eejay the dj 31,964 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 What are the chances of an out and out bear being Compliance officer this century ? Bears r us 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690tamRFC 5,001 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 2 hours ago, cushynumber said: this new compliance officer has a legal background as I recall. My impression is that she is there to make sure the process is followed to the letter according to the rules laid down, and thats about it. Pretty sure she left her position at the terriers law firm harper McLoud to take up this role. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690tamRFC 5,001 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Just now, eejay the dj said: What are the chances of an out and out bear being Compliance officer this century ? Pretty fucking slim I would imagine Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,628 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Compliance Officer very unlikely to have much by way of jurisdiction when it comes to issues the ref dealt with on the field. I’d imagine only to be changed if there’s something material the ref didn’t see, or if the decision was outwith the reasonable options available to the referee. Bears r us 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears r us 30,796 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 52 minutes ago, eejay the dj said: What are the chances of an out and out bear being Compliance officer this century ? You are just being silly now EEJAY. eejay the dj 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,722 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 1 hour ago, eejay the dj said: What are the chances of an out and out bear being Compliance officer this century ? It'll come right after Liewell admits there was never any tour of Japan planned, the SFA chuck the scum out of the game as punishment for the paedo ring, and referees give us parity. Don't hold your breath. eejay the dj 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNowForever 232 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I knew her as a PF and as much as I didn’t think she was up to much as a Fiscal I would be surprised if she was biased against us in fairness to her. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wullyRFC 5,230 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, ThenNowForever said: I knew her as a PF and as much as I didn’t think she was up to much as a Fiscal I would be surprised if she was biased against us in fairness to her. Doesn't fit the conspiracy theory I'm affraid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,722 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 7 minutes ago, ThenNowForever said: I knew her as a PF and as much as I didn’t think she was up to much as a Fiscal I would be surprised if she was biased against us in fairness to her. Thanks Clare. scottyscott1963 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThenNowForever 232 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, wullyRFC said: Doesn't fit the conspiracy theory I'm affraid. Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said: Thanks Clare. Haha I’m two for two in the replies I thought that would get. She was far from my favourite person so I’m not taking any pleasure in saying that. Still very surprised she got the gig Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
siddiqi_drinker 14,635 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 Compliance officer, Clare Whyte............ this is no a job for a woman, end of story. Why can the compliance office not be a retired ref or better a three MAN panel. Probably cant even sack her or she'll scream 'sexual abuse'. Blue Avenger 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,722 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 9 minutes ago, siddiqi_drinker said: Compliance officer, Clare Whyte............ this is no a job for a woman, end of story. Why can the compliance office not be a retired ref or better a three MAN panel. Probably cant even sack her or she'll scream 'sexual abuse'. It'll be fine, Liewells will bury the allegations. siddiqi_drinker and cascadeshrimp 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
harlands plater 16,975 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 I keep forgetting it’s not Vincent or Tony now, it’s Bernadette or something like that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basrah Bear 2,981 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 4 hours ago, Blue Avenger said: suchka Russian Bitch? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
feda16 136 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/291575/Ditch-the-lawyers-says-Aluko Great article, surely as compliance officers they would be trained in the laws of the game with extended interpretation. However if they don't have a footballing background i really can't understand how they can apply this without any kind of bias towards a team they may support. Also if the role is to exist and to be used, based on the current employee in the role, the nationality would be irrelevant so why not go for someone from the US, Australia, England etc they has no perceived bias or supporter of any Scottish club. This would allow for fairer governance within the role. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 3 hours ago, Bears r us said: You are just being silly now EEJAY. It's Christmas mate 😉 Bears r us 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 2 hours ago, ThenNowForever said: I knew her as a PF and as much as I didn’t think she was up to much as a Fiscal I would be surprised if she was biased against us in fairness to her. I realise you are new on here so you you could be a infiltrator . Percentage wise Give is your opinion of how many taigs are in top positions . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted December 22, 2018 Share Posted December 22, 2018 2 hours ago, wullyRFC said: Doesn't fit the conspiracy theory I'm affraid. It's gonnna beeeeeeee a beltaaaaaaaa Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetheart 8,458 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 10 hours ago, Domthenbud said: WTF is the point of the compliance officer. She was considering increasing the punishment of Ryan Porteos for his tackle on Coulibaly. However Thompson has stated, to her, that he felt the yellow card was ok and she has accepted this, presumably, without consultation. This thread is not about was it a yellow or red but more about how the compliance officer makes a decision. I was under the impression there was a committee. Or was Thompson the committee. I was of the understanding that the role of compliance officer was to have the ability to retrospectively fix things where the referee misses something or gets it very wrong during a game. If the compliance officer role is to have the confidence of the clubs, when making refs answerable, then the process needs to be more transparent, with clear rules and a report on how each case is processed. Domthenbud 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluenoz 30,836 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 back in the day, that is a yellow and nothing more is. It was definitely a bad and high tackle but that was common occurrence in the 60's, 70's and 80's. We have become soft and moaning gits. I do believe there is an agenda against our club but not at every tackle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rum Ham 2,059 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 13 minutes ago, bluenoz said: back in the day, that is a yellow and nothing more is. It was definitely a bad and high tackle but that was common occurrence in the 60's, 70's and 80's. We have become soft and moaning gits. I do believe there is an agenda against our club but not at every tackle. I think it was a yellow to, but that he should have already have been on one. No point comparing them to 30 years ago as football has changed for the worse, even since the days of Thomson, Ferguson etc. I don't think the refs have an agenda against us, but think they are less scrutinised in the media/ social media if they give a wrong decision for us than against us, which might play in their mind during games. Edit: and the refs in Scotland are just shit, even in games not involving us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magic8ball 27,901 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 16 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: It's a joke job. created to appease cunts like popcorn teeth and controlled by taigs SeparateEntityMyArse and Blue Avenger 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Avenger 22,567 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 11 hours ago, Basrah Bear said: Russian Bitch? Naw just bitch, but I love using that word. Someday I'll get my bawz kicked when some bitch knows what it means. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basrah Bear 2,981 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Blue Avenger said: Naw just bitch, but I love using that word. Someday I'll get my bawz kicked when some bitch knows what it means. I meant its Russian for bitch. Miss Uzbeck uses it all the time that's how I know it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
1690tamRFC 5,001 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 6 hours ago, Rum Ham said: I think it was a yellow to, but that he should have already have been on one. No point comparing them to 30 years ago as football has changed for the worse, even since the days of Thomson, Ferguson etc. I don't think the refs have an agenda against us, but think they are less scrutinised in the media/ social media if they give a wrong decision for us than against us, which might play in their mind during games. Edit: and the refs in Scotland are just shit, even in games not involving us. That in itself causes bias to a degree though even if it’s unintentional from the refs from the outset. If they know that a bad call against the taigs would get them ruthlessly scrutinised by the media etc then they will obviously mindfully be more cautious in their decision making, with us and no media reprisals they don’t give a fuck. Still boils down to us getting more contentious decisions against us and that’s become more and more obvious the past few seasons. Rum Ham and Bears r us 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.