0
    0

    Comment on Accountability via Transparency. by Jingso.Jimsie.

    Big Pink @ 1026hrs:

     

    Don't forget they've also had the opportunity to bask in the reflected glory of Shelley Kerr's team actually getting to a World Cup. That'll make for a lovely summer "Jolly Boys' Trip" to France for the blazers…

    Jingso.Jimsie Also Commented

    Accountability via Transparency.
    'incredibleadamspark 22nd May 2019 at 19:09

     

    Surely Clarke’s touchline ban would only be applicable to club football/competitions run by the SFA? I think players can represent their countries whilst serving a ban at club level so wouldn’t that be the same for managers/coaches?'

    ####################################

     

    After boring myself half to death scouring the SFA Handbook & JPP, it appears that bans such as Clarke's required to be served in matches sanctioned by the SFA and other national football associations which are co-signatories to some (unspecified, as far as I read) disciplinary agreement.

     

    UEFA & FIFA aren't, of course, national football associations: therefore such bans aren't enforceable/enforced in games sanctioned by those bodies.    


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Lugosi @ 1104hrs:

     

    Clarke was in the stand on Sunday 19.05.19 & presumably that was the first match of his two-match ban. The second should, of course, be the Scotland v. Cyprus game on 08.06.19.

     

    This is ripe for an SFA fudge along the lines that the ban only applies to club matches or some such nonsense…


    Accountability via Transparency.
    Seen over on James Forrest's blog:

     

     https://thecelticblog.com/2019/05/blogs/sfa-and-celtic-shamed-as-the-welsh-fa-shows-what-nimmo-smith-should-have-done/

     

    FAW statement:

     

    https://www.faw.cymru/en/news/statement-bangor-city-football-club/?back=/en/news/&pos=3


    Recent Comments by Jingso.Jimsie

    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    A little bit of speculation on my part:

     

    TRFC will appeal Kent's notice of Complaint today.

     

    Tomorrow, they will represent their defence at a hearing. The word 'provocation' will be used unsparingly. The Judicial Panel, having read all the Level Sinko froth over the last few days, will refer to the JPP Section 11.4 & particularly 11.4.2.2:

     

    11.4.2.2 The existence of provocation and whether the Party acted in retaliation and/or self defence. 

     

    The Notice of Complaint will be rescinded. Level Sinko will get a bonus. TRFC will rejoice Real football fans will shake their heads, both at the injustice of the findings, but also in embarrassment.


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Bogs Dollox 2nd April 2019 at 17:10

     

     

    Jingso.Jimsie2nd April 2019 at 16:46    

     

    All of that is utterly irrelevant to what we were discussing regarding Brown's unprofessional and unecessarily provocative behaviour.

     

    Why take the ball of the spot? '

    ##################################

    I don't know why Brown picked the ball up when the game was effectively stopped. You'd need to ask him that. While you're at it, ask him if it was 'unprofessional' and 'unnecessarily provocative' for him to do so.

     

    However, you clearly stated that Brown picking up the ball prevented the game restarting. I outlined in my reply at 1646hrs that Brown didn't prevent a restart as neither team nor the referee was in position for that event to take place prior to Kent's lash-out under the Laws of the game. You claim that the points I made are irrelevant. I fail to see how they are.

     

    Perhaps it's better if I just leave it there & I'll discuss the matter no further.


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Bogs Dollox 2nd April 2019 at 15:33

     

    In the Kent incident he withholds the ball to prevent the restart of the game…'

    ##################################

     

    The game couldn't have restarted immediately before the Kent incident occurred.

     

    Law 8 states the following:

     

    For every kick-off: • all players, except the player taking the kick-off, must be in their own half of the field of play • the opponents of the team taking the kick-off must be at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball until it is in play • the ball must be stationary on the centre mark • the referee gives a signal • the ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves.

     

    Neither the referee, TRFC players or their opponents were in position for the kick-off. I accept that Brown lifted the ball from the centre-mark, but the ball wasn't 'live'. The referee hadn't blown his whistle. The referee (apparently) wasn't  even looking in the vicinity of the centre-spot or he'd have seen what transpired. Brown clearly doesn't prevent the game restarting at that moment because nobody except Kent was ready for the kick-off. Bain & Brown were (I think) the only two CFC players in their own half.

     

     


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    'Big Pink 1st April 2019 at 11:29

     

    I think Bobby Madden had a fairly good game yesterday. Lots for him to do. He missed what I thought was a clear penalty to Rangers and the now-infamous left hook from Kent, but overall I though he was professional and honest…'

    #########################################

     

    I won’t mention any specific incidents, but I think that Mr. Madden had a 4/10 performance at best yesterday. That's simply not good enough for a FIFA referee in the highest-profile domestic fixture in Scotland.

     

     


    One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All
    https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/gordon-smith-on-that-brighton-miss-sunday-dinner-with-paul-mccartney-and-his-sfa-tenure-1-4898555

     

    Read it & weep (or laugh hysterically; your choice!). Remember, this chump was CEO of the SFA.