And the new Compliance Officer is ....

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, StuGers said:

As a matter of transparency, Rangers (and any right-minded club) should be asking to know what the recruitment process was. Transparency is key.

This is by far the most important point raised in this topic. The answer lies at the heart of the entire problem.

[Scott7 5,144]

You don’t need to be a lawyer to do the film clip part of the business. It needs a panel of one retired referee and two former players, one a defender and one a forward. They should not have played and the ref should not have whistled in Scotland. I like pete’s idea of videos of the whole match. That would be a day’s work to watch the footage and highlight any incident and a half day’s work to decide if a complaint should be made. Over to the lawyer chap after that. In fact it still doesn’t need a lawyer. Just a guy who is competent with rules and paperwork. Was Jim Farry a lawyer?

[Rick Roberts 246]

2 hours ago, StuGers said:

As a matter of transparency, Rangers (and any right-minded club) should be asking to know what the recruitment process was. Transparency is key.

iirc the whole fan fair at the start was transparency/trust, helping the refs etc 

 

Its strange that no one in the media ever discusses it (well not that i've heard).  I've seen a few laughing at the process but it ends there. There's no analysis of the role, its performance, inconsistencies or bias, none. The role clearly draws a decent wage and other SFA resources but adds nothing obvious to the game. 

 

 

[buster. 4,808]

2 minutes ago, Rick Roberts said:

iirc the whole fan fair at the start was transparency/trust, helping the refs etc 

 

Its strange that no one in the media ever discusses it (well not that i've heard).  I've seen a few laughing at the process but it ends there. There's no analysis of the role, its performance, inconsistencies or bias, none. The role clearly draws a decent wage and other SFA resources but adds nothing obvious to the game. 

 

 

Whoever has the TV contract should get to televise the process and fill an hour of their programming during the week.

[Rick Roberts 246]

5 minutes ago, buster. said:

Whoever has the TV contract should get to televise the process and fill an hour of their programming during the week.

Surprised BBCscotland havent thought of that. A (green and) whitewash of the position.

[buster. 4,808]

Just now, Rick Roberts said:

Surprised BBCscotland havent thought of that. A (green and) whitewash of the position.

Those on the panel would probably protest but the declared transpareny should trump that.

 

If the prcess is robust, no need to hide it.

[Uilleam 5,409]

1 hour ago, Scott7 said:

You don’t need to be a lawyer to do the film clip part of the business. It needs a panel of one retired referee and two former players, one a defender and one a forward. They should not have played and the ref should not have whistled in Scotland. I like pete’s idea of videos of the whole match. That would be a day’s work to watch the footage and highlight any incident and a half day’s work to decide if a complaint should be made. Over to the lawyer chap after that. In fact it still doesn’t need a lawyer. Just a guy who is competent with rules and paperwork. Was Jim Farry a lawyer?

If memory serves, Jim Farry was a gardener (and not a Trades' House Gardener, although he may have been, but a proper horticulturalist).

Don't know his Ludge No. 

 

Now, who would deal with Strict Liability, should it ever come in, or be forced upon the Clubs?