Herald - Lord Glennie - Reasons for judgement published

[Zappa 0]

Sorry Zappa but the bit in bold is nonsense. Two things :

 

1. Go and read what O' Neill says. He doesnt "recommend" anything at all - he simply says that the SFA will need to now consider the more harsh punishments. Which they will, along with no further punishment at all.

 

2. O' Neill is not part of the decision-making process with regards to what the punishment will be. Given that Lord Glennie clearly stated that the SFA must punish what is within their guidelines i.e. specified punishments then even the inept SFA will be able to see what is available to them without the oversight of their QC. The appeal tribunal will not include O'Neill.

 

To suggest that O' Neill is now effectively orchestrating what punishment will be handed down to is, IMO, wholly inaccurate.

 

Craig, the SFA said after the Court of Session hearing that they would be consulting their legal advisors and I think it's quite obvious that O'Neill will be one of the people they consult. His comments along with my instinct tell me that O'Neill will not have advised them to push for a lighter punishment or no punishment at all.

 

Three points from me:

 

1. The SFA and their Judicial Panels (including legal eagles) have been made to look very foolish.

2. The SFA will be pissed off.

3. The SFA's legal advisors/appointed QCs and Judges will be pissed off.

 

Now we wait to see what happens next.....