Hearts Daft Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 A debate currently taking place on JKB that's interesting for Hearts, Hibs and The Rangers. All the talk of Stevenson and Walker getting retrospective punishment has brought to light a massive flaw in Lunny getting involved in The Championship. Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Lunny isnt the compliance officer any more ETA - #prayforthechampionship3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden til i die Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Has the compliance officer gotten involved in the Championship yet? Other than talk on JKB has he actually done anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowdenConvert Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 A debate currently taking place on JKB that's interesting for Hearts, Hibs and The Rangers. All the talk of Stevenson and Walker getting retrospective punishment has brought to light a massive flaw in Lunny getting involved in The Championship. Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. No one from Cowden or Alloa would be as billy big-time or stupid as Stevenson or Walker so no need to gather evidence against us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paranoid android Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Lunny isnt the compliance officer any more ETA - #prayforthechampionship3 Think Lunny still has a month to go before the next guy takes over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoversMad Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 A debate currently taking place on JKB that's interesting for Hearts, Hibs and The Rangers. All the talk of Stevenson and Walker getting retrospective punishment has brought to light a massive flaw in Lunny getting involved in The Championship. Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paranoid android Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 It's the way of the world - goal line technology was used in The World Cup, but we're not likely to see it in the lower Scottish leagues - games involving Rangers or the Edinburgh derby will always attract more attention than some other games. This particular incident has been blown up unneccesarily. Is it fair and equitable across the board? No, of course it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thundermonkey Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 #1stworldproblems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 It's the way of the world - goal line technology was used in The World Cup, but we're not likely to see it in the lower Scottish leagues - games involving Rangers or the Edinburgh derby will always attract more attention than some other games. This particular incident has been blown up unneccesarily. Is it fair and equitable across the board? No, of course it isn't. There are a number of things that have happened over the last few years that could fall into that category! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 A debate currently taking place on JKB that's interesting for Hearts, Hibs and The Rangers. All the talk of Stevenson and Walker getting retrospective punishment has brought to light a massive flaw in Lunny getting involved in The Championship. Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. This is the silliest argument in history and makes me laugh every time someone puts it forward. It's basically tantamount to saying cctv footage shouldn't be used to prosecute a murderer who was caught committing his crime on it because if someone else had done it three streets along or in a different town there's no camera in the street there. Utter bollocks! If an offence is committed and everyone can see it then the compliance officer should act accordingly. Whether or not the same thing would happen at a Cowdenbeath game is completely irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the optimist Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 totally agree with skyline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWatt Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Vincent Lunny is in the process of handing over to Tony McGlennan over a period of a month. The Compliance Officer can deal with appeals from any Division. These appeals often rely on 'electronic evidence' mostly television coverage but not exclusively for example.... Hibernian once submitted video evidence from a camera placed behind the goal. The footage submitted cleared Gary O’Connor of simulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Think Lunny still has a month to go before the next guy takes over. I stand corrected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRubberFist Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. Don't want your players to stand trial by telly? Then don't have your games on the telly. If your BoD agreed with you they'd hand back the Sky appearance fees and put an end to this scandalous injustice..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 A debate currently taking place on JKB that's interesting for Hearts, Hibs and The Rangers. All the talk of Stevenson and Walker getting retrospective punishment has brought to light a massive flaw in Lunny getting involved in The Championship. Basically, Lunny appears to act on TV footage and media coverage alone. There is no way he watched every single games footage from all the leagues. So how is it fair that he gets involved in The Championship when only thr big three will be broadcast nationwide every single week? Basically, if this incident had occurred in a match between Cowdenbeath and Alloa there would be no involvement whatsoever. Punishing the rest of the championship is basically reliant on one club making a complaint and producing evidence. The big 3 have no such luxury. Hardly a fair system. In theory it can go both ways. Clubs who play in front of lots of cameras are more likely to receive retrospective punishments for things the referee missed but are also more likely to be able to successfully appeal against punishments given in error. The two effects should go at least some way to cancelling each other out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieThomas Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Not too bothered by it, to be honest. Best way not to get caught doing something against the rules is not to do it. That said, it seems fairly ludicrous that with the tv evidence that was in place that not headbutting someone is deemed a far worse crime than deliberately ramming your studs down the back of someone's leg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden til i die Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 Hearts Daft is some boy. SD has wiped the floor with him here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 The Compliance Officer can deal with appeals from any Division. These appeals often rely on 'electronic evidence' mostly television coverage but not exclusively for example.... Hibernian once submitted video evidence from a camera placed behind the goal. The footage submitted cleared Gary O’Connor of simulation. This is more problematic as Hibs would hardly be expected to volunteer evidence that incriminated their player as eagerly as evidence that exonerated him. Clubs who can afford extra cameras of their own can apparently afford better justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 SD's analogy doesn't stand up, imo. In a sporting contest teams are competing directly against one another, and the manner in which the rules are applied has no implications beyond those within the narrow limits of the sport itself. Neither of those apply to a criminal justice system, where criminals aren't competing against one another, but where the the rights have to be balanced against those of third parties (the victims). Me, I'd say the OP has a point, but I can't say I feel very strongly about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted August 19, 2014 Share Posted August 19, 2014 And at the risk of getting into tinfoil hat territory even with commercial TV footage there are issues about how likely the existence of footage from angles that shows refereeing mistakes is to become known. Once the BBC editorial decision making process has been co-opted into a quasi-judicial sporting disciplinary process questions about its partiality and agenda become slightly more serious as they go from reporting the story to instigating it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.