Shanks Posted February 21, 2020 Author Share Posted February 21, 2020 14 minutes ago, Kiwidoug said: The more I think about this, the more I think it has to be deliberate and it has to be some form of corruption. It simply can't be an error or poor judgement. You couldn't ask for clearer evidence that the referee made an error. Why would they want to penalise a player and a club in the biscuit cup? It makes no rational sense and really requires an independent investigation. This is why it annoys me as well. There is no rational explanation and I can't think of any reason why this decision would be made? Sums Scottish football up really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 17 hours ago, Longshanks said: This is why it annoys me as well. There is no rational explanation and I can't think of any reason why this decision would be made? Sums Scottish football up really. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnthomas Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 17 hours ago, Longshanks said: This is why it annoys me as well. There is no rational explanation and I can't think of any reason why this decision would be made? Sums Scottish football up really. If our media had any balls they would make a programme about this featuring the most ridiculous decisions . I know it's not going to happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionDJambo Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 It would take someone of courage and honest principles, within the SFA, to stand up and say that this isn't right. Since James Keatings has played for Hibernian, who's chairman at the time was Rod Petrie, now the SFA president, there is an obvious candidate to do the courageous thing. What are the chances? Slim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
true-jambo Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 3 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said: It would take someone of courage and honest principles, within the SFA, to stand up and say that this isn't right. Since James Keatings has played for Hibernian, who's chairman at the time was Rod Petrie, now the SFA president, there is an obvious candidate to do the courageous thing. What are the chances? Slim? Nil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Scottish FA Statement: James Keatings Saturday 22 February 2020 The Scottish FA’s Chief Executive, Ian Maxwell, has received notification that the tribunal convened to hear the Claim for Wrongful Caution raised by Inverness Caledonian Thistle on behalf of James Keatings failed to implement its duties as per the Judicial Panel Protocol. Specifically, one of the panel members has advised that, despite raising no concerns throughout the process, they did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence. While the Fast Track Claims process is by definition an appeal, and therefore not open to further consideration, none the less the Chief Executive and Presidential team, Rod Petrie and Mike Mulraney, are unanimous that the tribunal outcome cannot be considered competent in light of the disclosure from the panel member and that the input from that panel member must be withdrawn. With that in mind, and only in extremis based on the information provided by the panel member, the determination cannot be considered valid. Therefore, the Judicial Panel Secretary has been instructed to convene a new tribunal and a fresh date will be set in due course. The initial outcome is rendered invalid by the acknowledgement of a panel member of their failure to dispose of their duties in respect of section 13.13.4 of the Judicial Panel Protocol and, in particular, the following paragraph: The Determination of the Claim shall be made by the Fast Track Tribunal by examining and deliberating upon: (ii) all of the evidence and submissions delivered by the Claimant in support of the Notice of Claim. The Scottish FA upholds the independence of the Judicial Panel Protocol but cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent, based on the admitted failure of a panel member to adhere to the process as outlined. The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 What a cop out though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 So all we need to do is to get enough retweets of future crimes against non-OF clubs and SFA will fold? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, kila said: So all we need to do is to get enough retweets of future crimes against non-OF clubs and SFA will fold? If only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarmerTweedy Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 16 minutes ago, ...a bit disco said: Scottish FA Statement: James Keatings Saturday 22 February 2020 The Scottish FA’s Chief Executive, Ian Maxwell, has received notification that the tribunal convened to hear the Claim for Wrongful Caution raised by Inverness Caledonian Thistle on behalf of James Keatings failed to implement its duties as per the Judicial Panel Protocol. Specifically, one of the panel members has advised that, despite raising no concerns throughout the process, they did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence. While the Fast Track Claims process is by definition an appeal, and therefore not open to further consideration, none the less the Chief Executive and Presidential team, Rod Petrie and Mike Mulraney, are unanimous that the tribunal outcome cannot be considered competent in light of the disclosure from the panel member and that the input from that panel member must be withdrawn. With that in mind, and only in extremis based on the information provided by the panel member, the determination cannot be considered valid. Therefore, the Judicial Panel Secretary has been instructed to convene a new tribunal and a fresh date will be set in due course. The initial outcome is rendered invalid by the acknowledgement of a panel member of their failure to dispose of their duties in respect of section 13.13.4 of the Judicial Panel Protocol and, in particular, the following paragraph: The Determination of the Claim shall be made by the Fast Track Tribunal by examining and deliberating upon: (ii) all of the evidence and submissions delivered by the Claimant in support of the Notice of Claim. The Scottish FA upholds the independence of the Judicial Panel Protocol but cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent, based on the admitted failure of a panel member to adhere to the process as outlined. The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals. It is, at the same time, both quite stunning and not remotely surprising, that one of the panel has effectively admitted that they didn't even bother to watch the replays!!!! I'm going to guess that they get paid a fee for being on a panel, and simply got the case details sent to them, waited a bit, then sent back their 'verdict' and pocketed the fee! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John mcCartney Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 name and shame the incompetant bastrads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joondalupjambo Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Knowing this mob they will reconvene on a date after the Challenge Cup final so Keatings will miss the game anyway😃😃😃 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 There were 3 people on the panel, so I fail to see how 1 member apparently not reviewing all the evidence led to that outcome... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankfurter Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, stotty said: There were 3 people on the panel, so I fail to see how 1 member apparently not reviewing all the evidence led to that outcome... Does it require all three to agree to overturn a decision? Or maybe the other two were split. Edited February 22, 2020 by Frankfurter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 minute ago, stotty said: There were 3 people on the panel, so I fail to see how 1 member apparently not reviewing all the evidence led to that outcome... I think for a decision to be overturned the panel have to vote unanimously Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, Frankfurter said: Does it require all three to agree to overturn a decision? Just now, kila said: I think for a decision to be overturned the panel have to vote unanimously Didn't know that - still reeks of a cover up to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, stotty said: Didn't know that - still reeks of a cover up to me. It is only because the case went viral that they have intervened. The setup and the competence of those enlisted is all under SFA control. Bunch of useless arseholes taking a wage while the governance of our game rots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankfurter Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, stotty said: Didn't know that - still reeks of a cover up to me. The panels are made up of one representative each from Celtic and Rangers, plus a token neutral. Here obviously the Rangers rep saw their Colts team involved, so didn't need any further evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 minute ago, kila said: It is only because the case went viral that they have intervened. The setup and the competence of those enlisted is all under SFA control. Bunch of useless arseholes taking a wage while the governance of our game rots. That's my take on it too - their ludicrous decision has attracted too much unwanted attention and they've had to backtrack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, Frankfurter said: The panels are made up of one representative each from Celtic and Rangers, plus a token neutral. Here obviously the Rangers rep saw their Colts team involved, so didn't need any further evidence. Sadly, that's probably not far from the truth 😕 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky_26 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, stotty said: That's my take on it too - their ludicrous decision has attracted too much unwanted attention and they've had to backtrack. yep when gary lineker tweets about it they know they needed to do something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, milky_26 said: yep when gary lineker tweets about it they know they needed to do something Trial by Match of the Day trumps Trial by Sportscene The SFA really are unfit for purpose Edited February 22, 2020 by Toxteth O'Grady Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusk_Till_Dawn Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just overturn it you ****ing roasters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusk_Till_Dawn Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 They’re basically saying the panel ignored the evidence. Corrupt ***** Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruickie Was King Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Not so much as a foul, more an assault!! Disgraceful that this decision was not overturned! How would we be feeling if this happened to a Jambo!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusk_Till_Dawn Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 minute ago, Cruickie Was King said: Not so much as a foul, more an assault!! Disgraceful that this decision was not overturned! How would we be feeling if this happened to a Jambo!! Something about Leigh Griffiths or something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher75 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 "The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals." Given this is all anonymous, how can we know this is true? It would be more believable if they added another paragraph: "The SFA are recruiting a new independently-minded member to join the panel. Please apply, quoting your Ibrox season ticket reference and/or Lodge membership number." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoda Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Making it up as they go along. Embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 On 20/02/2020 at 09:47, Phage said: Well shan on Keats. Got clattered in that video. Cheats the lot of them. Alfredo would have got decision turned over Alfredo would have had no decision to contest. He would have scored both the resultant 2 penalties awarded Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimbo99 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 43 minutes ago, kila said: It is only because the case went viral that they have intervened. The setup and the competence of those enlisted is all under SFA control. Bunch of useless arseholes taking a wage while the governance of our game rots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
highlandjambo3 Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 So.......smoke and mirrors aplenty. I copied and pasted that statement into google translate and this is what came out: “yes we know we fc***d it up but you know what, we don’t really care, we will convene again and change our minds and, we’re closing ranks to protect our own so we won’t disclose who messed this up the first time” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadj Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 10 minutes ago, gnasher75 said: "The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals." Given this is all anonymous, how can we know this is true? It would be more believable if they added another paragraph: "The SFA are recruiting a new independently-minded member to join the panel. Please apply, quoting your Ibrox season ticket reference and/or Lodge membership number." 😂😂😂😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadj Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, highlandjambo3 said: So.......smoke and mirrors aplenty. I copied and pasted that statement into google translate and this is what came out: “yes we know we fc***d it up but you know what, we don’t really care, we will convene again and change our minds and, we’re closing ranks to protect our own so we won’t disclose who messed this up the first time” Even Google knows 😂😏 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sooperstar Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, John mcCartney said: name and shame the incompetant bastrads They can't. They made it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankfurter Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 26 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said: They’re basically saying the panel ignored the evidence. Corrupt ***** I wonder how they found out. Phoned him, "Did you even look at it?", "Nah couldnae be arsed." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Be funny if the new panel comes to the same decision. 😍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, ...a bit disco said: Scottish FA Statement: James Keatings Saturday 22 February 2020 The Scottish FA’s Chief Executive, Ian Maxwell, has received notification that the tribunal convened to hear the Claim for Wrongful Caution raised by Inverness Caledonian Thistle on behalf of James Keatings failed to implement its duties as per the Judicial Panel Protocol. Specifically, one of the panel members has advised that, despite raising no concerns throughout the process, they did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence. While the Fast Track Claims process is by definition an appeal, and therefore not open to further consideration, none the less the Chief Executive and Presidential team, Rod Petrie and Mike Mulraney, are unanimous that the tribunal outcome cannot be considered competent in light of the disclosure from the panel member and that the input from that panel member must be withdrawn. With that in mind, and only in extremis based on the information provided by the panel member, the determination cannot be considered valid. Therefore, the Judicial Panel Secretary has been instructed to convene a new tribunal and a fresh date will be set in due course. The initial outcome is rendered invalid by the acknowledgement of a panel member of their failure to dispose of their duties in respect of section 13.13.4 of the Judicial Panel Protocol and, in particular, the following paragraph: The Determination of the Claim shall be made by the Fast Track Tribunal by examining and deliberating upon: (ii) all of the evidence and submissions delivered by the Claimant in support of the Notice of Claim. The Scottish FA upholds the independence of the Judicial Panel Protocol but cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent, based on the admitted failure of a panel member to adhere to the process as outlined. The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals. Banana Republic nonsense. Sounds exactly what it is, a dictatorship realising they pushed the abuse and bullying too far. Medieval monarchy,,,esque! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, Sooperstar said: They can't. They made it up. Exactly, the anonymous patsy guff. 😁😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Change must happen. No need to have such a secret squirrel setup. A rep should be put forward for the panels from each club in the top 4 divisions. Without this outcry we wouldnt be even having the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
...a bit disco Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 7 minutes ago, davemclaren said: Be funny if the new panel comes to the same decision. 😍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, ...a bit disco said: Scottish FA Statement: James Keatings Saturday 22 February 2020 The Scottish FA’s Chief Executive, Ian Maxwell, has received notification that the tribunal convened to hear the Claim for Wrongful Caution raised by Inverness Caledonian Thistle on behalf of James Keatings failed to implement its duties as per the Judicial Panel Protocol. Specifically, one of the panel members has advised that, despite raising no concerns throughout the process, they did not undertake their obligations with respect to the consideration of all the available evidence. While the Fast Track Claims process is by definition an appeal, and therefore not open to further consideration, none the less the Chief Executive and Presidential team, Rod Petrie and Mike Mulraney, are unanimous that the tribunal outcome cannot be considered competent in light of the disclosure from the panel member and that the input from that panel member must be withdrawn. With that in mind, and only in extremis based on the information provided by the panel member, the determination cannot be considered valid. Therefore, the Judicial Panel Secretary has been instructed to convene a new tribunal and a fresh date will be set in due course. The initial outcome is rendered invalid by the acknowledgement of a panel member of their failure to dispose of their duties in respect of section 13.13.4 of the Judicial Panel Protocol and, in particular, the following paragraph: The Determination of the Claim shall be made by the Fast Track Tribunal by examining and deliberating upon: (ii) all of the evidence and submissions delivered by the Claimant in support of the Notice of Claim. The Scottish FA upholds the independence of the Judicial Panel Protocol but cannot in this instance consider the tribunal verdict competent, based on the admitted failure of a panel member to adhere to the process as outlined. The panel member in question has subsequently been withdrawn from the pool of potential panel members for all future tribunals. They can dress it with all the legalise and chuck in a Latin phrase or two all they like - they have still just admitted that their appeals process is flawed, not fit for purpose, opaque and perhaps even corrupt. Someone, who they refuse to identify, made a decision without basis because he couldn't be bothered looking at the evidence... This raises questions about every single panel this person has previously been a member of... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rick witter Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, stotty said: There were 3 people on the panel, so I fail to see how 1 member apparently not reviewing all the evidence led to that outcome... I agree mate. If it was only the one person that never viewed the material surely the two that viewed it should have overturned the decision anyway. They are a bunch of incompetent arseholes and it makes you wonder about every decision that panel has ever made. They could just make an on the spot decision without viewing any video evidence and we would never know. Corrupt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Internet Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) I mean scottish football is literally run like a ****ing bowling club isn't it. Just a bunch of auld pals getting pished. Edited February 22, 2020 by Mauricio Pinilla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, kila said: So my initial thoughts were correct... Did think with a panel of 3 it would only be a majority required. Absolutely beggars belief that at least 2 of the 3 voted it was a dive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stotty Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 minute ago, rick witter said: I agree mate. If it was only the one person that never viewed the material surely the two that viewed it should have overturned the decision anyway. They are a bunch of incompetent arseholes and it makes you wonder about every decision that panel has ever made. They could just make an on the spot decision without viewing any video evidence and we would never know. Corrupt There are plenty people on here who refuse to believe any corruption exists in Scottish football as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 1 minute ago, stotty said: So my initial thoughts were correct... Did think with a panel of 3 it would only be a majority required. Absolutely beggars belief that at least 2 of the 3 voted it was a dive. It is clear that not bothering to view the evidence before submitting a decision is not limited to just one person - 2 people must've done it, but only one has owned up to it...As I wrote above, every past decision by these panels is now questionable. Specifically every panel upon which the 2 who voted to deny Keatings appeal should now be reviewed. .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nelly Terraces Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Bwhahahaha. What an utter shambles! Complete amateur hour moment yet again for the game in the footballing backwater of Scotland! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Reading the Disciplinary Procedures - https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/5604/judicial-panel-protocol-2019-20.pdf 8.6.6 Where three Panel Members preside on a Tribunal, a Decision or Determination of said Tribunal may be made by a majority or unanimous verdict of the Panel Members. 8.6.7 Where one or two Panel Member(s) preside on a Tribunal, a Decision or Determination of said Tribunal must be made by a unanimous verdict of the Panel Member(s). So there exists an appeals panel with one member/vote on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboozy Posted February 22, 2020 Share Posted February 22, 2020 Scottish football, the governing body of , is the joke that everyone laughs at. What a fecking shambles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.