The SFA’s Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal (JPDT) process itself is now under scrutiny .
Aberdeen FC have asked for change and the Celtic Supporters Association have written to Ian Maxwell SFA CEO expressing concerns about judgements reached concerning recent on field incidents that appear to herald in A Cloggers Charter.
However the whole Judicial Panel Protocol (JPP) on which the JPDT is based (and which was the brainchild of the discredited former SFA Chief Executive Stewart Regan) has shown itself to be a means of perverting justice rather than providing it since it was introduced amidst a loud fanfare at the SFA AGM in June 2011 (the same one that saw Campbell Ogilvie elected SFA President)
To see how the JPP has been misused we need to start with a definition of judicial which according to Websters dictionary is:
of or relating to a judgment, the function of judging, the administration of justice
The latest Judicial Panel Protocol can be found on the SFA Web Site .
One of its Founding Principles is:
2.2 Principle 1 – Economic and expeditious justice. The objective of the Protocol is to secure the Determination of disciplinary proceedings arising in respect of Association Football and that Decisions are made economically and expeditiously in a fair manner. Tribunals appointed from the Judicial Panel may impose reasonable procedural requirements on Parties to ensure that matters are dealt with economically and expeditiously.
The word justice actually appears nine times and injustice three times, so it would appear that whilst economy and speed are the means to the end, that end is justice, but how has that panned out since June 2011?
I am grateful here to Glasnostandtwostrickers for three enlightening articles in Pie and Bovril in which he reviews the protocol a year later in 2012 with suggestions that with the passage of time have been shown to be prescient when made. They can be read at:
Of particular interest is the important view that the process is not independent of the SFA and the following is an extract from Pie and Bovril 3 covering that aspect which explains how the JPP has been used by the SFA to pervert rather than administer justice.
“So to what extent does the JPP system achieve that independence? We think that it does so to a far greater extent than the old system, but not nearly enough. Ensuring that the Tribunals are chaired by respected members of the legal profession was perhaps the single most important reform to make. But there remains a serious lack of independence in the JPP system. This centres on the roles of the SFA’s Compliance Officer (Vincent Lunny) and the SFA Secretary (Stewart Regan) in the process of bringing a case in front of a Tribunal.
The Compliance Officer’s task is to monitor what goes on in Scottish football, assess whether anyone has broken any rules, and – if so – to initiate the disciplinary process. What happens if the Compliance Officer reviews a given event and decides that the conduct of the club, player or official in question doesn’t breach any rules? Well, that is the end of the matter. Neither the SFA executive nor the Judicial Panel can do anything about that decision. And, given that some SFA rules are very vague (e.g. ‘bringing the game into disrepute), the Compliance Officer wields a great deal of power. If the system is to be independent of the SFA, it the Compliance Officer must be independent of it. Yet, as things stand today, Vincent Lunny is an employee of the SFA.
The lack of independence associated with the SFA Secretary’s role is even more flagrant. Firstly, he can veto any decision of the Compliance Officer to mount a disciplinary case. Secondly, even if he allows a case to go ahead, he has the power to select (from the 100-strong Judicial Panel) the 3 individuals who will hear the case. The SFA claims that this takes place on a ‘cab rank’ basis (i.e. the Tribunal is formed of next 3 people in line), but no such rule is to be found in the JPP. On the contrary, it states that:
“Tribunals shall be appointed by the Secretary or his nominee from the Judicial Panel…The Secretary or his nominee may take such steps in respect of the appointment of Tribunals as he considers, in his sole discretion, to be appropriate.” (sections 7.2.1-2)
This applies equally to the Appellate Tribunals as it does to the first-instance Disciplinary Tribunals. So, in theory at least, the SFA Secretary gets two bites of the cherry. He may appoint to a Disciplinary Tribunal the individuals who he thinks are most likely to return the result that he desires. If they don’t, and there is an appeal, he also gets to choose the make-up of the Appellate Tribunal that will hear the appeal. And that’s only if he hasn’t blocked the case from happening in the first place. That is not to impugne Stewart Regan himself, but rather a system that allows him (and his successors) such great power.
The reasons why the JPP is structured in the way that it is are unclear. Despite the fact that it represents a great improvement over the system it replaced, more work must be done if we Scottish football is to have a genuinely independent – and therefore credible – system of footballing ‘justice’.
This article however will let the readers decide if they impugn Stewart Regan and shows how he has used the Judicial Protocol not to deliver justice but to prevent such an outcome, which might just clarify the reason why the JPP was structured in the way that it was and why it absolutely must be replaced on the lines of the suggestions in the excellent Pie and Bovril articles.
Perverting the Course of Justice.
The Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal on Craig Whyte – Bringing The Game Into Disrepute.
The First instance can be found in this E Tim’s article where Regan and LNS met in February 2012 to set the terms of reference for the Judicial Panel that charged Craig Whyte with bringing the game into disrepute.( Telegraph Report 21 Feb 2012 )
As the E Tim’s article shows, whilst Whyte was charged with non payment of PAYE and VAT no charges were made with regard to his failure to pay the £2.8m tax liability that CW undertook to pay in his statement to Rangers shareholders of June 2011. This omission prevented scrutiny of what lay behind that liability, what created it and why it was accepted by RFC in March 2011 and how the SFA were able to grant RFC a UEFA licence in April 2011.
Whatever information Regan had from his telephone conversation with Andrew Dickson on 6th December 2011 and subsequent meeting at Hotel Du Vin with Craig Whyte along with Campbell Ogilvie and RFC CEO Ali Russell, appears not to have been passed to Lord Nimmo Smith in February 2012 when Regan and Nimmo Smith were drawing up the JPP Terms of Reference for the Craig Whyte Tribunal.
The Lord Nimmo Smith Commission
The second instance of Regan’s ability to shape outcomes is in respect of the LNS Commission. Here the SFA stood aside on the grounds they were the Court of Appeal should RFC wish to appeal the eventual LNS Decision and let the then SPL take the running in March 2012. This was a convenient argument given that Regan knew by March 2012 that RFC had a £2.8m tax liability that Sherriff Officers had called to collect that prompted a number of enquiries asking how the SFA were able to grant a UEFA licence in March/April of 2011.
That event caused UEFA and the SFA in September 2011 to discuss the submission RFC made in June 2011 under Article 66 of UEFA FFP that described the status of the liability as postponed and awaiting scheduling of payments but more of this SFA/UEFA discussion later in the context of the current JPDT charges of non compliance against Rangers FC.
It is inconceivable that by March 2012 when the investigation into ebts and side letters began that this September 2011 discussion along with his conversations in December 2011 that Regan was unaware that the tax owed was the result of RFC use of unlawful ebts nor the reasons why RFC had accepted liability for the sum owed arising from their use. However by standing aside there was no specific mention in the SPL Lawyers letter of 15 March 2012 that began the investigation of the by then clearly unlawful ebts that caused the £2.8m tax liability, although it did refer to all ebts with side letters from 1998. All rather convenient for Regan under the powers the Judicial Panel Protocol gave him.
The impact of this exclusion in skewing the LNS Terms of Reference and so the LNS Decision is now a matter of Social Media record that can be followed from beginning to end HERE.
The E Tim’s article already mentioned covers how events from February to April 2012 allowed the exclusion from the Craig Whyte JPP and The Reasons given by Lord Nimmo Smith in September 2012 appear in a follow up E Tim’s article where LNS himself justifies the exclusion of the £2.8m tax liability caused by RFC’s use of unlawful ebts in from 1999 to 2003 on what are less than convincing grounds unless he was kept in the dark by Regan.
SFA JPP Charges In Respect of UEFA Licence in 2011
The final instance of the misuse of the JPP begins in September 2017 when after court testimony stating when the £2.8m tax liability was accepted, the SFA, whilst rejecting an investigation into the handling of RFC use of ebts with side letters (and the foregoing on LNS spells out why) Regan accepted that the granting of the UEFA Licence by the SFA in 2011 should be subject to the Judicial Protocol process.
It took until mid-May 2018 for that process to come up with two charges of non compliance of SFA Articles by RFC that were put to TRFC presumably on the basis that they were responsible for the events in 2011, particularly when at least three current TRFC officials/Directors were in place in 2011, charges which TRFC said they would contest and subsequently in July wanted CAS involvement on grounds that the secret 5 Way Agreement requires it but on scope that that have still to be made known as the parties negotiate the terms of reference to CAS.
Now seven plus months is a long time to finally arrive at charges that according to a TRFC statement in May 2018 in this BBC report excluded the very period at end of March 2011 stating accusations were groundless, that caused the SFA to invoke the JPP process, but what is interesting about those charges is the absence (and as Regan left in February he might not have had an influence or was his parting shot), of any charges against the SFA itself of aiding RFC noncompliance at end of March in September 2011. The Compliance Officer himself resigned not long after the charges of non- compliance were made which raises eyebrows higher than Roger Moore level.
Perhaps it was because of possible SFA complicity in September 2011 that the Compliance Officer agreed to exclude this end March period although that exclusion was challenged by Resolution 12 lawyers just before the SFA Judicial Panel Disciplinary Tribunal (JPDT) sat on 25th June. No answers to the evidence backed questions in that letter, copied to Celtic, have so far been provided.
So what are the SFA hiding from or behind the JPP process this time?
Here is a copy of the Good News e mail of 19th September 2011 between Keith Sharp the UEFA FFP man at the SFA and Ken Olverman the Financial chap at RFC. In it Sharp tells Olverman that UEFA have verbally accepted the RFC submission of June 2011 under Article 66. (This admitted that the 2.8m EBT proposed settlement also required to be disclosed but is shown as a status of postponed (awaiting scheduling of payments) but that a further declaration will be needed under Article 67. This can be read here but note the Comments were not part of original exchange.
Note the tone of the advice given about the Article 67 submission but the point is, either Sharp of the SFA told UEFA porkies to get the monitoring submission under Article 66, that itself was false at the time it was made, verbally accepted or told UEFA the truth and as RFC were out of Europe there was an agreement to bury it between SFA and UEFA.
That UEFA involvement if the latter instance, would explain Celtic’s reluctance to take Res12 to UEFA in 2013 especially as we don’t know UEFA’s response to Celtic’s earlier letter of May 2012 to SFA re ebt investigation copied to Infantino at UEFA.
If the former instance i.e. SFA told UEFA porkies it makes SFA complicit in covering up the non compliance they are charging Rangers with!
I mention this in the context of the SFA Judicial Process being totally inappropriate in this case and why there should be a speedy independent investigation because the charges of non-compliance that the JPDT are covering relate to RFC and NOT the SFA which is perhaps why the terms of reference to CAS are taking so long to emerge.
There is clearly a conflict of SFA self interest here.
It would be more than ironic if the organisation bringing charges against Rangers were in fact complicit in the non-compliance by Rangers after it became public HMRC were owed tax in August 2010!
Summary
The point of this long blog is that the Judicial Panel Protocol introduced by Regan in June 2011 with the flaws pointed out a year later in The Pie and Bovril articles has been used by the SFA under Regan not to produce justice but pervert it since 2011.
Only a truly independent investigation will provide the justice that the crimes perpetrated against Scottish Football and its supporters since 2000 by RFC under the dishonest leadership of Sir David Murray requires, an investigation that should recommend changes that make the JPP independent of the SFA..
Justice is there to uphold the rule of law, that applies to football law as much as natural law and without justice there can be no law. That is where Scottish football now exists, in outlaw territory with the bad guys still ruling as they please, not as justice demands.
Until justice is served and seen to be served there is no law in football and no fake Judicial Protocol Panel is ever going to provide it.
The owners and Directors of all SPFL clubs need to revisit the scene of the crime, the 5 Way Agreement has done its job, a form of Rangers drawing big crowds will continue to exist, but on it has to be on more honest grounds, where who knows, they might even earn redemption.
jimbo 26th September 2018 at 17:22
0 0 Rate This
Here we go.
Kris Boyd.
…………..
Works for level 5 and had an EBT .Kris Boyd £215,000
So unless he want’s to talk about when he is paying the tax or if HMRC have been in touch,he has nothing worth listening to.
nawlite 26th September 2018 at 13:08
edit
“I see JD Sports are selling the new TRFC tops today.”
Checked the JD Sports web site and indeed they are advertising TRFC Hummel kit ..for pre-order.I wonder if Hummel have actually committed to the manufacturing process as wholeheartedly as one might expect, evidenced by the strange outfits worn on the European stage lately.JD sports and TRFC don't seem to be jointly promoting this availability with the usual gusto…you know the sort of thing.Serious back page interview with the Captain of TRFC and how smart does he look in that new top which is available from etc.No doubt it'll all come out in the wash.
just checked Hummel website and no mention of TRFC there either.
https://hummel.co.uk/sport/club-jerseys/others
gunnerb
I’m not sure the strips will survive a wash!
I'll be on to my MP this week. Public funding of the SFA while there are people using foodbanks – not a chance!!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45659899
Just in case, … It's
Celtic v Hearts…. and Aberdeen v trfc ltd. in the "semis"
A straight red card for dissent? That will be right! Appeal tomorrow against that known Sevco supporting referee.
I'm sure the SFA will see the injustice!
In ‘normal’ cicumstances it would be two yellows. But not with Celtic.
Portbhoy 26th September 2018 at 22:19
Just in case, … It's
Celtic v Hearts…. and Aberdeen v trfc ltd. in the "semis"
=====================================
But where? Murrayfield after the SFA's snub?
It is of course the SPFL that runs the League Cup, so mibbees aye, mibbees no.
I also noted that Hugh Keevins is predicting a comeback for our own JC
hugh keevins @shinjukushug
After all these injuries and suspensions, it's John Clark and Danny McGrain in defence for the semi-final against Hearts. There's always a silver lining!
JC – you'd better get your dubbin out and your studs sharpened.
o now you are allowed to kick , stamp or even kung phoo opponents and get off with it but speak up in defence of your player who was kicked when he was down thats another matter , or forgot thats only for …..
Jimbo
In ‘normal’ circumstances it would be two yellows. But not with Celtic.
As far as I know whether it's Celtic or anyone else a red card can be appealed but 2 yellows can't so in this instance a red might be better.
Surely a good case for an appeal as a sweary word can't be as bad as a kick and as we know a kick is not a red card.
jimbo 26th September 2018 at 22:24
Ballyargus 26th September 2018 at 22:43
Foul and abusive language aimed at an official is a red card offence, although it is seldom enforced and referees are actually encouraged to ignore it as far as possible. (I got that from a friend who is a current SPFL official).
Boyata's issue was probably exacerbated by him having a go at the ref around four times over a period of a few seconds, including a bit of "brutality" in nudging him. From the video I saw, the ref had a yellow card in his hand when explaining something to Brown, but Boyata was so immersed in a red mist of his own making, he felt he had to have another go at the ref, who clearly had heard enough and showed him a straight red.
I've no sympathy for Boyata or Celtic in this case.
Jimbo 22.24
That will be the same John Beaton who red carded Ryan Jack last season (rescinded on appeal) in a game versus Hibernian, whilst allowing Anthony Stokes & Dylan McGeouch to remain on the field despite both committing red card offences.
Without doubt the worst refereeing performance i had seen for years and no surprise to see him demoted to officiating in the Championship the following weekend.
Beaton lost it. Took out yellow but changed his mind, would’ve been a red for two yellows. Canny send a player off for swearing. Not even in scoddland. I’ve rarely seen a ref so ragin’ after Celtic scoring
You know what the problem is in Scotland?
There are still lots of Jacobites. That included Protestants.
At the time of the German king gaining ascendancy (George 1) there were 50 before him but Catholics. Oh dear.
It is now a known fact that Scottish Referrees are not Jacobites.. Beaton for instance is a German Surname.
easyJambo 26th September 2018 at 22:31
'…JC – you'd better get your dubbin out and your studs sharpened'
____________________________
Ha,ha-I do actually have a tin of dubbin somewhere in the glory-hole under the stairs.
As for boots, the only pair available are an old pair of my OZ son's, from the days when he turned out briefly for one of the Spartans teams, before he went to Edinburgh Yooni.
They'll be a very loose fit, though: he was 6 foot 2 then, with feet commensurate!
Does any body know a site I could go on to, to share my love of holy songs? I know I am a pest on here. But I need new on line friends.
jimbo 27th September 2018 at 00:09
Does any body know a site I could go on to, to share my love of holy songs? I know I am a pest on here. But I need new on line friends.
==========================
Google is your friend Jimbo. I'm sure a quick search for the type of forums you are looking for would give you a few options.
jimbo 26th September 2018 at 22:43 11 5 Rate This o now you are allowed to kick , stamp or even kung phoo opponents and get off with it but speak up in defence of your player who was kicked when he was down thats another matter , or forgot thats only for ….. ………….. If certain fans can run onto a pitch to protect their players
Maybe Boyata was having a go at the ref for some protection for himself and his team mates
Looked to me like Boyata was raging because Beaton let what he felt was a foul on him by Kane go as st johnstone were on the attack then he gave a foul after it looked like Lustig was fouled by Kane as well not once but twice then Lustig was kicked by Swanson who claimed he got the ball it didn't look like he got anywhere near the ball unless the ball was ankle shaped.Boyata then runs over to Beaton there is contact but I think he was only going to give a yellow Beaton then tells Brown he is gonnae send him off ( I would bet that just before that he also said if he disnae pack it in)at this point he has a yellow card in his hand he then shouts a dedrik get here ( don't know what Boyata did or said at that point )then whit red card and you can see it all just search so all in all seems to me Beaton was fair.
This is a very interesting article on governance in sport, courtesy of the SFSA.
As you read through it you can identify where the SFA/SPFL are failing.
https://www.globalsportsjobs.com/article/strong-culture-and-governance-make-for-sporting-organsations/?utm_source=Global%20Sports%20Jobs&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=9883289_Inside%20Track%20-%20Newsletter%20-%20COM%20-%201270918&utm_Newsletter=Newsletter&dm_i=1G6Q,5VTZT,O916CF,N0FYC,1
The question has to be what are the SFA doing to help imbed a positive culture The Article suggests:
——————————————-
To help embed a positive culture, organisations should:
Organisations should revisit their culture periodically and not wait for crises before determining whether the one they have is the one they thought they had.
———————————–
The thing is do the SFA even realise and care they have to take steps to repair the damage a negative culture since 2000 has done to Scottish Football?
<
p style=”margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px”>
Referee incompetence notwthstanding (for it never far away), I don't think the sending off was incommensurate with what the offence appears to be, and indeed the post-match reaction from the Celtic camp appearss to be square with that.
Very little protest from either Boyata or his team-mates at the time, and it did seem that Beaton was giving him every chance NOT to get sent off.
Actually thought the ref had an okay game.
Delighted that Jimbo is spreading his wings a little in a musical sense.
https://www.musicbanter.com/ is a great place to start Jim
Actually I have an idea to make a sister site talking about music. Watch this space. Suggestions are welcome
Big Pink 27th September 2018 at 14:01
0 0 Rate This
Actually I have an idea to make a sister site talking about music. Watch this space. Suggestions are welcome.
Cool. …..But none of these hymns pish. (Sorry Jimbo) Nobody ever died in the name of atheism.
Corrupt Official 14.35
nobody ever died in the name of atheism?
apart from those untold thousands In the former USSR, China, Cambodia,Albania, North Korea to name only a few.
Your strongest subject is Corruption in football governance. I hope to continue to enjoy reading that
Confirmation of the latest episode of the TOP v King saga next week.
LADY WOLFFE – E Hunter, Clerk
Wednesday 3rd October
Debate At 10.00am
P341/17 Pet: the Panel on Takeovers & Mergers for orders section 955 – Dentons UK – Lindsays
I think this will be a fairly dry legal argument about the competency of the CoS to hear a case of contempt of court, rather than anything specific to King's long awaited offer.
Heard it all now ! John . a TRFC -supporting daughter's boyfriend , reckons that the taigy mainstream media are putting unwarranted pressure on his club by suggesting that the title is theirs to lose this year !Just when they get something going , the media and football authorities rear up and try to do them down . This victimhood can't shirley be healthy .
Double header for semi-finals Both matches to be played at Hampden Park on Sunday 28 October Betfred Cup semi-finals – Sunday 28 October – Hampden Park, Glasgow •Aberdeen v Rangers – Live on BT Sport, kick-off 12 noon •Heart of Midlothian v Celtic – Live on BT Sport, kick-off 7.45pm Last night’s Betfred Cup draw, which saw Celtic and Rangers avoid each other, means Scotland’s two representatives in Europe will play their semi-final matches at Hampden on the same day. ………….. Dear God.
……….
And if Aberdeen v the rangers goes to extra time and penalties what then?
Cluster One 27th September 2018 at 18:15
I'd imagine that both "away" sides will each be down by around 5,000 on on the number of potential fans making the trip, simply because of the scheduling of both ties.
Extra time and penalties could see a finish after 10:30pm on a Sunday night, with limited public transport options. Not a great prospect.
Hearts are due to visit Celtic in the League, the following weekend. Surely it would have been simpler to postpone the league meeting.
easyJambo 27th September 2018 at 18:20
……….
If the first game goes to extra time and penalties let’s hope the pubs around hampden are making plans.If some fans for the first game are still in the pub’s as bus loads of other fans arrive for the next game.
Aurellio Zen
_________________
Yip.???
easyJambo 27th September 2018 at 15:26
4 0 Rate This
Confirmation of the latest episode of the TOP v King saga next week.
LADY WOLFFE – E Hunter, Clerk
Wednesday 3rd October
Debate At 10.00am
P341/17 Pet: the Panel on Takeovers & Mergers for orders section 955 – Dentons UK – Lindsays
…………….
Ps thanks for that. I had the 3rd Oct in my head for something coming along, thought it was for the retail deal.
Notes are all over the place just now.
Double header for semi-finals Both matches to be played at Hampden Park on Sunday 28 October Betfred Cup semi-finals – Sunday 28 October – Hampden Park, Glasgow
……………….
When do the clocks change? Do we gain or lose an hour?
British Summer Time (BST) traditionally ends on the last Sunday in October.
This means that you will need to put the clocks back by one hour on Sunday, October 28, 2018, at 2am.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/when-clocks-go-back-2018-10176157
………….
hope some fans remember to put their clock’s back.
Would it not be possible to bring the CFC v HOMFC league match forward a week from Nov 3rd and play the semifinal on that date at Hampden ?
Aurellio Zen 27th September 2018 at 15:24
Your strongest subject is Corruption in football governance. I hope to continue to enjoy reading that
Actually my strongest subject is mechanical engineering, but it can be rather dull and wearisome to non-disciples. For that reason I wouldn’t dream of posting about it on here. As you say, this is a site dedicated to exposing, and where possible, tackling, fitba corruption.
paddy malarkey 27th September 2018 at 19:56
Would it not be possible to bring the CFC v HOMFC league match forward a week from Nov 3rd and play the semifinal on that date at Hampden ?
=================================
You would end up with the same issue with two games being played in Glasgow on the same day (28 Oct), only one would be a cup tie and the other a league game.
easyJambo 27th September 2018 at 20:22
Aye , but you can better accommodate Aberdeen fans wrt kick off times , and CFC and HOMFC with a better prepared playing surface . Say 12.30 ko at Celtic Park for the league game and 17.30 ko at Hampden for TRFC v AFC . The fans can easily be kept apart .
Aberdeen's response to the arrangements (still waiting for Hearts to even acknowledge the scheduling, far less make a statement).
Two matches on the same day on the same pitch. If it rains either the day before or on the day of the match the playing surface will be horrendous for the second tie. A showpiece occasion shown live on TV played on a tough mudder course. Only in Scotland.
easyJambo 27th September 2018 at 21:07
4 0 Rate This
Aberdeen’s response to the arrangements (still waiting for Hearts to even acknowledge the scheduling, far less make a statement).
……………….
“We met with representatives of all four clubs earlier today and explained that this was the only feasible outcome.
……………..
contesting the two matches on consecutive weekends would be an alternative surely worth investigating,
………..
Looks like the SPFL won’t bother investigating other options.
Ex Ludo 27th September 2018 at 21:42
3 0 Rate This
Two matches on the same day on the same pitch. If it rains either the day before or on the day of the match the playing surface will be horrendous for the second tie.
………..
Even worse if the first game goes to extra time and penalties. And let’s hope none of the ibrox club players need protected.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/09/27/transfer-strife-at-sevco/
………..
Latest from Phil. Could be another court case.
Never mind the stupidity or two semis on the same day. When is the draw from which fans go in which end or is there some unwritten rule that certain teams gave their 'own end?
Apparently SFA wanted final to kick off at Midnight on same day as semi finals.
How the hell is scottish football ever gonna improve and catch up with the nations our size or smaller who have passed us by when the people running ( ruining ) our game are so totally imcompetent !! Where else on this planet would you get a "proffesional" football orgaization making their senior teams play on the same park on the same day in 2 semi finals . Embarrassing !!! Apart from treating the fans like shit what about the actual playing surface for the second game. I think its bad enough playing 2 semis on the saturday and the Sunday for the same reason . Utter Utter Nonsense. Why not just do away with the leaugue cup as they have just made a mockery of it and our game…Once again. I feel for the Aberdeen fans but not Stewart " lets move on "Milne . He and chairmen like him are the problem. They have the power to change things for the better but over and over again they lack courage to rid our game of the total idiots that run (ruin) it
Hearts statement (eventually), but IMHO very weak, blaming contractual obligations..
So it looks like from two club statements that they are not that happy with the semi final arrangements.
wonder how the other two clubs feel?
A couple of points re-the 'contractual obligations' play both League Cup Semi finals at Hampden.
When did this kick in? When Aberdeen last won the league cup I'm sure they played the semi final at Tynecastle.
Who are the contractual obligations with? The SFA now own Hampden and made a specific point when they bought it that games could now be taken around the country. Are they forcing the SPFL to do otherwise?
On another point I think it is only right that Police Scotland explain exactly why Aberdeen v Rangers MUST be played first. We know Aberdeen fans are not being considered in the slightest with this order, so who or what IS being considered?
The decision to play both cup games on the Sunday in Glasgow is ridiculous and plain wrong.
It is a predictable but not excusable that the organisers are now hiding behind "contractual" and "police" issues – their usual justification.
When looked at in context this is not an acceptable response or excuse.
Fans being disenfranchised for early and late games being shown on TV like planned for Sunday 28th October is neither a new nor an unpredictable problem.
Whoever draws up these "contracts" at SFA and SPFL and whichever boards approve them can't say they are unaware of this particular ongoing issue.
Therefore there is no traction is their weak, reoccurring response.
The truth is the fans have been let down again by myopic and weak administration and club chairmen who collectively should have stopped this kind of thing being even a possibility.
When stuff like this happens it becomes more and more obvious that we the real stakeholders need representation in these meetings and get involved in grass roots policy because our club chairmen don't fight our corner well enough on our behalves.
How about a starting point bedrock policy of no big games being scheduled where home town fans can't make it there and back on scheduled transport.
Sounds reasonable enough to me.
Utter lunacy! If this goes ahead, I really hope it does so peacefully, but the potential for disaster is huge.
Even going with standard risks – pouring rain leading to the pitch being destroyed, extra time & penalties for the first game leading to a rapid turnaround, etc it looks bad.
But consider the abilities of the human mind to cause mischief – how quickly can a stadium realistically be cleaned and re-stocked/readied for another game? Wouldn't take much to double or treble the time required should supporters decide to "make a statement". More worryingly I have seen on a couple of chat sites from both of the game 1 clubs the possibility of a peaceful sit-in a the end of that game. Just imagine the prospect of 25,000 TRFC fans, deciding to refuse to move and instead celebrate a victory over Aberdeen (unlikely I know, but still!). What happens then? Police move into clear them out? I don't think so! It doesn't even need 25,000 – 100 will have the same impact.
Honestly I believe both AFC and Hearts should withdraw from the competition, it would be nice if the two Glasgow clubs joined in, but I can't see that happening, alas I feel the fingerprints of the “old firm” all over this one – happy to be proved wrong. Both AFC and Hearts will have their support slashed as folks just can't make it down, won't make it home, or refuse to pander to such dangerous lunacy. If the clubs won't stand up for their fans, I really hope the fans will tell them to ram it.
I did like one suggestion that both clubs withdraw, then decide to hold a training match against each other at Murrayfield on the same Sunday, a training match to which fans can buy tickets at knock-down prices. Maybe they could even rustle up a trophy… call it the Fans cup or something like that.
Current rules on the SPFL's website:
https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/images/shares/pdfs/067_324__rulesofthespflasat19_january_2018_1518083042.pdf
Extract-
Semi Finals
4.18 In the Semi Final Round of the Competition, the 4 Clubs and/or clubs qualified and eligible to participate in this Semi Final Round shall be included in an ‘unseeded’ ballot to determine which two Clubs or clubs will play against each other in each of the 2 Semi Final Round Matches. In the case of each such Match the Club or club drawn first shall be the Home Club. The Clubs or clubs will each play a single Match at a neutral venue or venues determined by the Board. The 2 winners from the Semi Final Round will qualify to play in the Final Round.
Maybe someone else can find where the predetermined obligation to play these matches at Hampden is within the Rules?
Much has been stated and slated about the irrational decision to play both SPFL Cup semi-finals on the same day at the same venue, here's another: Hearts fans will have to travel to the west end of the ground, even although they are travelling, in the main, from the east. I cannot see in the Rules any statement of preferred ends for respective supports. Maybe the Police advise on this, in the same way we are informed, without questions expected, that they made the choice of which semi-final had to take place at noon?
The tournament itself isn't too attractive to me, with teams reaching the final these days rarely having to play more than three games to do so. Only Hearts this year have a chance of the Final having played throughout the tournament, but it could be argued they are fortunate to be involved having played an ineligible player in the group stages, without the expected loss of points.
Aulheid 27 September 2018, 11:24
This is a very interesting article on governance in sport, courtesy of the SFSA.
As you read through it you can identify where the SFA/SPFL are failing.
Thanks for posting this link. It made for interesting reading. I noticed a link within that document to "A Code for Sport Governance" Here is the link: http://www.uksport.gov.uk/resources/governance-code
It appears that since April 2017, any sporting organisation seeking funding from public funds, certainly in England, must meet new gold standards of governance. To achieve this, a new Code for Sports Governance has been introduced that sets out the required levels of transparency, accountability and financial integrity necessary to obtain funding from the public purse.&The code covers national sporting governance bodies.
I checked out some of the SFA funders who fund the SFA from the public purse. SportScotland have introduced a similar code, Scottish Governing Body Governance Framework.
Here is the link
: https://sportscotland.org.uk/media/1750/sgbframework14ppweb.pdf
I also looked up some recent Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to Scottish Government regarding SFA funding and it appears that the SFA are awarded multi-million pound grants for specific projects which are paid direct to the SFA. I have sent an FOI to Scottish Government asking whether it requires the SFA to adhere to the governance framework arrangements as a prerequisite for grant funding, whether compliance is monitored and who does the monitoring.
Similarly, I sent an FOI request to SportScotland to establish which national governance bodies are covered by the SGB Governance Framework, whether they are monitored and who does the monitoring.
As I had a look through the SFA strategic plan this morning, "Scotland United: A 2020 Vision" I came across the declared values of the SFA:
The link is here: https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/3168/scotland-united-ii.pdf
TRUSTED
We are open, honest and trusted to do the right thing, in a manner that reflects the highest standards of integrity.
POSITIVE
We are dynamic, enthusiastic and proactive in delivering the highest standards of performance.
PROFESSIONAL
We act in a business-like, responsive and correct manner
RESPECTFUL
We involve, engage and listen, treating everyone in a considerate and dignified manner.
UNIFIED
We work as a team, behaving in an equitable and inclusive manner.
PASSIONATE
We are excited and enthused by all that we do.
AMBITIOUS
We are driven and committed to excel in all aspects of quality and service.
<
p style=”margin-left:0cm; margin-right:0cm”>Maybe some compliance monitoring would be helpful.
Absolutely unbelievable and utter irresponsible for the authorities. It's good to know that they can make a shambles of things and no one can accuse them of doing it to suit an agenda – this time is just pure ineptitude. I understand the reasons why the games have to be played at Hampden and shown on TV, but surely the previous week or following week could be used for one of the games! This way the Aberdeen fans have to make their way a 4 hour journey for a 12pm kick off, and Hearts fans could end up heading back to Edinburgh at 10:30pm! As I say with how easy games get shifted all the time for TV reasons or European football, surely the obvious choice was to switch the Celtic league and Celtic cup games around? No team or fans are disadvantaged, the TV stations get their live cup games and Hampden gets it's semi finals but we don't have FOUR sets of fans congregating in the same area on the same day. What makes it worse is when you look at the four sets of fans – the two teams Rangers look upon as the biggest enemies are Celtic and Aberdeen. The two teams Celtic look upon as the biggest enemies are Rangers and Hearts! And all four are in the part of the city on the same day. It's the perfect storm for trouble.
Should the League Cup not now be consigned to the dustbin of history or at the least, changed to an U-21/U-23 only or pre-season tournament similar to the Glasgow Cup.
I am struggling to see it's relevance nowadays other than forming part of the treble – it's a drain on most supporters already stretched finances and is more of a hinderance to teams playing in European competitions.
We are crying out for the structure of football to be sized appropriately for the country we are in (i.e. we don’t need a national stadium for starters – more wasted resources). We dont need the League Cup now and just because its a link to the past there is no reason to keep it going just because we always have.
Joint statement just in
Sorry scratch that.
I've been away for a few weeks (no papers & no internet through choice!) & attempting to catch up…
Can someone enlighten me on this SFA Notice of Complaint? Thanks in anticipation!
'Notice of Complaint | Steve Turnbull, Referee
Thursday 20 September 2018
Alleged Party in Breach: Steve Turnbull, Referee
Date: 1 September 2018
Disciplinary Rules allegedly breached: Disciplinary Rule 72 – No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or micro-blogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this Rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a match official for Misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.
Principal hearing date: Thursday 11 October 2018
Response date: 26 September 2018'
Craig Levein hasn't missed the target in his press conference this morning. I only wish that Hearts official statement was written with the same feeling and message.
This is taken from an STV report.
Lets suppose for a minute that it buckets down before, during or after the A v R game.
What the hell is the state of the pitch going to be like for the evening game
HS
First time I can remember all clubs being fully united in the decision. Nice to see Rangers and Celtic teaming up with a joint statement in support for the smaller teams – again not something that is seen often.
easyJambo 28th September 2018 at 11:30
"see if you looked ahead and you envisaged that celtic might not be in the champions league and there's a chance they might be in the europa league that would be a huge red flag immediately.
Levein hasn't even thought this one through either beyond Celtic and Rangers.
The other League Cup quarter final was Aberdeen v Hibs, who, at the start of the season equally had a chance of playing in the Europa group stages along side T'Rangers and Celtic.
Therefore it could have been that three out of the four semi-finalist may have been playing in Europe on a Thursday night.
Indeed the possibilities ranged from everyone out of Europe at the first hurdle to all four Scottish Euro representatives being in the group stages along with the potential for the same top teams also making the latter stages of the league cup.
Surely Semi's on the 3/4 Nov in the gap between Europa match days 3 & 4 would have been far more sensible to avoid fixture clashes.
At the very least a decent Plan B should have been on the shelf.
Total bunch of F%*&wits!!!!
Darkbeforedawn 28th September 2018 at 13:10
First time I can remember all clubs being fully united in the decision. Nice to see Rangers and Celtic teaming up with a joint statement in support for the smaller teams – again not something that is seen often.
==============================
DBD – I think you'll find that Wottpi immediately told you to "scratch" that post. i.e. it was made up.
This is what Gerrard actually said:
Andy NewportVerified account @AndyNewportPA
Steven Gerrard admits he is pleased with Rangers' arrangements for Betfred Cup semi-finals: “It's a bit of a unique situation and unique circumstances because ourselves and Celtic are still going in Europe. But in terms of having an opinion on it, or adding to anything that's been said, then no I've got nothing to say apart from we're really looking forward to our game, we're first on the pitch which is a bonus and we're in for a very tough test against a good Aberdeen team. It's a really exciting game for us and our fans. We can't wait for it. We haven't got that problem [of playing second], we're first on the pitch so there's nothing to be said. That's a question you'd have to ask Craig Levein and Brendan Rodgers. I'm delighted we're first there.”
As you will see, the arrangements suit Rangers and Gerrard is content that any issues arising are matters for the other semi finalists.
Easyjambo@13.30
Very disappointing from Steven Gerrard and I would assume this reflects the view of his clubs’ board. Not one jot given as to the difficulties faced by the travelling support of his team’s opponents or what state the pitch will be in at the end of the first semi-final. If I was paranoid I might doubt the neutrality of the organisers. I think someone posted on here about the Werder Bremen fans who held a silent protest for the first 20 minutes of a home game because the start time of the match had been changed yet again to suit the TV company. Perhaps that’s a better option than loitering about Hampden.
easyJambo 28th September 2018 at 13:39
Darkbeforedawn 28th September 2018 at 13:10
Not sure how to take this.
Happy that some people got my little joke but sad that others may actually believe that such a statement would actually be forthcoming from Ibrox and Celtic Park.
(Maybe I’ll ask Trainor for a job??)
Given Gerrard's comments it clearly business as usual and 'I'm alright Jack' for the Govan club.
Celtic still have a chance to comment but I'm not holding my breath for anything that rocks the boat or holds the authorities to account.
The only comments I've seen attributed to Celtic (Brendan Rodgers) is in an Edinburgh Evening News article, where it seems that his biggest fear is that any issues with the pitch would favour Hearts (hoofball tactics?). But, as we have come to expect, he says we have to accept it.
Sorry Brendan, we don't have to accept it. If all the chairmen really had the interests of their fans at heart, then they would tell Neil Doncaster that the proposed scheduling is unacceptable and ask that he goes back to BT, the Hampden authorities and the Police to come up with a more fan friendly solution.
During my many, many years of experiencing the incompetence, cowardice and venality of Scotland’s football governors I thought I had seen it all. This Semi-final debacle is a new low from that bunch of cretins.
Whilst I would never consider Craig Levein my best pal, without much effort he listed a dozen reasons why this is a rotten idea. Others on here have easily filled any blanks he left and yet this was the best/only idea they could come up with?
ScotRail
A number of customers have been in touch with us about the Scottish League Cup semi-final between Aberdeen and Rangers at Hampden Park on Sunday, 28 October.
The @SPFL is well aware from previous events of the logistical challenges an early kick-off presents, particularly for Sunday morning services from Aberdeen.
Our events team wasn’t consulted by the @SPFL in advance of its announcement, which is disappointing. The SPFL has only now been in touch after the announcement.
We’ll assess all options to see what, if anything, is possible in relation to additional services. But the logistical challenges this presents shouldn’t be underestimated.
…………….
Could be some help for travelling Aberdeen fans
easyJambo
28th September 2018 at 16:17
Sorry Brendan, we don't have to accept it.
"… so we have to accept that it’s been organised in what they feel is the best way.”
=====================================
I assume that by "we" he is referring to Celtic, or perhaps his own staff.
I don't see him saying anything in that quote to suggest that he is talking for anyone else.
In fact given the context and earlier parts such as "we can only control how we prepare for the game now.” I think its pretty clear that is who he is speaking for.
Homunculus 28th September 2018 at 17:15
I assume that by "we" he is referring to Celtic, or perhaps his own staff.
I don't see him saying anything in that quote to suggest that he is talking for anyone else.
In fact given the context and earlier parts such as "we can only control how we prepare for the game now.” I think its pretty clear that is who he is speaking for.
========================
It doesn't matter whether or not he is speaking for Celtic, all four semi finalists, or some other subset. It's the meek acceptance of what the SPFL has decided that is the issue. He acknowledges that there had been "fierce criticism" of the SPFL following the decision, but chose to accept the situation rather than add his voice to the criticism.
Will anyone in the SMSM ask Doncaster what the "Contractual obligations " are?
It can't be both ties to be played on the same day, because the original schedule would have had one game on Saturday and one on Sunday.
It can't be both ties have to be played at Hampden, as there have been frequent instances of semi finals being played away from the "national stadium".
My cynical view is that the arrangements suit BT. They may not have the logistical capability to cover two games at different venues on the same day. It would also be cheaper for them to set up for two semis on successive days at the same venue, and even more so with the proposed same day and same venue arrangement.
I note that even Kevin Bridges fans are upset as he is appearing at the SECC on the same night, putting further pressure on the transport infrastructure.
Having said all that, I do think that if the schedule was changed Hearts fans would not attend in huge numbers anyway. Previous semi final appearances would suggest a maximum of 15k Hearts fans attending, even on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon. However that figure could now be under 10k. I don't think BT would be overly concerned, as they will be more interested in their viewing figures than tickets sold.
How about this scenario for Super Sunday ?
The first tie is a feisty affair and is decided by a controversial refereeing decision . The losing team’s supporters take great umbridge to this and decide to invade the Pitch , turf torn up , goalposts broken , electronic advertising boards destroyed.
The Stadium facilities do not escape either and seating and toilets are damaged too .
Would the second tie go ahead ? And if it didn’t would the losing team’s supporters view that as some kind of victory?
It doesn't matter whether or not he is speaking for Celtic, all four semi finalists, or some other subset.
=========================================
Of course it matters, or are you suggesting he is not entitled to express his opinion if it doesn't co-incide with yours.
Does that go for everyone else as well.
This will blow over. TRFC and Celtic are ok with it.
What interests me is the SPFL stating that they consulted with the semi finalists. From the reactions it's pretty clear that they may have consulted with 4 but didn't listen to 2.
Did Neil Doncaster not sign the old SPL contract?
This fiasco has arisen because the SPFL has a legacy commitment from the SPL to play later stage League Cup ties involving RFC 2012 and Celtic FC at Hampden. A simple get out of this was to claim force majeure in respect of the liquidation of one the parties central to that commitment. The SPFL surely couldn't be held accountable for a member club going bust?
One thing to come out of the LC fiasco is that Police Scotland can no longer object to CFC and TRFC playing in Glasgow on the same night , can they ?
Cluster One
28th September 2018 at 16:54
'ScotRail
A number of customers have been in touch with us about the Scottish League Cup semi-final between Aberdeen and Rangers at Hampden Park on Sunday, 28 October.
The @SPFL is well aware from previous events of the logistical challenges an early kick-off presents, particularly for Sunday morning services from Aberdeen.
Our events team wasn’t consulted by the @SPFL in advance of its announcement, which is disappointing. The SPFL has only now been in touch after the announcement.
We’ll assess all options to see what, if anything, is possible in relation to additional services. But the logistical challenges this presents shouldn’t be underestimated.
…………….
Could be some help for travelling Aberdeen fans'
It's not as simple as Scotrail deciding to run some extra trains from Aberdeen, Edinburgh & on the Glasgow Suburban lines .
They're constrained by law to the number of extra services they're permitted to run. They need to find staff on overtime to drive the trains & operate crowd control at stations. They need Nitwit Rail's permission (an organisation that makes the SFA/SPFL deathstar seem almost capable) to run them. That's not taking account of planned engineering & signalling work which often causes service alterations on a Sunday, unit/train maintenance plans, etc.etc.