The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench


Cluster One That exchange between Sutton and Broadfoot is a very …

Comment on The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench by Auldheid.

Cluster One
That exchange between Sutton and Broadfoot is a very interesting one in terms of the dangerous waters that any sport sails into when you get lawyers involved.
It’s the old unforeseen consequences thing. The independent panel approach is/was the right approach to disciplinary matters but there has to be a balance struck imo between what is fair to the player involved and what is fair to the game in terms of other players and referees.
I speak from some amusing and enlightening experience in the late 70s as a member of an amateur league Disciplinary Panel when  after adjudicating on one memorable  melee at Glasgow Green, when “testimony” was heard on either side of the main League Meeting and sentences dished out after each,  that whilst justice had been served the right sentences had not necessarily been handed out in the right order to the right culprits.
However the main driving factor at those meetings was protection of the game rather than fairness to the individuals involved, many of whom could hold a half pun of butter in their mouths for a day without any loss to melt.
By the game I meant as I said the referees and other players. The first were a great group of guys, some of whom had top level experience (including Jimmy Callaghan) and turned out in all sorts of circumstances to make sure there was a game on a Saturday morning  and other players who just turned up to play in a football and not boxing match.
Thus even if we felt there were some circumstances that might lessen a sentence, if a player admitted raising his hands or threatening in any way, even if in retaliation, there was a punishment to be delivered. 
In the Tiernan case there is no question a hand was lifted and even if  it could have been proved  it was only to remove fluff from his opponent’s navel (with said fluff presented as  evidence) the question for the amatuer committee would be what impact does a not proven judgement have on referees and players in future matches?
This is where lawyers don’t have a responsibility. Theirs is only to their client and not the game. That is where an independent panel need to take responsibility, to step back from the narrow confines of the case and consider the message their decision sends out especially when incident caught clearly on camera.
If I were a referee or player who did not like taking a blow I’d be raising more than an eyebrow and asking to what extent independent panel guidance covered them.
With regard to DB’s defense that SFA not involved, I think their processes should be under continual review and this case, not the offense,  but the process  itself, should be under review to keep unforeseen consequences in check.

Auldheid Also Commented

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
Cluster One
The last evidence of the SFA’s approach to self improvement was their 20/20 Vision. Check via Google.
I recognise a bit of the process behind arriving at the Vision and from that, based on my experience, what is needed to take that Vision forward, but taking the one on being trusted to govern as an example there is little evidence that a vision delivery mechanism has been installed.
Taking Res12 as an example there is a prima facie case that the licensing  process did not work in 2011 and in most independent organisations that of itself would result in a review but the SFA are not as independent to act because of the self protection nature of their members looking after themselves more than the game.
There is a lot more to it than “loaded” independent panels.

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
Cluster One
Just because we know they are out to get us does not mean everyone is. ?
However in terms of improving the process why not expand panel beyond Scottish shores? Perhaps they have but a sprinkling of non Scottish neutrals from other UK FAs might help.
That is the kind  of thing a continual review of the process might bring about.

The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
I mentioned Southampton previously in respect of football authority’s attitude elsewhere to using the holding company argument to get around football rules. 
Here is an explanation of the circumstances. 
The form of the wheeze might change but the underlying principle is the same, don’t dump debt and expect no football sanction to follow.
RFC differed in that there was no club operating as a single economic entity left to sanction.
What happened thereafter was the natural consequences of that situation.

Recent Comments by Auldheid

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
The allegations on CQN that Bobby Madden has a gambling problem surely require his  removal from the the firing line until the allegators are proved wrong.
No snap decisions, just a leisurely swim until there is no question as to his motivations. 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Dons/Hibees/Jambos and any other club wanting a UEFA spot.
Flogging players who have put TRFC near top of league is an admission those players unaffordable.
The solution is to make a licence for TRFC conditional on a realistic sustainable business plan. SFA are not doing their licencing job. Never have in fact.
So what questions are your club Directors asking the SFA?
Why not get them to ask UEFA if they are happy with the way SFA process licence applications from Ibrox. Seems UEFA not happy.
Proper club licencing can level the playing field a bit but it also protects all clubs from charlatans selling jam tomorrow.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo 21.41

Matthew Lindsay: Time for Dave King to depart Rangers – but who could take over at the Ibrox club?

Rangers need to be run by individuals whose integrity is beyond doubt.
Do such individuals steeped in blue exist?

As rare as a dodo nesting on an iceberg in Carlisle Bay, Barbados.
” No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Albert Einstein

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
I got my electronic copy of Not The View delivered yesterday.
Browsing through I thought I recognised The Christmas Tale offering and was pleased to read it as I had forgotten it was a tale I told at Christmas in 2012 (on CQN I think).
I think it worth repeating as a reminder of why SFM exists – because we love football and we love Scottish football and we aren’t done yet.
See me?
See me?
Ah jist luv fitbaw.
Its funny cos I was never that interested until about age eleven when a good pal, who was destined never to see his 21st birthday after a car crash in Rome encouraged me to try it. John was there to become a priest but got fast tracked by the Big Man who knows a good guy when he sees wan.
John encouraged me to give it a go in Suffolk St.  We played “croassies in” with the metal pull down blinds that formed the gates to the interior of the Barras as goals. Plastic baws, Fridos then Wembleys, arrived about then and many a red hot poker made the game a bogey in a failed attempt at repairing a burst baw.
(I blame the whelk shells; they were aw ower the place from the Oyster Bar in the Gallowgate (where I was entrapped in the cellar two weekends in a row cleaning whelks and mussels) and the ravenous appetite of the Glasgow punter for shellfish.
I played fitbaw morning, noon and night and saw Glasgow Green pitches UPGRADED from black ash/clinker to red blaze. We thought we were Wullie Fernie playing on that stuff and there was a case for playing with 10 baws as teams were filled with tanner baw players (goalies were just last man standing) for whom the object of the game was to beat everybody else in the opposition before scoring or it wisnae a goal.
I remember wan night  at the Glasgow Green waiting to play for St Alphonsus v Our Lady of Fatima  when I saw Tony Green, who was a Mungo boy and went on to play for Newcastle and Scotland before injury ended his career too early, waiting, sannies under his arm, to get a game with any team who were a man short. I think the OLOF manager mugged wan of his boys as Tony appeared for them and turned a virtuoso performance against us to give OLOF a 3-2 victory.
I started work and went to London for a year to work in the old Post Office Savings Bank. In my first week Jock (a Jock) approached and asked if I played. He never mentioned the sport, he didnae hiv tae, we wur already communicating at the spiritual level only fitbaw lovers can reach (the kind of thing that electrifies CP on CL nights.)
I get directions fur a game oan the Saturday at Acton Town and turn up, new Puma boots, paid by my transfer grant, under my arm (nae sannies fur me) On entering the park ahm puzzled, there wiz GRASS everywhere, nae clinker or red blaze in sight.  “Must be roon the back of the dressing rooms “ I remember thinking.
Anyhoo I gets changed runs roon the back to see — MAIR grass as far as the eye can see. So I troop back tae the dressing rooms to get directions to the ash pitches. When I explain what ah wiz used to playin oan they aw jist looked at me like my village wiz searching fur their idiot.
Well I get sorted out and line up. The baw, I remember, wiz a size 5 orange wan, but no wan o they bricks wi laces. The first pass to me wiz high and ah chests the ball doon and whirls roon afore I get studded from the back as wiz the custom oan the narrow pitches of Glasgow Green. To ma amazement the nearest opponent to me is about 4 yards away. As I look into his eyes I smile and turn to Jock at the sidelines and shout.
“Yer gonnae need anither baw” as I meander off in pursuit of the only goal that counted for a tanner baw man. I think I managed 7 before netting and I’ll take that. It wiz oan unfamiliar grass after all.
 Postscript “Aye very guid Auldheid” yer thinking (if you have stayed with me so far.)
“Nice reminiscing and it is Christmas Eve, so thanks fur the memories. “
But there’s mer tae this tale fur
See me?
See me?
I jist luv fitbaw.
Its ma game, its  OOR game and when I see the mess those responsible for looking after its welfare have made of it ah want to do something.
I hope ahm not alone.
Dec 2012

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
That Dave King is allowed any influence in Scottiish football is a dereliction of the duty of the SFA to protect our game from criminality.

Dave King should be called to account by the other clubs via the SFA to provide evidence he can do what he has promised, which is bank roll TRFC.

At the very least the clubs should be preparing for another insolvency event at Ibrox and deciding the conditions they will set for TRFC to continue taking part in Scottish football on the same basis as every other club, who act with the utmost good faith to fellow members.

The clubs via the SFA have the powers under Club Licensing to do so, powers that the SFA Comp Off can only conclude the SFA have failed to utilise. Powers that UEFA must have recognised by now as a result of Res12 letter of May 2016 and UEFA Licence submission this year, are not being used fully by the SFA.  

It was self preservation that underpinned the 5 Way Agreement . The dangers of that agreement – destroying integrity, undermining trust, ignoring deceit – become more and more manifest and should alert other clubs to the necessity to exercise their collective responsibility to each other and so to our game that they govern via the SFA on our behalf, using Club Licensing powers.

When a particular course of action designed to preserve self is not working it is human nature to try another course.

Not renewing STs come April/May unless positive trust restoring actions are taken by our clubs collectively, is one way of changing minds about what is self preserving.

About the author