Jump to content

Notice of Complaint against Levein


Matthew Le Tissier

Recommended Posts

We have to fight this to the end its discriminating to charge Levein for the exact same comments made by Lennon 

 

If we accept this our games finished 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Beast Boy

    13

  • Mikey1874

    11

  • wavydavy

    10

  • sadj

    10

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Fozzyonthefence
1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Saying ref was 12th man is saying he is biased. 

 

So guilt is pretty certain.

 

Change needs someone to challenge though. And standard of refereeing needs radical change. Just depends if Hearts and Levein want to do that.

 

Yep, he called the ref abysmal and like playing against 12 men, then changed it to 13 men when the interviewer pointed out Morelos goal was offside.  Definitely criticising the officials which is against the rules but you could argue he was just saying Madden had a bad game rather than any deliberate bias.  Same as Lennon.

But iirc Gerard’s comments were worse and implied something more sinister.

 

So I think a club statement to make sure the incompetence / corruption is all over the media but let’s be honest, an appeal would bea  total waste of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply put this is selective punishment and therefore unenforceable.  However that won’t stop those ***** in that shitehole Glasgow.  Petrie will be creaming himself at the though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

 

Yep, he called the ref abysmal and like playing against 12 men, then changed it to 13 men when the interviewer pointed out Morelos goal was offside.  Definitely criticising the officials which is against the rules but you could argue he was just saying Madden had a bad game rather than any deliberate bias.  Same as Lennon.

But iirc Gerard’s comments were worse and implied something more sinister.

 

So I think a club statement to make sure the incompetence / corruption is all over the media but let’s be honest, an appeal would bea  total waste of time.

 

Agree Gerrard's were the worst of all of them. How he said it as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

 

While I agree CL and the club shouldn’t take this lying down and should make some sort of statement about the lack of consistency and in particular how Lennon and Gerrard didn’t get charged, I’m not sure there is any point appealing this.  He is guilty as charged at the end of the day and I can’t see whataboutery being a successful tactic for an appeal.  

Victimisation should be a successful tactic for appeal though , because that , clearly , is what this charge amounts to . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fozzyonthefence
2 minutes ago, ramrod said:

Victimisation should be a successful tactic for appeal though , because that , clearly , is what this charge amounts to . 

 

No it isn’t.  The speeding charge example earlier probably explained it better than I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

There's been at least 3 bizarre decisions this season 

 

1. Downgrading the Morelos red card when kicked the Aberdeen player.

 

2. Not charging Steven Gerrard for his comments about referee after that game.

 

3. Not charging Neil Lennon for his comments after the Celtic game. Though was that because these weren't videoed? 

Clearly states in their laws that even if not caught in camera etc if they are made aware of the comments they will be dealt with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh
35 minutes ago, BarneyBattles said:

Ding ding. Popcorn at the ready. 

 

Got it a feeling we’ll go all in on this. 

 

Could certainly turn into a Barney or even a Battle! :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Captain Sausage said:

Spoke to my lawyer wife who says a lack of charge for Lennon is irrelevant for Levein’s defence. 

 

As she put it, just because someone else was speeding, doesn’t mean you don’t have to pay if you get caught speeding too. 

 

Hard to argue with his guilt, in spite of me agreeing completely with him. Would happily chip in for whatever fine he gets. 

 

Also expect CL to flag Lennons comments and demand an explanation as to why no charge for the goblin. 

The difference would be if someone was caught speeding, doing the same speed, in the same road, under the same circumstances by the same officer 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

 

No it isn’t.  The speeding charge example earlier probably explained it better than I did.

Is it not a case though that based on breaking the law if made aware of the speeding by all three (with evidence) and only charging one then there is a selective process and therefore you enforce all three or none? 

 

Or as Bozi says above...

Edited by sadj
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain Sausage
1 minute ago, sadj said:

Is it not a case though that based on breaking the law if made aware of the speeding by all three (with evidence) and only charging one then there is a selective process amd therefore you enforce all three or none? 

 

3 minutes ago, Bozi said:

The difference would be if someone was caught speeding, doing the same speed, in the same road, under the same circumstances by the same officer 

 

Irrespective of the punishment for anyone else, if I’m caught speeding I’d expect points on my license and a fine. 

 

The fact that they haven’t elected to punish someone else doesn’t negate the fact that I broke the rules and am therefore eligible for punishment. 

 

As above, I would expect Levein to come out swinging and make the SFA answer for not punishing Lennon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fozzyonthefence
3 minutes ago, sadj said:

Is it not a case though that based on breaking the law if made aware of the speeding by all three (with evidence) and only charging one then there is a selective process and therefore you enforce all three or none? 

 

Or as Bozi says above...

 

Questions should certainly be asked if Gerrard and Lennon’s comments were raised with the Compliance Officer (or is she responsible for this personally?) and if not, why not since everyone else heard them.  And if she was aware why were no charges brought?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

heartgarfunkel

Karl Weathers would be all over this if it was an episode of season 2 Fargo on the telly.  Unfortunately for us the SFA is even more bonkers and twisted than a Cohen brothers dark comedy inspired creation. 

 

Unfortunately for those ***** we’ve got Craig Levein and Craig Levein has us.

 

Let’s take it all the way. I’m in if there’s a fighting fund.  Let’s ****ing blow these ***** out of the water.

Edited by heartgarfunkel
Shhhpellingk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sadj said:

Is it not a case though that based on breaking the law if made aware of the speeding by all three (with evidence) and only charging one then there is a selective process and therefore you enforce all three or none? 

 

Or as Bozi says above...

 

11 minutes ago, Bozi said:

The difference would be if someone was caught speeding, doing the same speed, in the same road, under the same circumstances by the same officer 

 

:spoton:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sadj said:

Is it not a case though that based on breaking the law if made aware of the speeding by all three (with evidence) and only charging one then there is a selective process and therefore you enforce all three or none? 

 

Or as Bozi says above...

Ergo victimising one party over another . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Deevers said:

I think they might have bitten off more than they chew with Craig.

I agree 100% mate.

He took them on before and won and I am confident he will do so again.

We are no pushovers and hopefully will expose the corupt SFA for all to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

 

While I agree CL and the club shouldn’t take this lying down and should make some sort of statement about the lack of consistency and in particular how Lennon and Gerrard didn’t get charged, I’m not sure there is any point appealing this.  He is guilty as charged at the end of the day and I can’t see whataboutery being a successful tactic for an appeal.  

guilt seems to be irrelevant to the sfa, look at the charges brought against us and hibs for the confrontation. By the letter of the rules we were guilty but it was thrown out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has a charge to answer there can be no doubt about that at all... but surely there has to be some consistency of the actions of the compliance officer. It is clear to see that he is being made an example of for making these comments. I honestly cannot see how he can argue any case against the charge but I do think he is entitled to some sort of explanation as to why he has been chosen to be the manager who takes the rap now when much the same has been said before without the compliance officer taking any action. In short he can be outraged that no action has been taken against previous managers making comments about reffing performances but he cannot argue he is guilty of making comments which are contrary to the rules in place.

edit

BTW I really did think this was a certainty to happen ... took longer than I thought... this is the result of a complaint to the compliance officer from the SFA asking why he has not taken action he has of course said but but I never done either of the other two and the SFA have said F that get the C charged pronto!

Edited by jock _turd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

guilt seems to be irrelevant to the sfa, look at the charges brought against us and hibs for the confrontation. By the letter of the rules we were guilty but it was thrown out.

And the only reason they were thrown out is that exactly the same will happen in the not too distant future in a game involving the Tims and the Orcs... they do not really want to set a precedent for this ... could it be it happens too frequently in any case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alwaysthereinspirit

He needs to be backed by Budge on this and not talked out off it by her.

If we're going to take it dry again then we deserve all the $#!t they throw at us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Son Of Anarchy

Take it all the way Craig. Show how corrupt and biased the gfa are. Hopefully it all comes out, the refs take the huff and go on strike and we can get unbiased European replacements ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Son Of Anarchy said:

Take it all the way Craig. Show how corrupt and biased the gfa are. Hopefully it all comes out, the refs take the huff and go on strike and we can get unbiased European replacements ?

 

It has already been said but to "take it all the way" what is his defense? Just because someone else has broken the law but not been charged is not a defense really is it ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tcjambo said:

What Hearts need to do is add Lennon into the charge in their response and call him as the first witness

 

 

Neil Lennon might be happy to do that. 

 

John Hughes was backing Craig Levein on radio earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kimosavi said:

We have to fight this to the end its discriminating to charge Levein for the exact same comments made by Lennon 

 

If we accept this our games finished 

Scottish football has been finished for years! 

Thank you SFA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Son Of Anarchy
11 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

It has already been said but to "take it all the way" what is his defense? Just because someone else has broken the law but not been charged is not a defense really is it ? 

Just keep refusing any punishment. Defence should be consistency or lack of. Cite corruption. Get uefa involved. No idea how he can do it tbh, I'm a hearts fan not a lawyer but we should all back him 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, tcjambo said:

What Hearts need to do is add Lennon into the charge in their response and call him as the first witness

 

Take the appeal tp European Sport not Scottish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot

Gonna go against the grain here.. 

 

I think CL has allot going on as do Hearts atm. 

 

Craig, could really do without this extra "stress", he's not long recovered and things like this cannot help. 

 

He should be doing as little as possible, no getting more wound up.

 

The guy shouldn't even be on the touchline, never mind shite like this. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
12 minutes ago, tcjambo said:

What Hearts need to do is add Lennon into the charge in their response and call him as the first witness

 

 

Lennon might actually do that. 

 

Would upset a few tho, hibs n hearts getting too cosy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Captain Canada
5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

I can see a repeat of this on the cards. He shouldn't have to pay a fine - the whole system is flawed where referees don't have to explain decisions while teams are losing points off the back of blatantly sub-standard officiating.

 

Personally, I think it's a distraction CL and the club could well do without but he's not known for just lying down and taking his punishment. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, WeeChuck'sHeed said:

Gonna go against the grain here.. 

 

I think CL has allot going on as do Hearts atm. 

 

Craig, could really do without this extra "stress", he's not long recovered and things like this cannot help. 

 

He should be doing as little as possible, no getting more wound up.

 

The guy shouldn't even be on the touchline, never mind shite like this. 

 

 

 

 

If this helps Hearts get every decision going for the rest of the season then respectfully accepting the outcome makes sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Son Of Anarchy said:

Just keep refusing any punishment. Defence should be consistency or lack of. Cite corruption. Get uefa involved. No idea how he can do it tbh, I'm a hearts fan not a lawyer but we should all back him 100%

 

Not saying I don't back CL he has not done anything the other two did not... but how is that a defense to thew charge... they were not charged. All that can come out of any appeal is that,as we already know, the compliance officer is not impartial in any way... or his impartiality is being compromised by the SFA officers who for what ever reason have CL and possible Hearts in their sites. But to refues punishment would in my opinion be wrong because it is plain to see that he has broken the rules... now if on the back of this the other two are cited...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Son Of Anarchy
4 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

Not saying I don't back CL he has not done anything the other two did not... but how is that a defense to thew charge... they were not charged. All that can come out of any appeal is that,as we already know, the compliance officer is not impartial in any way... or his impartiality is being compromised by the SFA officers who for what ever reason have CL and possible Hearts in their sites. But to refues punishment would in my opinion be wrong because it is plain to see that he has broken the rules... now if on the back of this the other two are cited...

Craig may have broken their rules but are rules worth sticking too if not adhered to or enforced unilaterally? I get your position, mine is refuse the ban, then the fine, explain why, see how far it gets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
15 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

If this helps Hearts get every decision going for the rest of the season then respectfully accepting the outcome makes sense. 

 

Just don't want his heart to explode because of the stress. 

 

Most folk won't come back to work for 3-6 months, he's prowling the touchline and now taking on the SFA. 

 

His doctor must be going rage! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Son Of Anarchy said:

Craig may have broken their rules but are rules worth sticking too if not adhered to or enforced unilaterally? I get your position, mine is refuse the ban, then the fine, explain why, see how far it gets

If they are laws and are ignored when some breach them not when others do or are made with just cause then you could reasonably say they are in definition in fact only guidelines therefore there is no case to answer. Strict adherence would mean all parties breaking the rules treated equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Glib and Shameless Crier said:

Winning is almost irrelevant. It’s about shining a light on how unfair the system is.

Agree with that , still a twat and not learned though ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big Craig should just walk in with a video of all the shite decisions throw it on the table with a bag filled with prices of silver, turn round moon them and walk out!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Son Of Anarchy
2 minutes ago, sadj said:

If they are laws and are ignored when some breach them not when others do or are made with just cause then you could reasonably say they are in definition in fact only guidelines therefore there is no case to answer. Strict adherence would mean all parties breaking the rules treated equally

Surely they are exactly that, guidelines so therefore unenforceable unless unilaterally adhered too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WheatfieldWarrior

You couldn't make this up.

 

The inconsistency is the problem - there is no consistency in the refereeing and the governing body themselves being inconsistent in their approach to silencing the critics is insane.

 

Its not Levein making them look stupid they are making themselves look stupid by getting these decisions wrong - the referee doing his best hasn't been good enough for twenty years.

 

We can put a man on the moon, but the SFA can't tell if Morelos is standing in an offside prior to a goal.

 

It's not that they can't make the right decision, they just don't want to and that is the real problem.

 

I Imagine whatever the decision is it will be suspended as they are trying to shut him up, but I think the time has come to push for change and get VAR or similar in.  There can be no hiding place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jock _turd said:

 

It has already been said but to "take it all the way" what is his defense? Just because someone else has broken the law but not been charged is not a defense really is it ? 

No one disagrees that he has broken rules, but we need to kick up an absolute stink about the lack of consistency 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Make no mistake, this was pre meditated. Contrived almost. 

 

Maybe a little to do with taking the heat off his under performing players. Definitely a lot to do with highlighting the inconsistencies, incompetence and downright bias that's blighted our game for more than a century.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...