Celtic/SFA Issue

dreamers75

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/32402364

Meekings was served with a Scottish FA notice of complaint after he was retrospectively deemed to have handled Leigh Griffiths' goal-bound header in the semi-final win over Celtic.
Inverness went on to win 3-2 in extra-time and set up a final on 30 May against Championship side Falkirk.

Im sure its covered in the Celtic thread but it highlights a bigger issue.

Celtic lost a match and sent a "letter" to the SFA to review the game, SAF reviewed the game and banned a player from the final. Didnt overturn the result but banned a player from the final.

To me you cant ban him and not overturn the result, your admitting liability.

But how feckin whingey are Celtic to send the letter in the 1st place (unlike them to look for an off the field result after a beating). Its something you would expect from the FAI not from a club of that size.

Feel sorry for the young lad being banned like that.

dreamers75

sugarman wrote: »

Whingey? Its protocol, its in place for a reason, the board to review it are in place for a reason. If a player commits an offense they must be punished. Celtic had every right to send that letter.

Of course they did as do any club in that league that avail of that offer.

Doesnt make it less whingey tho.

Eirebear

I'd love to know if there's any precedent for retrospective handball bans - could open a real can of worms.

The ref made a mistake, get over it - as the Celtic manager himself said
"Sometimes you get something for you, sometimes you get something against you. I don’t think a lot about it."
Obviously, that wasn't last sunday mind you....

BTW - I don't think Celtic themselves can report something to the compliance officer, it needs to be an outside source.
The letter is just Celtic's way of putting a wee bit of pressure on the authorities. "Clarification" indeed.

A Dub in Glasgo

dreamers75 wrote: »

.

But how feckin whingey are Celtic to send the letter in the 1st place (unlike them to look for an off the field result after a beating). Its something you would expect from the FAI not from a club of that size.

Feel sorry for the young lad being banned like that.

Not as big as your whinging in this thread

Meekings is not banned and will play in the final and this is something that would not have happened if the ref and his merry men had done their jobs in the first place

Guy:Incognito

Celtic have far bigger issues to deal with and its the conduct of their fans.

They should be stripped of the league for this:

s8n

?

duffman13

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Celtic have far bigger issues to deal with and its the conduct of their fans.

They should be stripped of the league for this:

Scott Brown's looking trim

Utopia Parkway

dreamers75 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/32402364

Feel sorry for the young lad being banned like that.

He got off lightly to be honest. Should have been red carded and a penalty and it would have cost his team a semi-final. As it is he'll miss the final but at least his team are still there.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

dreamers75 wrote: »

Feel sorry for the young lad being banned like that.

I personally would find it very hard to feel sorry for a player who gets away with very deliberate cheating in a game of football. Any retrospective action taken against clear foul play is a good thing for football. If you know you only need to cod a ref or linesman it may be worth the risk but knowing you can't fool the tv cameras when a game is reviewed may make some players think twice before they cheat against an opponent.

bobbysands81

Pointless writing to the SFA over this issue.

Referees miss calls all the time, 5 sets of eyes missed something that every other set of eyes in the stadium saw, it's over let it go Celtic.

The standard of refereeing in Scitland is very poor, Celtic get more than our fair share of these mistakes, too much in fact.

The_Kew_Tour

The bigger robbery was the day before tbh.

Bloody ref could not get his arse out of the way

Eirebear

Unfortunately Peter Lawwell hasn't infiltrated FIFA yet, and we all know the conspiracy goes all the way to the top.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32416795

Josh Meekings: Inverness player should not be banned, says Fifa
By Chris McLaughlin BBC Sport

Fifa's head of referees has said that the Scottish FA is wrong to suspend Inverness Caledonian Thistle's Josh Meekings for the Scottish Cup final.

The Highlanders have appealed against a retrospective one-game ban following a controversial hand-ball incident during their 3-2 semi-final win over Celtic.

If Thursday's appeal fails, defender Meekings will miss the 30 May final against Championship side Falkirk.

"I think it would be a very, very dangerous precedent," said Jim Boyce.

"Who's to say it was even intentional?

"Every week we have hand-ball situations where referees make a decision. In this particular game, there was a referee, an assistant referee, one of these people behind the goal line and there was a fourth official and none of them made any decision.

"So I can't believe that they're going to suspend a player for a hand ball."
Jim Boyce addresses Fifa

Jim Boyce is Britain's Fifa vice-president and the head of Fifa's refereeing committee

Celtic have written to the SFA asking why referee Steven McLean and his officials did not award a penalty and send Meekings off after he blocked a goal-bound Leigh Griffiths header.

Boyce told BBC Scotland that he understands Celtic's grievance but disciplinary action against the officials in question is a matter for the SFA.

Britain's Fifa vice-president and the head of refereeing committee added that he is in favour of the fourth official being able to consult a monitor should he spot incidents missed by the referee that would affect the result of the game.

The SFA did not wish to make a statement on Boyce's comments.

Since the SFA overhauled their disciplinary procedures in 2011 and employed Vincent Lunny as the first compliance officer to enforce the new protocols, players have been retrospectively punished for violent conduct and serious foul play.

Lunny, who was replaced last year by Tony McGlennan, said the rules also allow for action to be taken over any potential sending off offence, including preventing a goal by handling the ball.

A Dub in Glasgo

Bryce is saying that he does not think Meekings should be punished for the mistakes of the officials - something few can argue against.

I very much doubt Lawwell has had a hand in the reffing fraternity closing ranks around McClean and Co

Hazys

The FAI are asking, "Why can't Celtic be the 3rd team in the Final?"

Jelle1880

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

He got off lightly to be honest. Should have been red carded and a penalty and it would have cost his team a semi-final. As it is he'll miss the final but at least his team are still there.

A lot of people seem very sure that Celtic would have scored that penalty and would definitely have won.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

A lot of people seem very sure that Celtic would have scored that penalty and would definitely have won.

Good chance of scoring the peno and an excellent chance of winning the game. Can you explain why you disagree?

Coillte_Bhoy

Jelle1880 wrote: »

A lot of people seem very sure that Celtic would have scored that penalty and would definitely have won.

is it not a fair assumption that they probably would have scored and if they had they would have been 2-0 against 10 men and more than likely would have won? You can never be certain of course,

Peppa Pig

Eirebear wrote: »

The ref made a mistake, get over it -
The letter is just Celtic's way of putting a wee bit of pressure on the authorities. "Clarification" indeed.

There is a precedent for this in Scotland. It was set in 2011 as the SFA complained to UEFA over a refeering call in the Scotland Czech Republic match.

Ban the Czech cheat: SFA bosses demand UEFA dish out justice for blatant dive which cost Scotland dear
SFA President Campbell Ogilvie has written to UEFA chief Michel Platini to demand a ban for cheating Czech Jan Rezek.

Scots boss Craig Levein hope ref observer Markus Nobs will mark the Dutchman down for his Hampden horror show.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/ban-the-czech-cheat-sfa-bosses-1081096

Celtic have asked for clarification, they are apparently entitled to demand justice, according to the SFA president.

The SFA can't have it both ways.

SantryRed

Peppa Pig wrote: »

There is a precedent for this in Scotland. It was set in 2011 as the SFA complained to UEFA over a refeering call in the Scotland Czech Republic match.


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/ban-the-czech-cheat-sfa-bosses-1081096

Celtic have asked for clarification, they are apparently entitled to demand justice, according to the SFA president.

The SFA can't have it both ways.

It's still absolute bollocks by Celtic and complete sour grapes.

Even more of a joke that the lad has been suspended from the final.

A Dub in Glasgo

SantryRed wrote: »

It's still absolute bollocks by Celtic and complete sour grapes.

Even more of a joke that the lad has been suspended from the final.

What kind of bollocks, grapes and joke would it have been if the ref done his job correctly?

Peppa Pig

SantryRed wrote: »

It's still absolute bollocks by Celtic and complete sour grapes.

But not nonsense when it happens to Shels .....:D

SantryRed wrote:

Absolute ****ing disgraceful by the referee at Inchicore. I hope Shels lodge a complaint against him. ****ing waste of petrol.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83736904&postcount=67

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Good chance of scoring the peno and an excellent chance of winning the game. Can you explain why you disagree?

Because you can't use hypotheticals to claim that Meekings' incident deprived Celtic of a final. You can guess that it would have been game over, but that's all.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Because you can't use hypotheticals to claim that Meekings' incident deprived Celtic of a final. You can guess that it would have been game over, but that's all.

So you do not disagree that Celtic would have likely scored the peno and very likely proceeded to the final?

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

So you do not disagree that Celtic would have likely scored the peno and very likely proceeded to the final?

I'm saying that you can't use it as an argument, it's not really hard to understand. So saying that Celtic were cheated out of a final place is wrong.

Glad to see common sense prevail and Meekings can play.

edit: Not saying you claimed it, but it seemed to be the general mindset of the Celtic fanbase that this decision meant they wouldn't play the final. Which is something they can't know for sure.

A Dub in Glasgo

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I'm saying that you can't use it as an argument, it's not really hard to understand. So saying that Celtic were cheated out of a final place is wrong.

Glad to see common sense prevail and Meekings can play.

edit: Not saying you claimed it, but it seemed to be the general mindset of the Celtic fanbase that this decision meant they wouldn't play the final. Which is something they can't know for sure.

I have been clear all along, Celtic have been denied the excellent opportunity of the final due to incompetence of the officials

A Dub in Glasgo

SantryRed wrote: »

Even more of a joke that the lad has been suspended from the final.

Ahem, you were saying?

CSF

Peppa Pig wrote: »

But not nonsense when it happens to Shels .....:D

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83736904&postcount=67

You're aware this isn't to do with a refereeing decision going against Shels right?

And instead a referee's decision to initially deem a pitch playable, but then call it off 15 minutes from kickoff when everyone had nearly all arrived.

Not really the same thing, how did you even go about finding that post? And when you did make such a witty discovery, did you not think to put it into context?

CSF

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Ahem, you were saying?

He said he was suspended. He was at the time.

A Dub in Glasgo

CSF wrote: »

He said he was suspended. He was at the time.

Wrong - the beeb has it wrong as well. He was offered a 1 match suspension in lieu of a hearing, he declined so it went to a hearing and the outcome was about an hour ago. He was never suspended for the final

Peppa Pig

Interesting quote from the PFA Scotland chief executive.

The referee could see the incident on Sunday - he just didn't see the handball

That's a bizarre statement - he saw it but he didn't. I'd love to see what yer man behind the goal said.

A Dub in Glasgo

and to think there are football folk supporting him saving the ball from going into the goal

CSF

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Wrong - the beeb has it wrong as well. He was offered a 1 match suspension in lieu of a hearing, he declined so it went to a hearing and the outcome was about an hour ago. He was never suspended for the final

How do you know this? Weird that the BBC would print it if wasn't the case. They're hardly the Daily Mail

A Dub in Glasgo

I know this as that is what happened and that is the way the SFA do things - they offer a punishment in lieu of a hearing and the player can take their chance or accept. Meekings took his chance, he was not suspended from the final at any stage this week

Look at post 5 of this thread from 2 days ago

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95178197&postcount=5

monkey9

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I know this as that is what happened and that is the way the SFA do things - they offer a punishment in lieu of a hearing and the player can take their chance or accept. Meekings took his chance, he was not suspended from the final at any stage this week

Look at post 5 of this thread from 2 days ago

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95178197&postcount=5

What's the chance that he's taking, that he'll get a longer ban?

Jelle1880

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

and to think there are football folk supporting him saving the ball from going into the goal

Who is supporting his handling of the ball ?

People are just wanting him to be able to play in what is most likely the game of his life.

Guy:Incognito

Referees make mistakes. Do you get so worked up and demand justice when the ref makes mistakes in celtics favour?


Its not like a ban will in any way affect Celtic anyway, they're not going to benefit from it so it just comes across as bitterness. If it was a league game and Inverness were close at the top with Celtic , then a ban could contribute t them dropping points then maybe.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Who is supporting his handling of the ball ?

People are just wanting him to be able to play in what is most likely the game of his life.

Him being able to play in the final shouldn't be considered when giving him a punishment. He should get the maximum punishment in the rule book for the offence. It was blatant cheating on par with some of worst you'll see on a football field. I can only think of a handful of incidents that were worse.

The player should be punished and all those officials should be demoted immediately. Retarded refereeing should be punished.

I dont agree with Celtic going public on the complaint before getting a response from the SFA. Give them a chance to respond with their usual bull**** before going public and showing them up for what they are instead of getting the deafening silence they are giving everyone now.

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

It was blatant cheating on par with some of worst you'll see on a football field. I can only think of a handful of incidents that were worse.

Oh come on.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

Oh come on.

Its as blatant cheating as you'll get on a football field. Maybe the uproar would be only worse if he got away with using his hand to score a goal...

Alot of people are desensitized and indifferent to cheating in football these days.

dreamers75

He cheated the ref didnt book him, get over it like everyone else (except the FAI) do.

Have Monaco sent in their letter yet?

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

Its as blatant cheating as you'll get on a football field. Maybe the uproar would be only worse if he got away with using his hand to score a goal...

Alot of people are desensitized and indifferent to cheating in football these days.

I don't think anyone here suggests it wasn't a big mistake by the ref - but a "handful of incidents" really?
If the penalty had been given and he'd got booked - we wouldn't be talking about it now.
It was an instinctive reaction, there's no way he had time to think about what he was doing and "cheat" to the level which you suggest.

A Dub in Glasgo

If that was a goalkeeper, we would be talking about how fantastic his reactions were and what a great save it was. It was an outfield player who saved the goal and people are talking about how he should not miss the final completely ignoring the fact that he should not be in the final in the first place had the ref done his job on the day

The questions here should be to the ref, his assistant and his assistants assistant

grumpymunster

What seems odd to me is why did the SFA set the whole thing up in the first place, if I understand it correctly

The SFA set up a committee (or some such ilk) to review mistakes by referees that would have led to a red card.

Such a case presented itself to the SFA committee which was pretty clear cut

The SFA committee decide to do nothing about it

What is the point of the committee?

For me I see little wrong with retrospective look at things, providing it is fair. The citing commission works reasonably well in rugby no reason why it should not in football. Would I feel sorry for the player if he missed the final .... no the rules of a competition are known before you enter, if you break them then you suffer the consequences. He would not be the first player to miss a final by being banned.

PauloMN

Dempsey wrote: »

Its as blatant cheating as you'll get on a football field. Maybe the uproar would be only worse if he got away with using his hand to score a goal...

Alot of people are desensitized and indifferent to cheating in football these days.

Can you imagine the uproar on here if the roles were reversed, if ICT had been denied a place in the final, and that had been VVD or another Celtic player handling the ball to deny a certain goal?

The comments, especially from certain quarters, would be wildly different I suspect.

bobmalooka

I think the core issue has been dodged by the SFA, they offered a retrospective ban and now the debate is centered on the merits of that.

However, it was my understanding that Celtic asked for a clarification of the incident which still hasn't happened.

The referee had a clear view of the incident, the extra official had a clear view of the incident and can be seen immediately speaking into his microphone. The referee took no action.

Given those facts it seems incredible that a referree can conclude that no action was necessary, given that it appears to have been seen by both officials and that they immediately communicated it can't be dismissed as a missed incident or simple mistake either.

Clarification is needed and its perfectly reasonable for Celtic to seek it considering the circumstances.

PauloMN

PauloMN wrote: »

Can you imagine the uproar on here if the roles were reversed, if ICT had been denied a place in the final, and that had been VVD or another Celtic player handling the ball to deny a certain goal?

The comments, especially from certain quarters, would be wildly different I suspect.

People would have been upset about the incident.

But then, if ICT had whined about it in a letter, they too would have received criticism. Refs make crap decisions, move on, give out about the ref, give out about the incident, but forget about getting your revenge in a strongly worded letter.

osarusan

Peppa Pig wrote: »

But not nonsense when it happens to Shels .....:D

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83736904&postcount=67

Joke of a post, for the reasons CSF point out downthread.

SantryRed

Peppa Pig wrote: »

But not nonsense when it happens to Shels .....:D

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83736904&postcount=67

As CSF has pointed out, this is to do with the referee calling a match off 15 minutes before kick off, after deeming the pitch playable at 6:45pm, and there being no rain between 6:45pm and 7:30pm.

Why you'd go look for posts like that too is beyond me?

Try harder.

Peppa Pig

SantryRed wrote: »

As CSF has pointed out, this is to do with the referee calling a match off 15 minutes before kick off, after deeming the pitch playable at 6:45pm, and there being no rain between 6:45pm and 7:30pm.

I never said it was a decision against Shels. I pointed out that your opinion of Celtic complaining about a referee is it's "bollocks", yet you support your own club writing to complain about an incompetent ref.

Anyway, you must have missed the big in the post showing it was tongue in cheek.

Eirebear

bobmalooka wrote: »

I think the core issue has been dodged by the SFA, they offered a retrospective ban and now the debate is centered on the merits of that.

However, it was my understanding that Celtic asked for a clarification of the incident which still hasn't happened.

The referee had a clear view of the incident, the extra official had a clear view of the incident and can be seen immediately speaking into his microphone. The referee took no action.

Given those facts it seems incredible that a referree can conclude that no action was necessary, given that it appears to have been seen by both officials and that they immediately communicated it can't be dismissed as a missed incident or simple mistake either.

Clarification is needed and its perfectly reasonable for Celtic to seek it considering the circumstances.

So you're suggesting something more sinister than an "Honest Mistake"?
Now we're getting to the crux of the issue for Celtic eh? The great conspiracy.

TheCitizen

dreamers75 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/32402364




Im sure its covered in the Celtic thread but it highlights a bigger issue.

That the SFA are a bunch of clownshoes you mean.

dreamers75 wrote: »

Celtic lost a match and sent a "letter" to the SFA to review the game, SAF reviewed the game and banned a player from the final. Didnt overturn the result but banned a player from the final.

To me you cant ban him and not overturn the result, your admitting liability.

The player wasn't banned, the SFA "offered" him a suspension which he declined, ask them what that's about.

dreamers75 wrote: »

But how feckin whingey are Celtic to send the letter in the 1st place

Celtic sent a letter to ask the SFA to ask the officials to explain themselves. They still haven't done that. What's "whingey" about it.

dreamers75 wrote: »

(unlike them to look for an off the field result after a beating).

Is this a reference to Legia Warsaw? Celtic had no say in what happened in that incident. Legia Warsaw fcked up and Celtic were readmitted, some people think Celtic should've declined re-admittance:pac:.

dreamers75 wrote: »

Its something you would expect from the FAI not from a club of that size.

Feel sorry for the young lad being banned like that.

What, asking for an explanation for a ridiculously obvious oversight by the officials? Celtic didn't ask for the result to be overturned, or for a replay or for a player to be banned. What happened was the officials made a massive, obvious mistake and the SFA completely failed to do anything about it after the event, didn't want to do anything about it and had no intention of ever dealing with it properly.

Amazing the number of inaccuracies in such a short op. Try harder.