Madjid Free To Face United

[Bluedell 5,376]

As Dougal said last night, the given red was completely rescinded but they had made the decision to review the initial sliding challenge...

 

To quote Boss:

 

On the kick issue they have 2 choices:

 

The Review Panel have only two choices:

1. to dismiss the claim (therefore the red card stands, with no further right of appeal); or

2. to uphold the claim and expunge the offence (therefore the red card is binned).

 

On the initial sliding challenge they have 2 choices:

 

the Review Panel have only two choices:

1. to refer the matter to the Disciplinary Committee; or

2. to decide there is no case to answer

 

What IS the yellow card for and how can they give one to him when it is apparently outside their remit?

 

I'll ask Boss to comment, as I don't understand.

[boss 0]

What IS the yellow card for and how can they give one to him when it is apparently outside their remit?

 

I'll ask Boss to comment, as I don't understand.

 

Bluedell is right. And I don't understand either.

 

The 'second incident', for which he got sent off, was appealed under Section 6 Paragraph 2 (page 38) of:

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/SFAHandbook/14DiscProced.pdf

 

The 'initial challenge' was referred to the Review Panel under Section 6 Paragraph 3(i) on page 39.

 

Can someone advise me what powers the Review Panel have under either section to issue a yellow card for either incident ?

[Frankie 8,200]

Well, reading the SFA release, it suggests he was given the yellow card for the second incident...

 

All a bit bizarre.

[Norris Cole 0]

Correct decision...

 

All that needs to be said.

[Norris Cole 0]

What IS the yellow card for and how can they give one to him when it is apparently outside their remit?

 

The yellow card would be for dangerous play surely (which, intentional or not, it was). Certainly never a red though and wouldn't have been were it not for Mulgrew's red.

 

Anyway let's move on from this, watch timmy implode with the 'pyoor injustis' of it all, and win this championship.

 

[Bluedell 5,376]

The yellow card would be for dangerous play surely (which, intentional or not, it was). Certainly never a red though and wouldn't have been were it not for Mulgrew's red.

 

But they apparently don't have the power to award a yellow card.

 

But as you say, let's win it.

[Norris Cole 0]

But they apparently don't have the power to award a yellow card.

 

Aye, who'd have thought the SFA would cock anything up?

 

They probably had to be seen to be dishing out some sort of punishment. They are absolutely pathetic.

[craig 5,199]

As Dougal said last night, the given red was completely rescinded but they had made the decision to review the initial sliding challenge...

 

If that were the case does it not become similar to McDonald in that Bougherrs effectively didn't get a card at all. Thereafter it is felt that the review panel should consider it when they next convene with any card at all not applying till next season ?

 

Either way, happy enough the big man will play, he is vital to us.

[Frankie 8,200]

That's what I thought initially Craig but the SFA release suggests they gave the yellow card for the second challenge upon review. The first challenge doesn't seem to have been punished at all.

 

Unless Dougal was wrong in what he said last night as he indicated the overall incident was seen as two different challenges.

[Jon 0]

Pewrsonally I think they make it up to suit themselves to look as less incompetent as possible....