suspend.

3.  If you badly foul a celtic player you can expect to be sent off and suspended.  If the referee doesn't deal with you as we expect, you'll be cited and suspended.

4.  If a celtic player badly fouls a player from any other team and the referee takes no action then neither will the compliance officer.  If the referee does take action, then the compliance officer reserve the right to reverse the decision.

5.  Citation will be called based on evidence discussed on Sportscene by Michael Stewart, on Sky by Andy Walker, on Radio by Michael Stewart, Tom Currie, Tom English and Stuart Cosgrove or in the press by Chris Sutton or John Hartson.  Other experts such as Tom Boyd or Frank McAvennie may be consulted and ex first class referees such as Conroy or Clarke may also give opinions.

6.  Games involving other teams don't really matter  

prove me wrong 

 

Don't see why people are confused with the regulations you have mentioned. Seems quite clear to follow.

 

Fucking wanks!