Slattery

[joewarkfanclub]

2 hours ago, dennyc said:

It has not been made up on the hoof. Walker of Hearts and Shalke of Ross County both received two match bans for cheating. Ironically one of the games Shalke sat out was against us. No mention before of suspended bans though so that is new.

For the conspiracy theorists, both those bans were after restospective charges were brought following games against Celtic. Meekins of Inverness did have such a ban overturned on appeal. He was also cited after a match v Celtic. He would have missed a Cup Final had the decision been upheld. After the Compliance Officer was accused of having links to Celtic such citations suddenly stopped. Until now it seems. Again. all before VAR was introduced to assist referees who got it wrong on first viewing.

If its not being made up on the hoof, Id love to see the regulations outlining the wording of the offence and what the penalty should be.

As others have said. We have VAR now. The red card should never have been given and if they send the ref to the monitor, Slattery gets a yellow.

The fact they f#cked up and we have a player with  2+2 game suspension is ridiculous.

The club dealt with Slattery internally, so this just feels pretty harsh.

 

[joewarkfanclub]

2 hours ago, weeyin said:

We're back to not being able to hold more than one opinion at a time here.

Slattery was wrong.

The Ref and Referee's assistant were both wrong to send off King.

VAR was wrong to not review the red card (like they had already done for Gogic)

The SFA was wrong for waiting 4 weeks and choosing to re-referee 3 different individuals' decisions.

Do you think they'll go back now and give us our penalty at Ibrox or give Oxlade-Chamberlain a red? 

If a player dives to get a penalty, will they now be subject to a 4 week suspension? If not, why not? That has a direct impact games.

What about feigning head injuries to waste time with stoppages? 

Exactly this.

Diving to gain a penalty is cheating and gains an advantage for your team.

I dont see the difference, but it happens all the time (including by our players).

[Kmcalpin]

Slattery was apparently found guilty by the Compliance Officer some weeks ago. A panel, comprising God knows who, was then convened and met today. It was these unknown  individuals who settled on a 4 game suspension. Where is the transparency and accountability in that?

[dennyc]

2 minutes ago, Kmcalpin said:

Slattery was apparently found guilty by the Compliance Officer some weeks ago. A panel, comprising God knows who, was then convened and met today. It was these unknown  individuals who settled on a 4 game suspension. Where is the transparency and accountability in that?

He was cited fairly quickly enough according to MFC. That it took so long for a panel to be convened to assess his guilt and punishment is a farce.  He then got a suspension which the Club could have anticipated. Especially as they went public in condemning  his behaviour, perhaps hoping to avoid what has now happened.

Same ban as others who got cited for an act of cheating missed by the officials. I agree the suspended two games has come from nowhere. That part I think is nonsensical. But not the two match ban. Same as Cantwell and Brown should have received. Would we have complained had that pair been banned? Pretty sure if I could be bothered checking back, most on here (including me....and you?) were calling for them to be hammered. Scott Sinclair as another example I think?

Amazing how Slattery has gone from cheat to victim though. I thought that approach was reserved for a certain other team. And if we want to be honest about it, Slattery has form. Went down clutching his face right in front of the POD not that long ago. Referee wasn't fooled that time although I admit I was until TV proved me wrong. This time his luck ran out. Hopefully he has learned his lesson as we need him on the pitch.

Our referees, Var and authorities are far from competent and certainly seem exempt from accountability and demotion. That is the aspect that needs sorting.  But this chain of events started because Slattery let himself, the fans and the Club down. Now we will all pay the penalty.

By the way, I like Slattery and hope he signs on for next season.

 

[grizzlyg]

1 hour ago, well_said said:

Are you on a comedy tour?🤣

Nah....no way would Mrs grizzly put up with that 🤣🤣

[Faddyisgod]

This is genuinely ridiculous. Slattery has been essentially cited for inappropriate behaviour under R77 rather than R201. If he had been cited under R201 he would have got a maximum 2 game ban. He now appears to be getting a 2+2 game ban as nobody appears to have been cited under this rule for this reason.
 

Despite this they haven’t rescinded the yellow card given to the St Mirren player because of a lack of evidence of no contact. This smacks of the SFA just being desperate to get Slattery no matter what. 
 

For me there isn’t clear cut evidence to suggest that there wasn’t contact (this was accepted by the SFA) so should never have progressed this far. Manipulation of situations happens literally all the time in every league in the world. You might not like what Slattery did from a moral perspective but legally the SFA have tied themselves in knots here. 
 

We should start a thread highlighting every potential simulation situation and whether this has been progressed to a 4 game ban. I think it’s highly unlikely any other club will be treated in this in the next 5 years but the thread would run to numerous pages of incidents that would be very similar. 
 

Genuinely baffling. Brilliant that the club have called it out. 

[cambo97]

1 hour ago, dennyc said:

 

Same ban as others who got cited for an act of cheating missed by the officials. I agree the suspended two games has come from nowhere. That part I think is nonsensical. But not the two match ban. Same as Cantwell and Brown should have received. Would we have complained had that pair been banned? Pretty sure if I could be bothered checking back, most on here (including me....and you?) were calling for them to be hammered. Scott Sinclair as another example I think?

 

 

But none of them were even cited; so asking if we would we have complained is irrelevant; if they had been the complaints probably wouldn't be as loud or happening at all.

Trying to use the example of something similar that didn't happen to justify something that did just doesn't work.

[star sail]

I am finding this one a little difficult to stomach I have to admit.

Yes, Slattery made a fool of himself and yes it took a little bit of a shine off of what was otherwise the perfect performance.

This kind of behaviour needs stamped out of football and in a world where all things are equal the punishment probably fits the crime

but

all things are not equal and the organisation doing the finger wagging in Slattery''s direction oversee a tiny shitty world where they are more than happy to turn a blind eye to some of the bigger vagueries of Scottish Football.

We have not heard a single word of condemnation from the SFA on the scenes at Ibrox a few weeks ago. The bigotry, the sectarian singing that could be heard both on radio and TV. The pitch invasions, the aggression, the on field violence. No word, no punishment, no finger wagging.

This is an organisation that oversees one of the most toxic environments in World football and is happy to continue doing so because of the money it generates. Hatred sells!

It sticks in my throat when that same organisation decides to randomly take the moral high ground on one single isolated incident when similar incidents are happening every single weekend in every single game in the country.

The decision making is haphazard, incoherent and hugely subjective.

Ultimately we have to suck it up because Slattery was in the wrong and brought this trouble upon himself and the club but I hate being lectured to, (with the verbose language they hide behind), by an organisation that has very little interest in actually creating the level playing field that would actually make the game in Scotland one we could all buy into.

 

[SteelmaninOZ]

5 hours ago, grizzlyg said:

Enjoying my first drink in Algarve and saw this!!. Yes he was a numpty but if that was an old firm player?

If they are consistent now no worries but I doubt it

Algarve? Is that a new pub in Hamilton? 😉

[bobbybingo]

3 hours ago, dennyc said:

By the way, I like Slattery and hope he signs on for next season.

 

Probably less likely now he's essentially a marked man in Scotland. The wording of Rule 77 is vague enough and broad enough for the SFA to trigger his suspended 2 game ban any time he steps out of line, whether that be a tackle, mouthing off or falling on his arse.

[texanwellfan]

9 hours ago, joewarkfanclub said:

Bit of a strange take.

You say it "should be a red card offence", I agree, only it isnt at the moment.

As someone, who openly criticised Slattery at the time and was embarassed by his actions, I have no issue with him being retrospectively punished.

But the punishment has to fit the crime, and shouldnt just be made up on the hoof to make an example out of someone retrospectively.

If that had happened no one would really argue, but this seems unfair and OTT, so no surprise some of our fans are leaping to the defence of our player.

Not sure we are leaping to defense of our player. Most well fans were not pleased With Slattery

I think we are all up in arms regarding the OTT response from authorities. Or should I say inconsistent response. 
 

there should be a boatload of these retroactive punishments for simulation. I’d expect to see it every week. 

[Kmcalpin]

6 hours ago, bobbybingo said:

The wording of Rule 77 is vague enough and broad enough for the SFA to trigger his suspended 2 game ban any time he steps out of line, whether that be a tackle, mouthing off or falling on his arse.

Yes, its a catch all. "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."

Now if the SFA is going to continue applying that in games we can expect a deluge of such cases. Many every weekend in fact. How about investigating all such cases since the turn of the year or even since the start of the season? 

Cheating by shirt pulling

Cheating by stealing yards at throw ins and free kicks

Harassing a referee

Cheating by simulation

Managers openly wanting their players to dive to win penalties.

Cheating by committing off the ball fouls

A referee treating players with disrespect

The list is endless.

How often do you hear pundits in the media saying "he had to take one for the team"? A phrase I detest.

You're right Bobby. Mr Slattery will have to be cleaner than clean in future. 

 

[Orinoco]

Cant see Slattery resigning now after this.

As said every player and official cheats to some exstent.  VAR has apparent definitions when they get involved. Whats is the definitions for the compliance officer, who is it? to get involved?

Also will he now have a look at Camara sending off incident against Hearts? Or will it be ignored as the sending off was upheld, even although the Hearts guy was at.

There are so many issues involving the Glasgow two clubs and officials that keep going unchecked that merit more compliance involvement. The game in this country is being run by clowns with a bowling green club mentality. Which is probably unfair to bowling clubs.

Fans ask for consistancy and the authorities invent ways to make things worse. Baffling!

Collum and VAR needs to go. They have shown especially with this and recent incidents they are not fit for purpose.

Clubs in the top league need to put on their big boy pants and have a serious discussion about VAR and the way the game is being run.

 

[GrahamH]

I know there have been retrospective bans given out previously for diving to win penalties and violent conduct but has there ever been one handed out for feigning injury? I genuinely can’t think of any and I’ve seen plenty of incidents where players go down holding their head/face when there’s been zero contact there.

[Motherwell Daft]

I completely agree with Star Sail, what Slats done was wrong, and he's been punished for it, but so to have the club by loosing one of our most influential players for 2 key games weeks after the incident, however the SFA in their ongoing unbelievable wisdom have been silent on the shocking scenes at Castle Grey Skull weeks ago…why?
No condemnation, no quick sanctions, all seems very quiet for some reason.

What all other 10 clubs in the SPL expect is fairness across the board, but what appears to be, and always happens, is no action until the end of the season against the two clubs involved in what was, the worst case of hooliganism in the UK, not just Scotland, in a decade just incase it effects either of the uglies chances of winning the title and keeping the status quo.

I hope I'm wrong but I don’t think I'm far away from what'll happen at the end of the season.

In the meantime Id love to see the Mighty Well win our remaining 7 games and set the cat amongst the pigeons.

CMYW!!!! 

[Orinoco]

Re your last paragrath, would be nice, but it wont happen. The officials will make honest mistakes....

[Kmcalpin]

3 hours ago, Orinoco said:

Cant see Slattery resigning now after this.

As said every player and official cheats to some exstent.  VAR has apparent definitions when they get involved. Whats is the definitions for the compliance officer, who is it? to get involved?

Also will he now have a look at Camara sending off incident against Hearts? Or will it be ignored as the sending off was upheld, even although the Hearts guy was at.

The game in this country is being run by clowns with a bowling green club mentality. Which is probably unfair to bowling clubs.

Could it be worse than that?

[Kmcalpin]

3 hours ago, GrahamH said:

I know there have been retrospective bans given out previously for diving to win penalties and violent conduct but has there ever been one handed out for feigning injury?

Not that I know of. The worst case of that I can recall was Craig Gordon at Fir Park a few years ago  when he collapsed several times feigning serious injury to waste time. I lost all respect for him that day and have had no time for him ever since. 

[wellfan]

I think we’d all accept Slattery’s punishment if it wasn’t the one that bucked the trend. But it is, and that’s what makes it so infuriating. Cheating should be penalised at all times, but players shouldn’t be over-penalised for officials’ mistakes. The real issue is the complete lack of consistency, in real time, through VAR, and then retrospectively, with the compliance officer seemingly picking and choosing at random which incidents to look at. The whole set-up is a clown show.

[Richie]

As has been said, the 'inappropriate behaviour' thing is pretty broad.

Could even include posing for selfies with fans on the pitch during a pitch invasion.

Making gestures towards fans.

 

[bobbybingo]

7 minutes ago, Richie said:

Making gestures towards fans.

 

As Michael Higdon would confirm. Though that was Rule 200, apparently.

[joewarkfanclub]

15 hours ago, texanwellfan said:

Not sure we are leaping to defense of our player. Most well fans were not pleased With Slattery

I think we are all up in arms regarding the OTT response from authorities. Or should I say inconsistent response. 
 

there should be a boatload of these retroactive punishments for simulation. I’d expect to see it every week. 

I didnt mean defending his actions. Maybe I should have said "raising concerns regarding the level of punishment and its implications for the wider game......"

[star sail]

Taking all the emotion and subjectivity out of the situation, simulation is a yellow card offence not a two game ban. ( or 4 suspended). The penalty should be based on that single action alone and not any other circumstances that come after. Slattery's action is the same regardless of what comes next.

Doing 35 in a 30 is three points on a drivers licence and does not become 9 points just because the Police are pissed off that nobody put some spool in the speed camera or because they don't like the look of your re-spray.

The suspension is about more than Slattery's actions (which were pish) and this clause the SFA have pulled out is to allow them to make whatever whimsical point they want to make at this moment in time.