Comment on One, er, Two Rules to Rule Them All by Jimmy Bones.

    JJ at 11:41 

    A bit negative ?  I see that Section 11.4 is headed Determination of Sanction.  BBC is pushing for 2 games, I'm hoping for more.

    Recent Comments by Jimmy Bones

    Accountability via Transparency.
    JJ at 15:55

    On your first part, it was my understanding that the CO raises an issue which is assessed by 3 anonymous ex-referees who must unanimously agree her issue before a Notice of Complaint can be raised.  The CO has gained that unanimity and has raised the Notice.  I believe the club has contested – presumably so that Kent can play tonight !

    The JPP Section 13 seems to distinguish between "Fast Track Proceedings raised by the Compliance Officer" (13.2 to 13.8) and  "Fast Track Proceedings raised by or on behalf of a Player (“Claims”)"  (13.9 to 13.13); so your 13.13.6 refers to the latter. 

    The table at 13.16 gives a good summary of the timeline/differences.

    Who'd be a lawyer ??

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    I would imagine the beleaguered Compliance Officer at the SFA will be delighted that Ian Maxwell has issued this statement which I assume is in response to the SMSM criticism of her role.


    I suppose the Scottish Referees Preservation Society will be quite tickled too.  Notwithstanding the above, I will be interested to see how much, if any, of this statement sees the light of day tomorrow in our beloved smsm.


    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    I read somewhere that the extra game ban for More or Less was 'cos it was his 3rd or 4th red card of the season ?

    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    nawlite 18:16 on 12th 


    We’re Gonny Need Another Baw.
    Re : Compliance Officer – naegreetin at 17:13

    "I notice Chris Sutton sounding off on twitter re the latest judgements made by the CO – I must admit I was astonished McGinn of St Mirren got off with what looked to me like a forearm smash on the DUFC player last weekend – if it had happened in the street an assault charge would have been looming."

    I don't disagree but the CO can only act if (a) the referee has not dealt with the incident and (b) the panel of 3 x ex-referees agree unanimously that it is a red card.  I believe the protocol & therefore the CO, is careful not to "re-referee" games in case it upsets FIFA.  As mentioned above, if the CO did look at this, it would be great if the SFA could indicate no citing because …., but perhaps there is a good reason why they cannot do that ?