Tom Boyd being investigated by Compliance Officer

Bonnyloyal said:
Celtic say they are "astonished" that club ambassador Tom Boyd is being investigated by the compliance officer for his comments about referee John Beaton.

"We have had absolutely no contact from the SFA in relation to this matter and, given the context and circumstances in which the comments were made, would be astonished if the matter were to be progressed," a statement said.

"If it is, then we will respond robustly."
Click to expand...

SFA Peter didn’t tell Celtic Peter?
 
Bonnyloyal said:
Celtic say they are "astonished" that club ambassador Tom Boyd is being investigated by the compliance officer for his comments about referee John Beaton.

"We have had absolutely no contact from the SFA in relation to this matter and, given the context and circumstances in which the comments were made, would be astonished if the matter were to be progressed," a statement said.

"If it is, then we will respond robustly."
Click to expand...

Of course they are astonished. They didn't appoint her for this scenario. It was to make sure no Celtc player was cited, and up till now she is carrying out her mandate with aplomb.
 
Accusing a referee of cheating/corruption against your club should come with strict liability and a points deduction! Or is strict liability only for when our support sings a couple stupid songs?
 
Last edited:
Papatango said:
Not seen the incident to which he refers but (dons tin hat) why the %^*& shouldn’t he be able to call it as he sees it?

I wish some of our spineless ex players would call out the cheats in the Scottish game.

%^*& the SFA & their draconian censorship of free speech.
Click to expand...
He did more than criticise the decision - he basically accused the ref of cheating

Given what happened to Beaton in January, Boyd crossed the line
 
It wont be Tom Boyd who should be taken to task it will be the club since he is acting in their stead as a representative. So if they can do this to us then Celtic should also be dealt with in a similar manner.

Disciplinary Tribunal Update | Rangers FC
Click to expand...
Thursday 20 December 2018
Alleged Party in Breach: Rangers FC
Date: Between 8 and 16 November 2018
Disciplinary Rules allegedly breached:
Charge 1:
  1. No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or microblogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the Decision(s) and/or performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this Rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a match official for Misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.
Or alternatively:
  1. A club or recognised football body which publishes, distributes, issues, sells or authorises a third party to publish, distribute, issue or sell a match programme or any other publication or audio/visual material of any description in any media now existing or hereinafter invented, including but not limited to the Internet, social networking or micro-blogging sites, shall ensure that any such publications or audio/visual material does not contain any criticism of any match official calculated to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official or to impinge upon his character. There shall be a presumption that any material issued, published, distributed and/or sold in such manner was issued, published, distributed and/ or sold in the name of and/or with the authority of the body bearing to have issued, published, distributed and/or sold the material.
Charge 2:
  1. No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, match official, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.
Charge 3:
  1. 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. Furthermore such person or body shall not act in any manner which is improper or use any one, or a combination of, violent Conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.
Charge 4:
  1. All members shall:
(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and shall comply with: (i) the Articles; (ii) this Protocol; (iii) the Cup Competition Rules; (iv) the Registration Procedures;
(v) the International Match Calendar; (vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and (vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, Decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport; (c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (d) respect the Laws of the Game; (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; (f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.
Charge 5:
  1. Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players act in accordance with Rule 1.
Or alternatively:
  1. Each member shall use its best endeavours to procure that its Team Staff its employees and its Team Scout(s) (other than its officials, Team Officials or players) act in accordance with Rule 1.
Or alternatively:
  1. All Parties must keep confidential any information or documentation relating to Proceedings arising under this Protocol which is not in the public domain (including but not limited to the identities of the Panel Members), save where disclosure is allowed under the Protocol and/or required by law.
Principal hearing date: Wednesday 19 December 2018
Outcome:
Charge 1 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 72: Proved. £5000 fine.
Charge 2 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 71: Not Proved.
Charge 3 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 77: Proved. £1000 fine.
Charge 4 - Breach of Disciplinary Rule 1: Not Proved.
Charge 5 - Withdrawn and dismissed.
Click to expand...
 
Tom ‘tin foil’ Boyd is a useful idiot to feed the Celtic narrative of victimhood. Of course he is entitled to his ‘opinion’ but I believe that rightly or wrongly, spokesmen, whether it be players, managers or employees of clubs can’t criticise referees. It’s the rules which of course don’t apply to them. I’m sure Celtic, by supporting ‘tin foil’, will pander to the worst elements of their support by currying a siege mentality and be a unifying factor and welcome distraction from their current troubles. Someone on here posted ‘the conspiracy theory is their mental safety net when things go wrong’.That perfectly sums them up. Watch as the compliance officer lets him off with a commendation. Their complete record with the CO is referred - one, let off - one.
 
He's a fly mentally challenged scumbag....banking on the possibility refs will be frightened to award anything against paedo f.c. and if they do the mhedia and the other tramps will be claiming conspiracy from the roofs of the chapels.....been doing it for decades
 
LoganBear said:
Aye very good.

Legos elbowed his way through the last 3 seasons and had a shocker of a tackle on candyman at Ibrox yet gets nothing.

tadger boyd says something naughty on the tele and is pulled up for it.

How about actually punishing the mentally challenged players instead of their co-commentators.
Click to expand...
She could do both when deserved.
 
Stanley Yelnats said:
She’ll do %^*& all.

She’s scared shitless of them
Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THIS
 
Papatango said:
Not seen the incident to which he refers but (dons tin hat) why the %^*& shouldn’t he be able to call it as he sees it?

I wish some of our spineless ex players would call out the cheats in the Scottish game.

%^*& the SFA & their draconian censorship of free speech.
Click to expand...

He is a Celtic employee. Their officials cannot be coming out with this deranged nonsense. It is clearly damaging to the game.
 
Celtic say "they would be astounded if this goes any further" They can't understand why, in the past, they got to fekk refs in the head with lighters, coins, caused refs to have their windows smashed, threatened them, Ref strikes, cost Refs their jobs. They think its their right to abuse
 
Jan Wyck said:
Of course they are astonished. They didn't appoint her for this scenario. It was to make sure no Celtc player was cited, and up till now she is carrying out her mandate with aplomb.
Click to expand...
Not a player, just an old roaster being cited, so they can say they take action against the filth as well.
 
The rules (as written by CFC, well Paul McBride, for the SFA):

Scottish Football Association article 29.2
'A club or recognised football body which publishes, distributes, issues, sells or authorises a third party to publish, distribute, issue or sell a match programme or any other publication or audio/visual material of any description in any media now existing or hereinafter invented, including but not limited to the Internet, social networking or micro-blogging sites, shall ensure that any such publications or audio/visual material does not contain any criticism of any match official calculated to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official or to impinge upon his character.'

CFC are guilty, Tom Boyd is guilty. Both will be charged and found guilty. Both will have action taken against them.

edit: The CO has no wriggle room
 
Bonnyloyal said:
Celtic say they are "astonished" that club ambassador Tom Boyd is being investigated by the compliance officer for his comments about referee John Beaton.

"We have had absolutely no contact from the SFA in relation to this matter and, given the context and circumstances in which the comments were made, would be astonished if the matter were to be progressed," a statement said.

"If it is, then we will respond robustly."
Click to expand...

What a shower of fannies.
 
Papatango said:
Not seen the incident to which he refers but (dons tin hat) why the %^*& shouldn’t he be able to call it as he sees it?

I wish some of our spineless ex players would call out the cheats in the Scottish game.

%^*& the SFA & their draconian censorship of free speech.
Click to expand...
Because he’s club ambassador talking on official club channel so it’s assumed that he’s pushing the clubs point of view. There’s no way club officials should be able to whip their scum into a frenzy. Where would the line be if club officials can just spout what they want?
 
audiorealis said:
It’s always nice to see Celtic get punished but there should be a different standard for club media vs club content distributed on public media. Boyd obviously took it way too far but it’s normal for commentators to be critical of refereeing decisions during a game. If they’re drawing a distinction here because Boyd is employed by Celtic FC as an ambassador, then fine, but I’d hate to see us go down a path where fan tv can’t call out refs.
Click to expand...
I’ve never heard a commentator say a ref is cheating in my life.
 
PortoyMortoy said:
Accusing a referee of cheating/corruption against your club should come with strict liability and a points deduction! Or is strict liability only for when our support sings a couple stupid songs?
Click to expand...
We haven’t had points deducted due to strict liability.
 
Has one single media outlet condemned Boyd's comments yet?

If not why are they all shit scared to offer an opinion?
 
Say what you like about those cvnts but you have to give them credit for sticking up for their own.

I think we know what would happen if Stevie Smith had said similar on RTV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top