Rangers hit with £6,000 SFA fine over Willie Collum statement

[ian1964 10,450]

Rangers hit with £6,000 SFA fine over Willie Collum statement following Daniel Candeias’ red card at St Mirren

Gers released a statement slamming the official and claimed he had an 'underlying issue' with the club

RANGERS have been hit with a £6,000 SFA fine for their blistering attack on Willie Collum.

Collum came under fire after controversially sending off Daniel Candeias during a 2-0 win at St Mirren.

And Gers released a statement in which they claimed the whistler had an 'underlying issue' with the club.

The SFA responded by throwing the book at the Ibrox club and hit them with FIVE charges.

More to follow.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/3645253/rangers-hit-sfa-fine-willie-collum-daniel-candeias-st-mirren/

[stewarty 1,878]

The interesting element to this is not whether the SFA felt compelled to follow their rules - for we did make statements that breached said rules; but whether there is actually any meaningful change in terms of the SFA's relationship with clubs with regards to the standards of refereeing.  

 

If there is a manager in the Premiership who hasn't complained at some point, I'd be surprised.  But when you have so many game changing moments that officials either plainly get wrong, deliberately or otherwise, the system needs to be be reviewed.

 

I wont hold my breath though.

[ian1964 10,450]

Rangers were furious with Collum for issuing Candeias with a second yellow card for what they deemed "gestures"m made to Anton Ferdinand as his team mates celebrated a late clincher from Alfredo Morelos.

But they were summonsed by the compliance officer for the outburst which appeared on the club’s own website.

The club was fined £5000 for the first charge. It said that clubs should not "(i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character".

A further £1000 fine was handed down for breaking the rule that states all clubs must "at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football".

Charges of "bringing the game into disrepute" and "observing the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship" were not proven.

A fifth charge, of failing to ensure that employees act within the rules, was withdrawn.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-fined-sfa-over-willie-13758437

[ian1964 10,450]

OUTCOME OF SFA HEARING

Charge 1 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 72: Proved. £5000 fine.

Charge 2 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 71: Not Proved.

Charge 3 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 77: Proved. £1000 fine.

Charge 4 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 1: Not Proved.

Charge 5 - Withdrawn.

THE CHARGES IN FULL

Charge 1:

No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or microblogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this Rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a match official for Misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.

Or alternatively:

A club or recognised football body which publishes, distributes, issues, sells or authorises a third party to publish, distribute, issue or sell a match programme or any other publication or audio/visual material of any description in any media now existing or hereinafter invented, including but not limited to the Internet, social networking or micro-blogging sites, shall ensure that any such publications or audio/visual material does not contain any criticism of any match official calculated to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official or to impinge upon his character. There shall be a presumption that any material issued, published, distributed and/or sold in such manner was issued, published, distributed and/ or sold in the name of and/or with the authority of the body bearing to have issued, published, distributed and/or sold the material.

Charge 2:

No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, match official, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.

Charge 3:

A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player, match official or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football. Furthermore such person or body shall not act in any manner which is improper or use any one, or a combination of, violent Conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

Charge 4:

All members shall:

(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and shall comply with: (i) the Articles; (ii) this Protocol; (iii) the Cup Competition Rules; (iv) the Registration Procedures; (v) the International Match Calendar; (vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and (vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, Decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; (c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (d) respect the Laws of the Game; (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.

Charge 5:

Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.

Or alternatively:

Each member shall use its best endeavours to procure that its Team Staff its employees and its Team Scout(s) (other than its officials, Team Officials or players) act in accordance with Rule 1.

Or alternatively:

All Parties must keep confidential any information or documentation relating to Proceedings arising under this Protocol which is not in the public domain (including but not limited to the identities of the Panel Members), save where disclosure is allowed under the Protocol and/or required by law

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/3645253/rangers-willie-collum-fine-daniel-candeias-st-mirren-charges/

[Uilleam 5,497]

What sanction was imposed in Collum for lying in his teeth?

[der Berliner 3,287]

You see, while this is all fine and well, I would like to see the list of charges brought to other clubs, managers & players for similar if not the very same "offences". Perhaps over the last 5 seasons. Just to get a certain "perspective".

 

Good on the Scottish Sun, BTW, to explain it all to the hard of thinking and those who might have missed the story thus far. My cynical self just muttered something like ... it's all about the Rangers.

[stewarty 1,878]

Its interesting that the SFA rules refer to acting in the utmost good faith.

Fair enough, but how does that explain Collum's obvious attempt to explain his errors?  I'm afraid it just doesn't wash.

[compo 6,220]

Has Levein been charged about his comments. 

We might get this clown for the next old firm game .

Edited December 20, 2018 by compo

[DMAA 3,603]

I have no complaint other than inconsistency. Both Levein and Lennon said after recent games the refereeing performancing was such that it was "like playing against 12 men". Does it really get worse than that? That is a direct claim of bias. Saying there is an underlying issue with Collum doesn't, but it does suggest incompetence.

Edited December 20, 2018 by DMAA

[pete 2,499]

Take it to CAS. Accept nothing from this mob.