Latest news with #DisciplinaryRule38
Daily Record
a day ago
- Sport
- Daily Record
SFA clamp Rangers 'misleading comments' as John Brown 'corruption' claim row escalates
The governing body have bit back with a lengthy statement of their own amid the controversy over John Brown's comments The SFA have fired back at Rangers after the Ibrox club raged at being hit with a fine over John Brown's controversial Rangers TV comments. The Ibrox club were sanctioned with a £3,000 after former defender Brown accused Nick Walsh of 'corruption' on Rangers TV. Brown lashed out at the decision by Walsh and his VAR assistants not to award Nicolas Raskin 's 'ghost goal' against Hibs, his comments enough for the SFA to charge Rangers with a breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, which prohibits clubs publishing material that 'indicates bias or incompetence on the part of such match official'. As part of their defence, Ibrox lawyers provided numerous examples of rival commentary teams stepping out of line while broadcasting on live games. And the club, after being notified of the fine, raised concerns in a lengthy statement demanding an explanation. But the SFA haven't backed down, today issuing a statement which reads: "We note Rangers' response to the determination of a recent independent Judicial Panel Tribunal. "In the interests of accuracy, we wish to address some of the misleading comments contained therein: "The sanction imposed by an independent panel was entirely in keeping with the application of the rules. "The most recent and relevant example of a similar breach, the sanction imposed on Richard Foster of Motherwell FC for comments of a similar nature in the media, attests to that. "Furthermore, to address the comments regarding 'rationale behind differing outcomes', we wish to point to the fact that investigations were undertaken in previous cases outlined and that the Compliance Officers of the time saw fit to issue a censure by way of warning letter for potential breaches deemed insufficiently serious to be progressed to a Notice of Complaint. "This system of proportionality has been adopted since the inception of the Judicial Panel Protocol in 2011. Indeed, such discretion was exercised last season when the Compliance Officer wrote to the club to warn of the future conduct of players following matters involving Vaclav Cerny, Dujon Sterling and Mohamed Diomande. "We also note that Rangers intend to contact the association to seek clarity on the Judicial Panel Protocol and its application. The club is, in fact, already represented on the JPP Working Group. "We have requested written reasons from the panel chair involved in the tribunal and in the interests of transparency will publish in due course. "JPP Rule 38 was introduced in response to the referee strike of 2010, when match officials campaigned for greater protection after enduring sustained personal criticism from clubs and fans. Ahead of a new season, we remind clubs of their responsibilities in this regard." You can get all the news you need on our dedicated Rangers and Celtic pages, and sign up to our newsletters to make sure you never miss a beat throughout the season. We're also on WhatsApp where we bring all the latest breaking news and transfer gossip directly to you phone. Join our Rangers community here and our Celtic community here.
Glasgow Times
2 days ago
- Sport
- Glasgow Times
Scottish FA fine Rangers over 'corrupt' commentary outburst
The former Ibrox player was on Rangers TV providing co-commentary when he made the remark. Rangers looked to have scored a second goal when Nico Raskin knocked the ball over the line, however, Rocky Bushiri then cleared with play allowed to continue. Hibs would then race up the park to equalise. VAR did not intervene as no conclusive angle was available to judge whether the ball was definitively over the line. "I would say it is corrupt," said Brown over the call. Commentator Tom Miller cautioned: "Well, I'm not sure we can actually say that', before Brown continued: "Well, I am saying it.' A club statement read: "Rangers FC today has been found by a Scottish FA judicial panel to have been in breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, following a remark made during commentary of the Hibernian v Rangers game in May. The club has been fined £3,000. "We feel it is necessary to highlight the broader concerns this outcome raises and the wider implications this has for clarity and confidence in their regulatory processes. "John Brown spoke emotionally and spontaneously as someone who cares deeply about the club. His words were not scripted, and they were not an official club comment. The ruling however sets a precedent where even spontaneous, corrected remarks made during live coverage of a clear refereeing error are enough to trigger a formal sanction. That is neither proportionate nor consistent, especially when other clubs have made stronger comments on official platforms without consequence. "As part of our defence today, we flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels. These incidents raise legitimate questions about Scottish FA rules and how consistently they are enforced. To our knowledge, none of these cases appear to have resulted in charges against the respective clubs. "The lack of consistency with the Scottish FA's policing of similar incidents leaves more questions than answers. That is why we will be contacting the Scottish FA Chief Executive and President to seek clarity on what policies and processes the Compliance Officer has in place, if any, to ensure a consistent and proportionate approach to enforcement and the equal treatment of member clubs. We shall also be asking the Scottish FA whether they accept that a rule that cannot be applied consistently across all clubs and all platforms risks losing credibility as a fair and enforceable regulation. "Our aim here is to understand the rationale behind the differing outcomes. A lack of consistency, or the perception of it, undermines confidence in the disciplinary process and exposes all member clubs to uncertainty about what is and is not allowed. "There remains no clear guidance on how clubs are expected to manage live broadcast content, though we note the panel acknowledged that the club's internal editorial guidelines may serve as a constructive step for others going forward. "To be clear, we referenced these other examples not to suggest they should have resulted in sanctions, but to highlight the clear inconsistency in how similar incidents have been handled. Club media channels are, by nature, passionate and partisan. Informal, tongue-in-cheek and emotional commentary comes with the territory, especially in live settings. "But, in choosing to pursue this case, the Scottish FA has opened the door to closer scrutiny of how similar situations are handled going forward. If this is now the standard, they will be watched closely to ensure it is applied across the board, consistently, without exception and without favour."
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- Sport
- The Herald Scotland
More questions than answers' - Rangers' response to SFA fine in full
"Rangers FC today has been found by a Scottish FA judicial panel to have been in breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, following a remark made during commentary of the Hibernian v Rangers game in May. The club has been fined £3,000. "We feel it is necessary to highlight the broader concerns this outcome raises and the wider implications this has for clarity and confidence in their regulatory processes. "John Brown spoke emotionally and spontaneously as someone who cares deeply about the club. His words were not scripted, and they were not an official club comment. The ruling however sets a precedent where even spontaneous, corrected remarks made during live coverage of a clear refereeing error are enough to trigger a formal sanction. That is neither proportionate nor consistent, especially when other clubs have made stronger comments on official platforms without consequence. "As part of our defence today, we flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels. These incidents raise legitimate questions about Scottish FA rules and how consistently they are enforced. To our knowledge, none of these cases appear to have resulted in charges against the respective clubs. "The lack of consistency with the Scottish FA's policing of similar incidents leaves more questions than answers. That is why we will be contacting the Scottish FA Chief Executive and President to seek clarity on what policies and processes the Compliance Officer has in place, if any, to ensure a consistent and proportionate approach to enforcement and the equal treatment of member clubs. We shall also be asking the Scottish FA whether they accept that a rule that cannot be applied consistently across all clubs and all platforms risks losing credibility as a fair and enforceable regulation. "Our aim here is to understand the rationale behind the differing outcomes. A lack of consistency, or the perception of it, undermines confidence in the disciplinary process and exposes all member clubs to uncertainty about what is and is not allowed. "There remains no clear guidance on how clubs are expected to manage live broadcast content, though we note the panel acknowledged that the club's internal editorial guidelines may serve as a constructive step for others going forward. "To be clear, we referenced these other examples not to suggest they should have resulted in sanctions, but to highlight the clear inconsistency in how similar incidents have been handled. Club media channels are, by nature, passionate and partisan. Informal, tongue-in-cheek and emotional commentary comes with the territory, especially in live settings. "But, in choosing to pursue this case, the Scottish FA has opened the door to closer scrutiny of how similar situations are handled going forward. If this is now the standard, they will be watched closely to ensure it is applied across the board, consistently, without exception and without favour."
The National
2 days ago
- Sport
- The National
More questions than answers' - Rangers' response to SFA fine in full
"Rangers FC today has been found by a Scottish FA judicial panel to have been in breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, following a remark made during commentary of the Hibernian v Rangers game in May. The club has been fined £3,000. "We feel it is necessary to highlight the broader concerns this outcome raises and the wider implications this has for clarity and confidence in their regulatory processes. "John Brown spoke emotionally and spontaneously as someone who cares deeply about the club. His words were not scripted, and they were not an official club comment. The ruling however sets a precedent where even spontaneous, corrected remarks made during live coverage of a clear refereeing error are enough to trigger a formal sanction. That is neither proportionate nor consistent, especially when other clubs have made stronger comments on official platforms without consequence. "As part of our defence today, we flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels. These incidents raise legitimate questions about Scottish FA rules and how consistently they are enforced. To our knowledge, none of these cases appear to have resulted in charges against the respective clubs. "The lack of consistency with the Scottish FA's policing of similar incidents leaves more questions than answers. That is why we will be contacting the Scottish FA Chief Executive and President to seek clarity on what policies and processes the Compliance Officer has in place, if any, to ensure a consistent and proportionate approach to enforcement and the equal treatment of member clubs. We shall also be asking the Scottish FA whether they accept that a rule that cannot be applied consistently across all clubs and all platforms risks losing credibility as a fair and enforceable regulation. "Our aim here is to understand the rationale behind the differing outcomes. A lack of consistency, or the perception of it, undermines confidence in the disciplinary process and exposes all member clubs to uncertainty about what is and is not allowed. "There remains no clear guidance on how clubs are expected to manage live broadcast content, though we note the panel acknowledged that the club's internal editorial guidelines may serve as a constructive step for others going forward. "To be clear, we referenced these other examples not to suggest they should have resulted in sanctions, but to highlight the clear inconsistency in how similar incidents have been handled. Club media channels are, by nature, passionate and partisan. Informal, tongue-in-cheek and emotional commentary comes with the territory, especially in live settings. "But, in choosing to pursue this case, the Scottish FA has opened the door to closer scrutiny of how similar situations are handled going forward. If this is now the standard, they will be watched closely to ensure it is applied across the board, consistently, without exception and without favour."
Daily Record
2 days ago
- Sport
- Daily Record
Rangers eviscerate SFA over 'lack of consistency' as John Brown commentary claim lands financial penalty
The comments from the Ibrox icon were made on air during the end of season draw with Hibs Raging Rangers chiefs have warned the SFA the decision to fine the club over John Brown 's Easter Road outburst threatens the credibility of the Hampden rulebook. The Ibrox outfit have been fined £3000 for comments made by the Gers legend as he co-commented for the club's official TV channel during last month's Premiership draw with Hibs. The retired defender lashed out at the decision by referee Nick Walsh and his VAR assistants not to award Nico Raskin 's Leith 'ghost goal', branding the incident 'corrupt'. That was enough for the SFA to charge Rangers with a breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, which prohibits clubs publishing material that 'indicates bias or incompetence on the part of such match official'. But furious Ibrox bosses have been left stunned after the charge was upheld by an SFA judicial panel. And they are now demanding an explanation of why other clubs have not been punished for a string of similar incidents. As part of their defence, the Light Blues lawyers provided numerous examples of rival commentary teams stepping out of line while broadcasting on live games. But that wasn't enough to get Gers off the hook. Now the Ibrox outfit have released a stinging statement which says: 'Rangers FC today has been found by a Scottish FA judicial panel to have been in breach of Disciplinary Rule 38, following a remark made during commentary of the Hibernian v Rangers game in May. The club has been fined £3,000. 'We feel it is necessary to highlight the broader concerns this outcome raises and the wider implications this has for clarity and confidence in their regulatory processes. 'John Brown spoke emotionally and spontaneously as someone who cares deeply about the club. His words were not scripted, and they were not an official club comment. 'The ruling however sets a precedent where even spontaneous, corrected remarks made during live coverage of a clear refereeing error are enough to trigger a formal sanction. "That is neither proportionate nor consistent, especially when other clubs have made stronger comments on official platforms without consequence. 'As part of our defence today, we flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels. "These incidents raise legitimate questions about Scottish FA rules and how consistently they are enforced. To our knowledge, none of these cases appear to have resulted in charges against the respective clubs. 'The lack of consistency with the Scottish FA's policing of similar incidents leaves more questions than answers. 'That is why we will be contacting the Scottish FA chief executive and president to seek clarity on what policies and processes the Compliance Officer has in place, if any, to ensure a consistent and proportionate approach to enforcement and the equal treatment of member clubs. 'We shall also be asking the Scottish FA whether they accept that a rule that cannot be applied consistently across all clubs and all platforms risks losing credibility as a fair and enforceable regulation. 'Our aim here is to understand the rationale behind the differing outcomes. A lack of consistency, or the perception of it, undermines confidence in the disciplinary process and exposes all member clubs to uncertainty about what is and is not allowed. 'There remains no clear guidance on how clubs are expected to manage live broadcast content, though we note the panel acknowledged that the club's internal editorial guidelines may serve as a constructive step for others going forward. 'To be clear, we referenced these other examples not to suggest they should have resulted in sanctions, but to highlight the clear inconsistency in how similar incidents have been handled. 'Club media channels are, by nature, passionate and partisan. Informal, tongue-in-cheek and emotional commentary comes with the territory, especially in live settings. 'But, in choosing to pursue this case, the Scottish FA has opened the door to closer scrutiny of how similar situations are handled going forward. If this is now the standard, they will be watched closely to ensure it is applied across the board, consistently, without exception and without favour.' Gers were served a notice of complaint from the Hampden hierarchy after Brown's lashed out with his on-air tirade. Raskin's effort in the 2-2 last day n draw clearly looked over the line but referee Walsh waved play on. Hibs went up the pitch and scored, prompting Rangers TV co-commentator Brown to question the integrity of the decision. When offered the chance to clarify the comments, Brown stood by them. The SFA's own KMI panel has since agreed that Raskin's goal should have stood in Edinburgh, despite referee chief Willie Collum backing Walsh's call not to award it.
