HTG Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 As far as I know any appeal the region views as wasting their time (i.e. frivilous) will result in a lengthened ban. Unless the ref turns round to say 'I was wrong, it wasn't such and such' then it stands, and the ban will be extended. I don't disagree with that as there has to be something in place to stop clubs appealing any red card on the off-chance it's overturned. Unless video evidence is highly supportive (for example, showing mistaken identity) it would appear to be a high risk strategy to appeal. But ... but ... it's a conspiracy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gudderman Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 So I'm a roaster because I've pointed out something that everyone involved in junior football in the east already knew. If your a so called big team the league will do everything to help you but if your a smaller club your treated as dirt and this was proved by the treatment of Ross donnelly. A 5 game ban for a tackle is a joke and this was the leagues way of basically saying the smaller sides needn't waste their time. You would have thought they would be trying to help the regions teams in the Scottish cup not make sure he's suspended for the next round in January. Would never happen to a "big team" player. That's pretty serious allegations you're making there spud. The referee made a Roger Hunt of his report. It wasn't somebody from Lithgae Rose who submitted the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gudderman Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Nothing new Linlithgow winning something on a technicality. They've been using loopholes for as long as I can remember and even won a league title on a technicality. Come oan then. What league title was won on a technicality? So you can remember Lithgae using loopholes? Give us some examples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 As far as I know any appeal the region views as wasting their time (i.e. frivilous) will result in a lengthened ban. Unless the ref turns round to say 'I was wrong, it wasn't such and such' then it stands, and the ban will be extended. I don't disagree with that as there has to be something in place to stop clubs appealing any red card on the off-chance it's overturned. Unless video evidence is highly supportive (for example, showing mistaken identity) it would appear to be a high risk strategy to appeal. I'd also note that 1) video evidence isn't universally available therefore only a limited number of clubs could see a charge quashed by using it 2) there appear to be no calls for it to be used to show a decision going against you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superpollok Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 I'd also note that 1) video evidence isn't universally available therefore only a limited number of clubs could see a charge quashed by using it 2) there appear to be no calls for it to be used to show a decision going against you As far as I know video evidence is not used in any way. I believe Pollok have had some in the past and it wasn't considered. Lok Forever may be able to comment on it more as I would think it's his footage that they have tried to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmontheloknow Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 Yeah point I was making was if a video had clearly shown a travesty of justice there'd be more incentive to appeal wholeheartedly. A mistimed tackle being judged red or yellow to me doesn't fall into that category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 So do the sjfa not accept video? If so its more evidence of being a backwards organisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shuggie123 Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 ^^^^ seething I was at the time. Spud and Shuggie are a pair of roasters. Good comeback. We have been known to lose one on a technicality. I think it's important to understand that you're talking utter shite. Carry on now. No, I'm not. What was the technicality that the rose won the league on Come oan then. What league title was won on a technicality? So you can remember Lithgae using loopholes? Give us some examples. 1987-88. Dalkeith beat Linlithgow leaving them as runners-up. Linlithgow protested about one of the Dalkeith players not being registered correctly and the result, and the title, was awarded to Linlithgow. All correct by the rules, but how many other teams would have had access to the required information to make it possible? Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 1987-88. Dalkeith beat Linlithgow leaving them as runners-up. Linlithgow protested about one of the Dalkeith players not being registered correctly and the result, and the title, was awarded to Linlithgow. All correct by the rules, but how many other teams would have had access to the required information to make it possible? "All correct by the rules." No further questions your honour. How many other teams would have had access? Clubs protest these things regularly through the season. It's hardly unique. And we have lost a league under these rules. But aye, carry on with your "it's no fair" pish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lithgierose Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 I was at the time. Good comeback. No, I'm not. 1987-88. Dalkeith beat Linlithgow leaving them as runners-up. Linlithgow protested about one of the Dalkeith players not being registered correctly and the result, and the title, was awarded to Linlithgow. All correct by the rules, but how many other teams would have had access to the required information to make it possible? Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. so what your saying is we cheated for knowing the rules.should dalkeith not had been better knowing the rules? you say what other teams have access to the required information,well i would hazard a guess that every team should and probably do. what about a few seasons ago,linlithgow playing musselburgh in a final at bathgate.our team was named and the mussy manager,davy mcglyn pointed out our keeper was ineligible to play.hence paddy flannery (striker went in goal.we still won.should we have protested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 so what your saying is we cheated for knowing the rules.should dalkeith not had been better knowing the rules? you say what other teams have access to the required information,well i would hazard a guess that every team should and probably do. what about a few seasons ago,linlithgow playing musselburgh in a final at bathgate.our team was named and the mussy manager,davy mcglyn pointed out our keeper was ineligible to play.hence paddy flannery (striker went in goal.we still won.should we have protested. That's an example of the very opposite of what normally happens. Anyway, we didn't do anything beyond check the paperwork and appeal. Fauldhouse presumably did the same. Ours was clear cut. Theirs wasn't. Hey ho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanburn Dave Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Bottom line here is the SJFA stick rigidly to the rules primarily because that is the easy thing for them to do. If they chose to apply common sense or fairness then it would just encourage loads of appeals and muddy the waters. Having inflexible, rigid laws, rules and constitutions does infuriate people at times but that's life. For once I will not jump on a conspiracy bandwagon.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Rules are rules - without them you have chaos. Most appeals the region will always err on the side of caution and side with the Ref. To many players make frivelous appeals for numrous reasons and often to delay suspensions to allow them to play in a vital game. Their appeals often tend to be no more than "I didn't do it" with no supporting evidence to back up their claim - off course if a Region Official has been at the game or an opponent was to provide supporting evidence then fine. Technicalities are something that are more down to luck (relying on a mistake) and having a good Secretary who is checking for such errors. The orignal poster refers to Linlithgow winning the league on an appeal - correct. Playing Dalkeith needing a win we drew allowing Whitburn to win the league on goal difference - their goalkeeper was particularly outstanding and in conversation it was mentioned he was from New Zealand (?). Our Secretary then found out that the player hadn't been reinstated as per the rules and submitted a protest to the old East Region. The protest was a stonewaller and the only outcome was that the points should be awarded to Linlithgow. At the meeting a lot of clubs wanted to go against the rules and keep the result - however the late Jim Donald who was also the Secretary at Whitburn stood up and backed the Linlithgow protest even at the expense of his own club winning the league. He did so because the appeal was correct and all associated paperwork. For Jim Donald doing what was right was all that mattered and respecting the rules. Despite all this the East Region chose not to listen to facts/rules and voted against the Protest thus meaning Whitburn won the league. Linlithgow appealed the decision to the SJFA who immediately backed the appeal as it was correctly submitted and followed the rules awarded the 2 points to Linlithgow allowing them to win the league. In all my time in Junior Football this was probably the best example of all that is Good and Bad. Clubs voting on personal views against the rules. But a true gentleman of the game Jim Donald putting personal gain aside in favour of the right thing and the overall integrity of Junior Football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.