Jump to content
SeparateEntityMyArse

Compliance Officer Role

Recommended Posts


That's an excellent article and does make sense. The compliance officer role is not fit for purpose, so scrap it. It does though, put the Power squarely with the referees again, so the question is can we trust them to make the correct and unbiased decisions? I'm not so sure.

what does need to stop is this culture of trial by tv and the pundits having too much power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

It's the system as much as the application, particularly due to the lack of transparency.

For parity all games need watched for the entire game, having been recorded and edited by neutral broadcasters/ editorial teams. The only way for this to happen is for in house team to do so, be audited by neutral overseers, and transparent in the logic behind incidents progressed to charge and those not.

This gives all teams equality.  This does not happen,  nor is it meant to or ever going to, so the current system is flawed. Those teams on live t.v. are more at risk. 

Then there's the obvious application issues, where us and the scum are the two teams most at risk but only one receives multiple charges and the other scot free. That's due to trial by tv and biased broadcasters. That's the application failing. Deliberately I'd argue.

So unless the system and application can be made fair across the board, none of it is fit for purpose.

The sheer logistics of that is unworkable, we can’t have a panel watching every game played. 

The broadcaster has the whole game recorded it isn’t then hard for any panel to ask for footage of a certain moment in the game. As I’ve said before the media should be taken right out of the equation and it left to each club to raise any issues, the broadcaster is simply there to supply footage. 

You cant have a perfect system where all games aren’t recorded in full, but every top flight game can be covered. You do the best for the best teams in the country.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Courtyard Bear said:

The sheer logistics of that is unworkable, we can’t have a panel watching every game played. 

The broadcaster has the whole game recorded it isn’t then hard for any panel to ask for footage of a certain moment in the game. As I’ve said before the media should be taken right out of the equation and it left to each club to raise any issues, the broadcaster is simply there to supply footage. 

You cant have a perfect system where all games aren’t recorded in full, but every top flight game can be covered. You do the best for the best teams in the country.  

No we can't. But that's why the system is flawed because there's no chance all teams are treated equally from the outset, even before possible bias comes into it.

In the spl,  if all games aren't scrutinised equally, even if not televised, then there's no chance of fairness in the system, ie it's flawed and unfit for purpose. That has to also apply to lower leagues if any if their games become televised too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

No we can't. But that's why the system is flawed because there's no chance all teams are treated equally from the outset, even before possible bias comes into it.

In the spl,  if all games aren't scrutinised equally, even if not televised, then there's no chance of fairness in the system, ie it's flawed and unfit for purpose. That has to also apply to lower leagues if any if their games become televised too.

Every other sport in the world accepts that all games/matches can’t be covered equally so they do the best they can with what they have. 

The top league can be covered so it should be. But even then until we take the scum factor out of the equation it’s still flawed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, OhW said:

Does the Compliane Officer actually watch every game in full, or just wait for the media to highlight things? 

There's little clarity on it. It's widely reported they receive evidential material from reputable (😁)outlets including main broadcasters. Clubs can also complain about incidents formally. It has been said that anyone including individuals can make complaints to highlight issues too, but I can personally vouch for this failing to be the case the time I did so.

Doubt they watch all games, even the televised ones. They seem to wait to be fed issues on a plate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

3 Compliance officers of a selik persuasion. 

Amount of times a selik player has been cited = 0

Rangers = 9

The evidence is there. 

Maybe it's coincidental 😂😂😂😂

:no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Courtyard Bear said:

Scrap the CO and have a panel of ex Refs look at any decisions that the clubs raise not the media and a club can only raise 2 issues per game to report to the panel. 

We need something like this with clear rules and restrictions. The current airy/fairy random pish seems only to favour one club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TEFTONG said:

I'm guessing using this wee Fact would have given the article a "whataboutery" feel to it..??

IMG-20190210-WA0011.jpg

That is a fucking disgrace but with the list of the biased bheast loving bastards in control of it . That may explain it .

And look . It's all the teams that could  hurt the scum sitting at the top

Watch out for a bheast player being sighted soon , where the player is not important and he misses a meaningless game or a game where he probably wouldn't be playing in.

Just to make it look like no bias going here . Aye fucking right

 

You have to hand it to the scum . Even with this . The scum will still say the SFA and the lot of them are masons . They will unified on that one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

3 Compliance officers of a selik persuasion. 

Amount of times a selik player has been cited = 0

Rangers = 9

The evidence is there. 

Don't think that stat relates to citations alone mate. It relates to citations and appeals combined. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...