Who knew about the 100 Volunteers

Bear all

Well-Known Member
#1
Is this the first time in all these years that we have learned about this set up or was it common knowledge because I have never heard of it,how many years has this being going on now .Surely the Club would have known how this mechanism worked .
 

AyrBear

Well-Known Member
#13
Last time I had heard I knew it was a panel of approximately 100 people but that they were all involved in the game in some way not that they were lawyers etc.
 

georgedoors

Well-Known Member
#28
Am interview with Vincent lunny that's posted on another thread revealed that the panel who reviewed incidents was made up from 100 non paid volunteers after advertisements were placed in printed media.
 

Div1872

Well-Known Member
#31
For clarification

Jimmy Ping interviewed Vincent Lunny the original CO in 2014 at BBC Scotland HQ

First I’d seen interview today. Was posted on here this morning

Lunny said 100 volunteers replied to SFA newspaper advert allegedly

All 100 were taken from lawyers. Judges. Etc to be on panels reviewing citations from SFA re incidents referred to CO

First I’d heard of this. I thought it was ex referees who reviewed the footage to assess the dodgy challenges

How the f.uck can these 100 volunteers have the expertise to make calls on football challenges

The whole CO is a sham and the club cannot accept this to continue

Action has to be taken and our manager must be sitting there and looking at Scottish football and thinking it’s exactly what the English commentators make it out to be a cesspit and full of amateurs
 

a_weir

Well-Known Member
#33
Right few things:

No one has mentioned this officially.
These 100 volunteers don’t all review the footage, it’s just a panel of whoever’s available, I think?
 

GimmeShelter

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
#34
The people who review the incidents

The Compliance officer has 100 volunteers who review the incidents he decides need looked into and they determine if any action is required as far as I can see,I have just found out about this today and was wondering was it common knowledge.
First I've heard of it, zero transparency as usual from the SFA
 

sofakineazy

Well-Known Member
#35
For clarification

Jimmy Ping interviewed Vincent Lunny the original CO in 2014 at BBC Scotland HQ

First I’d seen interview today. Was posted on here this morning

Lunny said 100 volunteers replied to SFA newspaper advert allegedly

All 100 were taken from lawyers. Judges. Etc to be on panels reviewing citations from SFA re incidents referred to CO

First I’d heard of this. I thought it was ex referees who reviewed the footage to assess the dodgy challenges

How the f.uck can these 100 volunteers have the expertise to make calls on football challenges

The whole CO is a sham and the club cannot accept this to continue

Action has to be taken and our manager must be sitting there and looking at Scottish football and thinking it’s exactly what the English commentators make it out to be a cesspit and full of amateurs
And how can you come to an agreement with 100 peoples input? Unless they have a voting button, after they review the evidence. This is a typical sfa cluster %^*&.
 
#36
It's 2019 - we have many Catholic players and fans - leave this kind of chat back in the early 80s lads.
Nah, lets not.

Lets bring the sham that is a Compliance officer and what it's all about and the reason for these imposters to the forefront of the news.

This farce is here for a reason and it's time the motives behind it are questioned.
 
#37
Am interview with Vincent lunny that's posted on another thread revealed that the panel who reviewed incidents was made up from 100 non paid volunteers after advertisements were placed in printed media.
Which printed media and how has this guff never been picked by all factions of Rangers support on the internet from the off? Because there's a lot of sharp eyes out there on our side.

If you want to give me a one inch column on page 72 of the rhebel or evening tims after the contacts pages, feel free to do so.
 

georgedoors

Well-Known Member
#38
Which printed media and how has this guff never been picked by all factions of Rangers support on the internet from the off? Because there's a lot of sharp eyes out there on our side.

If you want to give me a one inch column on page 72 of the rhebel or evening tims after the contacts pages, feel free to do so.
Just the messenger mate I never heard of the advertising before . seems like a great idea how to hand pick the mindset needed
 
#41
They all said that volunteers were vetted by THREE officials. Who picked them and what were their criteria?
Baselbear hits the nail on the head here, who are the three officials that vet the 100 volunteers? They should be named because if that’s not public knowledge then the system is wide open to abuse. The only requirement for being one of the 100 people should be that they have passed the refs exam. How do we know that these lawyers etc on the list of volunteers aren’t low level paper gatherers?
 
#44
So we have 100 unknown, unverified, untested people deciding what goes to the compliance officer?

How is that a fit and proper process?

It would be a real shame if a well known hacker group got access to the SFA servers and published lists and emails...
 

Commentator

Well-Known Member
#49
This was another an open goal for the club. What are we doing? Why can't we come out and say we now believe there's too much secrecy around this process and it must be suspended now until the close season when work on a public process can begin.
 
Top