eejay the dj 31,964 Posted May 30, 2019 Share Posted May 30, 2019 5 hours ago, Ozblue said: The cunts have power everywhere these days, eejay. They fucking breed like rabbits. The weird thing is that in Australia we can cull rabbits, but we can't cull tarriers Surely to fuck they aren't running the show over their mate Surely can't be as bad as this corrupt cesspit that is Glasgow Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralBlue 84 Posted May 30, 2019 Share Posted May 30, 2019 5 hours ago, Ozblue said: I would be very surprised if anybody would challenge them, but if they were challenged I doubt if we would ever hear about it. Perhaps an unknown deal has been struck with the FIFA technical committee that allows the SPFL to totally disregard Law 5, which in effect mean that FIFA themselves are technically going against their own laws of the game as they are currently written. I might try and get a hold of Jeff Winter on Twitter and raise this subject with him to see if he can shed any light on my query. That would be a good start to get his view. I really believe however, that the very basic points you have raised ought to be readily and openly answered by a national body. Anything other than that reeks of elitism and sneering at us mere mortals for having the temerity to question them. Ozblue 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malvern 11,329 Posted May 30, 2019 Share Posted May 30, 2019 On 29/05/2019 at 20:08, LegendofCoop said: Ceptic are the authority....... Well it is in the name, SFA. Scum Fenian Association. LegendofCoop 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malvern 11,329 Posted May 30, 2019 Share Posted May 30, 2019 On 29/05/2019 at 20:51, Ivybank said: Exactly, why wasn't Lego pulled up for simulation? Ref didn't want to get sacked. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 8 hours ago, eejay the dj said: Surely to fuck they aren't running the show over their mate Surely can't be as bad as this corrupt cesspit that is Glasgow Perhaps not in the football hierarchy, eejay, although there are quite a few with dodgy sounding surnames running the show and are just as inept as the SFA in running the game. Politically, we have had a mixed bag of leaders both in National and state affairs, but there has been a lot lately who seem to devoutly follow a certain faith that is led by a guy wearing a funny cap. I have to admit though that in my 53 years of living in Australia I have never seen bigotry or favouritism towards a club that you see in Glasgow; not even remotely close to it. In fact, I have hundreds of mates, acquaintances, and friends who I wouldn't know if they're a proddy or a tim, until they die and I find out if their funeral is at a church or a chapel. Of course, you find plenty (and I mean plenty) who strut around, mainly when they're on holiday or out shopping, wearing their green and grey rag, but I either laugh when I see them or put a hanky to my face when I pass them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 8 hours ago, AdmiralBlue said: That would be a good start to get his view. I really believe however, that the very basic points you have raised ought to be readily and openly answered by a national body. Anything other than that reeks of elitism and sneering at us mere mortals for having the temerity to question them. I agree with what you say, mate! although maybe I'm missing something about how the hell somebody other than a Referee can decide what punishment a player gets after the game has finished, especially when rule5 clearly states (in parts); " The decisions of the referee and all other match officials must always be respected." The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official, provided play has not restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match. The Referee can't change his decision after the game has ended.....The Compliance officer is NOT "another match official. DISCIPLINARY ACTION. punishes the more serious offence, in terms of sanction, restart, physical severity and tactical impact. REVIEWS AFTER PLAY HAS RESTARTED. (This one interests me) If play has stopped and restarted, the referee may only undertake a 'review', and take the appropriate disciplinary sanction, for mistaken identity or for a potential sending off offence relating to violent conduct, Considering that Clancy didn't review his original decision and give Flanagan a red card it stands to reason that the Compliance officer is acting as a de facto VAR after the game has ended, with the only difference being a VAR is used during the game and then the Referee makes the final judgement on the incident, which basically means that the SFA and the SPFL are saying that the decisions of a Referee as written in Law 5 are not final at all when it suits their agenda. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
72barca 1,788 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 47 minutes ago, Ozblue said: I agree with what you say, mate! although maybe I'm missing something about how the hell somebody other than a Referee can decide what punishment a player gets after the game has finished, especially when rule5 clearly states (in parts); " The decisions of the referee and all other match officials must always be respected." The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official, provided play has not restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match. The Referee can't change his decision after the game has ended.....The Compliance officer is NOT "another match official. DISCIPLINARY ACTION. punishes the more serious offence, in terms of sanction, restart, physical severity and tactical impact. REVIEWS AFTER PLAY HAS RESTARTED. (This one interests me) If play has stopped and restarted, the referee may only undertake a 'review', and take the appropriate disciplinary sanction, for mistaken identity or for a potential sending off offence relating to violent conduct, Considering that Clancy didn't review his original decision and give Flanagan a red card it stands to reason that the Compliance officer is acting as a de facto VAR after the game has ended, with the only difference being a VAR is used during the game and then the Referee makes the final judgement on the incident, which basically means that the SFA and the SPFL are saying that the decisions of a Referee as written in Law 5 are not final at all when it suits their agenda. They have managed to circumvent Rule 5 by the following text into their disciplinary procedures. I like your interpretation better. ... https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/compliance-disciplinary-qa/ ... Can the Compliance Officer take retrospective action for on-field incidents? The Compliance Officer can only raise a Fast Track Notice of Complaint and take retrospective action when an on field incident, or an exceptional part of an on field incident, has been unseen by the match officials. When investigating a potential Fast Track case, the Compliance Officer does not seek any opinion on the incident from the match officials, or ask them to reconsider any decision made. This has not changed. The decision of the referee regarding facts connected with play will always be respected in line with the Laws of the Game. It is for this reason that the disciplinary rules relating to retrospective action only come into effect when an incident, or part of an incident, is unseen by the match officials. When the match officials confirm an on field incident is unseen, the Compliance Officer seeks opinions from three independent experts. Those experts are drawn from a pool of former Category 1 referees, who are up to date with current refereeing guidelines. A Fast Track Notice of Complaint can only competently be raised when all three experts provide written evidence that the incident constituted a sending off offence. ... After the game Clancy's explanation for not sending off Flannigan was that he never seen exactly what happened. He would know about the CO being able to upgrade the card to a red if she thought he had not seen the incident in its entirety, as stated.How to abdicate responsibility and kick us in the ass later, eh? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 3 hours ago, 72barca said: They have managed to circumvent Rule 5 by the following text into their disciplinary procedures. I like your interpretation better. ... https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/compliance-disciplinary-qa/ ... Can the Compliance Officer take retrospective action for on-field incidents? The Compliance Officer can only raise a Fast Track Notice of Complaint and take retrospective action when an on field incident, or an exceptional part of an on field incident, has been unseen by the match officials. When investigating a potential Fast Track case, the Compliance Officer does not seek any opinion on the incident from the match officials, or ask them to reconsider any decision made. This has not changed. The decision of the referee regarding facts connected with play will always be respected in line with the Laws of the Game. It is for this reason that the disciplinary rules relating to retrospective action only come into effect when an incident, or part of an incident, is unseen by the match officials. When the match officials confirm an on field incident is unseen, the Compliance Officer seeks opinions from three independent experts. Those experts are drawn from a pool of former Category 1 referees, who are up to date with current refereeing guidelines. A Fast Track Notice of Complaint can only competently be raised when all three experts provide written evidence that the incident constituted a sending off offence. ... After the game Clancy's explanation for not sending off Flannigan was that he never seen exactly what happened. He would know about the CO being able to upgrade the card to a red if she thought he had not seen the incident in its entirety, as stated.How to abdicate responsibility and kick us in the ass later, eh? That is the biggest load of shit I have ever read. I can assure you there will be a letter sent to the SFA tomorrow blasting their incompetence in the running of Scottish football in all areas from Juniors right through to the National teams. It won't do any good but I am making my feelings known. I will also be contacting UEFA and FIFA asking why a National association are allowed to bastardise the written laws of the game. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,600 Posted May 31, 2019 Share Posted May 31, 2019 Are we the only club they have to explain decisions made as you don't see them explaining all the other decisions. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evenstevens 890 Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 I've no issue with refs being asked after a game to look at things the CO brings to them. As Oz says, that allows him to change his mind, or not. The re refereeing of games and incidents, by 3 unnamed ex referees, is a clusterfuck of monumental stupidity. It should be very simple. "Kevin, can you please review these incidents and advise if you believe you made an obvious error, or if you'd seen it fully at the time, would you have made a different decision?" Job done. jintybear 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robmc1 4,741 Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 33 minutes ago, evenstevens said: Kevin, can you please review these incidents and advise if you believe you made an obvious error, or if you'd seen it fully at the time, would you have made a different decision?" Job done. This is actually the process, only for a certain team though... 😀 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
16BlueSherbert90 19,221 Posted June 1, 2019 Share Posted June 1, 2019 They have to think of ways to deflect the attention away from what is happening at the beastdome. This is why they're bringing this up continuously. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralBlue 84 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 On 31/05/2019 at 04:36, Ozblue said: I agree with what you say, mate! although maybe I'm missing something about how the hell somebody other than a Referee can decide what punishment a player gets after the game has finished, especially when rule5 clearly states (in parts); " The decisions of the referee and all other match officials must always be respected." The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or on the advice of another match official, provided play has not restarted or the referee has signalled the end of the first or second half (including extra time) and left the field of play or terminated the match. The Referee can't change his decision after the game has ended.....The Compliance officer is NOT "another match official. DISCIPLINARY ACTION. punishes the more serious offence, in terms of sanction, restart, physical severity and tactical impact. REVIEWS AFTER PLAY HAS RESTARTED. (This one interests me) If play has stopped and restarted, the referee may only undertake a 'review', and take the appropriate disciplinary sanction, for mistaken identity or for a potential sending off offence relating to violent conduct, Considering that Clancy didn't review his original decision and give Flanagan a red card it stands to reason that the Compliance officer is acting as a de facto VAR after the game has ended, with the only difference being a VAR is used during the game and then the Referee makes the final judgement on the incident, which basically means that the SFA and the SPFL are saying that the decisions of a Referee as written in Law 5 are not final at all when it suits their agenda. Your summation is spot on. That very last point you make is exactly the one that needs to be made, formally, by clubs, fans and players' organisations and to shut up the idiotic, paid commentators/mouthpieces of the BBC, Spotscene, BT sport, journalists (well! ) et al. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted June 2, 2019 Share Posted June 2, 2019 11 minutes ago, AdmiralBlue said: Your summation is spot on. That very last point you make is exactly the one that needs to be made, formally, by clubs, fans and players' organisations and to shut up the idiotic, paid commentators/mouthpieces of the BBC, Spotscene, BT sport, journalists (well! ) et al. I'm quite pally with three ex-grade 1 Referees here ( I certainly wasn't when I played and managed/coached) so I organised a little drinking session with them today to partly discuss this Compliance officer shite and my first question was; " who has the final say on the punishment of a player who commits an offence during a game?" The answer was unanimous- the Referee. The next question was; " Can a player appeal a card?". Unanimous answer. He can appeal a red card but not a yellow, unless it's a case of mistaken identity. All was plain sailing so far until I asked them my next few questions, which resulted in funny looks, raised eyebrows, and shakes of the heads: "If a Referee gives a player a yellow card during a game can he review it after he has restarted the game and change it to a red and a sending off"?...there was a bit of discussion about this but yes was the agreed answer. if the Referee thinks he got it wrong. Now it got interesting. "Can a player who has received a yellow have his punishment upgraded to a red after the completion of the game?" Definitely NOT they said. "Can a player who has received a yellow card be cited to appear before a panel who were not officiating at that game, or even at the game to possibly be suspended a few days after the game, making the Referees final decision null and void?" "Right you! stop taking the piss and get the beers in." RFC Eagle and jintybear 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.