Jump to content

Compliance Officer / Justice for Meekings


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 411
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've been a Celtic supporter for almost 60 years and was at Sunday's Game and of course I was disappointed that we got beat and it does hurt to get so close to a Treble and not get it. But that feelin

An interesting point I saw made on P&B, in that the Compliance Officer is there to pick up incidents that the refereeing team has not dealt with at the time. By the accounts I have read, the ref s

So John Collins states as a matter of fact that ICT would have lost being behind and down to ten men.   Will someone please send him a DVD of last season's League Cup semi. We are quite capable of w

Posted Images

I think most football fans will agree that this was a waste of time and money, and it did take a bit of shine of one of the best results, if not the best result in our history. Josh has been through the ringer, and would probably not have had to go through this without those Celts with a chip on their shoulder and the conspiracy theorists, such as John Collins. Celtics lack of respect has brought the game into disrepute, and the SFA jumped when told to by Celtic and those "best fans in the world" cough cough ( always easy to support a team that wins things )

 

Celtic and their glorious fans have proved in the last few days that they are indeed far from that quote. Wonder what they expected from the SFA in reply to their letter. Dear Celtic, we write to confirm that the officials at the semi final were all hand picked blue noses, as we at the SFA could not stand that you had the chance of winning a treble. Down at the Lodge a few weeks back we all agreed that the best way to stick it right up Celtic was to have the ref upset your glorious legions of conspiracy believing fans that they was robbed. We prefer that Celtic Football Club have more conspiracy theories than trophies, so here's another one for you.

 

Wonder if the condemnation from varying officials from the game influenced their decision, or was it ICT who defended most successfully?

 

All we hope now is Josh enjoys playing in the final, and we enjoy supporting him to the hilt. 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news !!!! Thankfully the three panelists had a brain !!!

We can all now get back on track and look forward to the best

day out in ICT s history with no Celtic involvement .Delighted

for Josh and Well Done to all involved in getting justice for him .

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant news and justice served. Delighted for the boy. Its a real shame this has overshadowed the best result, imo, in the clubs history.

I've lost a lot of respect for Celtic and what little I had left for the SFA. If anything good comes of this, it'll be P45s for those clowns that continually make a hash of the running of the game in this country.

Let's get back to celebrating the deserved victory and enjoy the run in to the end of an amazing season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news !!!! Thankfully the three panelists had a brain !!!

We can all now get back on track and look forward to the best

day out in ICT s history with no Celtic involvement .Delighted

for Josh and Well Done to all involved in getting justice for him .

Don't know how true it is but one of the local journalists on Twitter naming Adams Snr as a panel member. Thanks to the panel for their common sense anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news !!!! Thankfully the three panelists had a brain !!!

We can all now get back on track and look forward to the best

day out in ICT s history with no Celtic involvement .Delighted

for Josh and Well Done to all involved in getting justice for him .

Don't know how true it is but one of the local journalists on Twitter naming Adams Snr as a panel member. Thanks to the panel for their common sense anyway.

He was on Radio Scotland just now and was speaking in favour of Josh

So you could be right .Maybe we owe him one

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news !!!! Thankfully the three panelists had a brain !!!

We can all now get back on track and look forward to the best

day out in ICT s history with no Celtic involvement .Delighted

for Josh and Well Done to all involved in getting justice for him .

Don't know how true it is but one of the local journalists on Twitter naming Adams Snr as a panel member. Thanks to the panel for their common sense anyway.

He was on Radio Scotland just now and was speaking in favour of Josh

So you could be right .Maybe we owe him one

Think it was his dad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cue a Celtic backlash claiming this is proof of institutional anti-Celtic sentiment at SFA. It won't end here - the SFA put themselves in a no win situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously we don't know why the panel reached their decision to dismiss the case. I've listened to the Sportsound debate with various theories as to why, but to me it is quite simple. The charge referred to deliberately handling the ball , there is no way that intent could be proved one way or the other, so the only possible outcome was , case dismissed.

Justice prevails......... eventually!

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great news.

 

But I note that the outcome was described as the case having been dismissed whereas when Ciftci's appeal was successful the outcome was not proven.  Does this mean that the club's legal team argued successfully that the Notice of Complaint was not valid and therefore it was not actually put to a panel?  Either way, in line with the culture of openness that the SFA claim they operate in, I guess we will never know why the case was brought in the first case or why it was subsequently dismissed. 

 

I also note that Barry Robson was unsuccessful in his appeal.  I am really quite surprised at that but at least it means he won't be playing against us on Saturday

Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest BBC report seems to suggest the case was dismissed because the incident had been seen by the match officials after all.

The article states "In his report, referee Steven McLean had explained he had sought the advice of Alan Muir - the official behind the goal - and was told by him that he thought the ball had struck the defender's head".

This being the case, should the CO have even been involved? Officials saw the "offence" but got it wrong. I thought the CO could only cite for things missed by the match officials?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy