BenLynch29
Well-known member
As a primer: James’ blog post today.
My own 2¢ on this is that it is long overdue and part of any sensible reform in the game, in Scotland and elsewhere.
The objective, in my opinion, should be to take disciplinary decisions that last beyond the 90 minute match in question and have them decided in a transparent, open, and fair process where all participants understand the rules and procedure used to arrive at a result. The rationale being that suspensions, particularly ones imposed for multiple matches, are major decisions with significant impacts not only on the two clubs participating in the match, but also other clubs in the competition (be it the league or cup). The Association needs to get these decisions right, or at least as right as they can as often as they can, and that can only happen if the process is utilizing all available information and there is consistency in the decision making process — none of which is possible if it falls to dozens of matchday officials to impose a sanction via red card without the benefit of multiple viewing angles, slow motion, or multiple viewings.
So what does an ideal process look like? Well, I think it involves several pieces.
My own 2¢ on this is that it is long overdue and part of any sensible reform in the game, in Scotland and elsewhere.
The objective, in my opinion, should be to take disciplinary decisions that last beyond the 90 minute match in question and have them decided in a transparent, open, and fair process where all participants understand the rules and procedure used to arrive at a result. The rationale being that suspensions, particularly ones imposed for multiple matches, are major decisions with significant impacts not only on the two clubs participating in the match, but also other clubs in the competition (be it the league or cup). The Association needs to get these decisions right, or at least as right as they can as often as they can, and that can only happen if the process is utilizing all available information and there is consistency in the decision making process — none of which is possible if it falls to dozens of matchday officials to impose a sanction via red card without the benefit of multiple viewing angles, slow motion, or multiple viewings.
So what does an ideal process look like? Well, I think it involves several pieces.
- A dedicated staff at the SFA or SPFL office to review ALL matches. The staff are to highlight any potential violation - regardless of any action or inaction by the matchday official - and log it.
- Once in the log, the incident can be broken down and analyzed relative to the wording of the relevent rule as well as the standard applied from past precedent. In other words, officials can look at these incidents and point by point compare the new incident to prior incidents that are similar and also compare actions against written criteria that warrant additional discipline.
- If the league/association feels discipline may be warranted, an invitation is sent to the offender to explain himself and offer any mitigating evidence. These meetings can be done over the phone/Skype or in person. If the league does not feel like any sanction should be imposed, the process continues although the meeting with the offender may be skipped as no defense is necessary.
- After the hearing has been held, the committee reaches a verdict and publicly publishes the decision along with the evidence it used to reach the verdict. Additionally, the verdict is also logged to be used as additional percent for future similar incidents.
- The people who are part of this process should be publicly known and those with conflict of interest must be removed on a case by case basis. If it was me, I would suggest an office outside of Scotland (London? Liverpool? Manchester?) staffed by former players or referees with no historical ties to the Scottish game or any of its clubs.
- Also, it would be highly beneficial if the league put out videos showing borderline cases of what does and does not constitute a violation with a detailed explanation. Doing this beforehand adds transparency to the process and can be used as for reference when dealing with similar incidents in the future.
