Walter Smith can’t complain about the appeals process
Appeals Process: Great in Jan and May ‘09, bad in December?
It is rare for Walter Smith to be criticised in the Scottish press and the Fourth Estate have given the Rangers manager the platform to moan about decisions this week.
Smith is unhappy about the fact that Kenny Miller was sent off against Dundee United and that an appeal was subsequently unsuccessful. This has given the manager the chance to crank up the pressure on the officials for Sunday’s Celtic v Rangers game…and to moan about the appeals process.
“How can you have an appeals process which is dependent upon the referee admitting that he got it wrong in the first place?”
“It doesn’t seem to make a great deal of sense.”
Back in January 2009, Sasa Papac was sent off against Falkirk but a quick appeal saw his red card rescinded. Willie Collum was the referee on that occasion and he decided that his decision to send off the Rangers defender was wrong. Walter Smith never had too much to moan about Willie Collum’s role in the appeal process then.
Willie Collum is of course the referee who sent off Miller on Wednesday and the referee who has stuck by his decision on that sending off. If his judgment was fine in January ’09, should it not be backed in December ’09?
Funnily enough, Falkirk had a player sent off that day but their appeal against that decision was turned away.
For Rangers to benefit once from the appeals process should be enough to convince Walter Smith that it is not all bad but there was further joy for Rangers in May.
When Madjid Bougherra was sent off against Aberdeen in the title run-in, Rangers immediately ran to the appeal process, which as we always state, is the right of every club in the SPL. Televised footage showed that Bougherra put his boots into the face of Aberdeen goalkeeper Jamie Langfield, which the assistant referee deemed to be violent conduct.
After perusing the video footage, retiring referee Stuart Dougall was very happy to change his mind and state that Bougherra did not deserve the red card. This allowed the player to feature in the final game of the season, where Rangers triumphed at Tannadice to take the SPL title.
Ironically enough, Madjid Bougherra is said to be missing from this weekend’s clash against Celtic but that is because of his involvement in the African Cup of Nations. Then again, the story has changed so much in recent weeks; it would not be a huge surprise to see Bougherra in the Rangers team.
Walter Smith has a right to moan about decisions, he is a football manager, his livelihood and the success of his team can depend on refereeing decisions. It is far easier to criticise than it is to praise and this is definitely the case for Walter Smith.
However, you wonder if any other SPL manager would be given as much leeway by the Scottish media.
If a Celtic manager made the comments that Smith has made, he would be labelled paranoid and the previous successful appeals would be trotted out in huge letters. With Rangers, the Scottish media has a rather handy case of selective amnesia.
How would you improve the appeals process?
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
The ignorance and blatant favouritism by the Scottish media should be brought to task by the Press Complaints Commission asap.
It is certainly something worth highlighting.
Walter Smith does seem to have a virtually untouchable persona in Scottish football as far as the media are concerned.
“If a Celtic manager made the comments that Smith has made, he would be labelled paranoid ”
I might be wrong, but i reckon this entire article is the result of paranoia.
mmm this article stinks of sour grapes what aload of shite especially coming from the septic scum who till this day still walk about with this big chip on their shoulders
Kenny, Trueblue, thanks for your comments.
Aaah the crazy world of Glasgow’s big two.
A few days back WeKnowSFA was accused of being too lenient on the SFA and Rangers. Now we’re “paranoid” for questioning the consistency of Walter Smith’s comments and views.
Let’s face it, no one is going to change the opinions held by Celtic or Rangers fans so we’re not going to lose any sleep over these sort of comments…
True Blue in the book of wisdom one of the Four Agreements is “Be impeccable with your word” here endeth the lesson.
This post is utter drivel.
Just because Papac’s red card was overturned on appeal (and Smith didn’t moan about a correct conclusion being reached) does not mean that the current appeals process isn’t fundamentally flawed.
Currently, when referees review their own decisions when an appeal is made, they tend to stick to their original decision, even if it’s clearly wrong. Referees, like everybody else, do not like to admit they’ve made a mistake.
So, on the whole, they only change their decision if the video evidence is so strong that they have no option but to reverse it, or if the finger of blame can be pointed at a linesman (see the Bougherra incident). If they can get away with sticking with a bad decision then they will do so, time and time again.
Despite what you say, Smith’s comments are entirely sensible and consistent – referees should not be reviewing their own decisions in the event of an appeal. This should be left to an independent panel.
A Celtic manager would not be labeled paranoid for making similar comments. Other SPL managers have already made similar comments without being criticised for doing so – this is because almost everyone, except you, agrees that the current appeals system is a joke.
No one is saying that the appeals process isn’t flawed; in fact, the whole system is a farce. At the end of the article, the question is asked how to improve the process. If that indicates to you that there is happiness with the current system, fair enough but that is certainly not the case.
From what you can appeal to the way the appeal is processed, it is undoubtedly a very flawed system.
However, there was a not a word of criticism from Rangers when the appeals system worked in their favour. If they were so against the system, would it have been impossible to state along the lines of “we are delighted the appeals process has been successful but we have reservations about the way the process is carried out”?
Rather, this comes out as sour grapes from Smith and an opportunity to put pressure on the referees at the weekend.
It also doesn’t help overturn the system. If a successful appeal was met with criticism of the system, the flaws would be highlighted in a better light and could be acted upon more effectively.
I see, so, although you’ve written a long rambling post criticising him, you agree with what Walter Smith is saying. In fact, you go futher, you say the whole system is a farce.
Walter Smith, along with many other managers, has criticised the appeals system in the past and nothing has changed.
The reason you don’t hear Walter Smith or any other manager complaining about the system when it occasionally arrives at a correct conclusion is because journalists will only ask managers about the appeals process when it hasn’t worked as it should – this is how stories are generated and papers are sold.
If Walter Smith was asked about the appeals process in the light of a successful appeal I’m sure he would continue to voice his concerns. But this question is never put to him because ‘appeals process reaches correct conclusion’ isn’t really much of a story.
The press didn’t display any favouritism towards Walter Smith by reporting on this issue – they were just doing their jobs and generating a story.
In addition, Smith has not behaved in any way that could be reasonably described of inconsistent or hypocritical over the appeals process.
It seems to me that you’ve seen this as an opportunity to have a dig at Smith, but have nothing, at all, to back up your claims.
Given that the post provides a defence of Smith and football managers in that their livelihoods are at stake, its a big step to see this as criticism of Smith. The piece is a criticism but it is not of Smith.
The criticism is of the media and just taking this story and not looking to progress any further. Rangers had three appeals in 2009, two successful, one unsuccessful.
So you say the fault lies with the media for not questioning Smith properly. Well, surely you would agree that this is not the only time this has happened?
Today’s papers have comments from ex-refs showing their support to Steven Conroy for his actions in the big game yesterday.
Which is fair enough, its another angle to the story.
However, this level of journalism was not carried out for this story or others of its ilk.
The media are not at fault, this has nothing to do with journalistic standards. They do not treat Smith any differently to any other managers, although the views of Old Firms bosses are always more newsworthy than most.
The only people at fault here are the SFA – the appeals process needs to change. Walter Smith is correct. The media have behaved properly in their reporting of what Smith has said.
It’s that simple.
And yet your view is ‘Walter Smith can’t complain about the appeals process’ (even though you agree with him) and that, somehow, this is all evidence of pro-Walter or pro-Rangers bias on the part of the media, or the SFA, or perhaps both…