PDA

View Full Version : SFA Articles of association



MyJo
30-05-2016, 02:40 PM
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2015-16/SFA_HANDBOOK_2015.pdf

28. Responsibility of Clubs/Behaviour of Spectators

28.1 A club shall take all such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure the safety, good
conduct and good behaviour of its supporters on any ground. A club playing at its own
ground or allowing its ground to be used for a match in which it is not participating shall
also take all such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure the safety, good conduct
and good behaviour of all spectators at that ground.

28.2 A recognised football body which is directly responsible for organising a match under its
jurisdiction shall likewise take all such steps as are reasonably practicable to ensure the
safety, good conduct and good behaviour of spectators at such match.

28.3 Misbehaviour by spectators before, during or at the close of a match resulting from the
failure of a club or recognised football body to take all reasonably practicable steps as
aforesaid shall render that club or recognised football body liable to a fine or closure of
ground or suspension or all of these penalties.

28.4 In the event of misbehaviour of spectators being reported to or otherwise being brought
to the attention of the Scottish FA, the Judicial Panel will have jurisdiction to deal with
the matter and to impose sanctions in respect thereof as prescribed within the Judicial
Panel Protocol. Such misbehaviour must be reported to or brought to the attention of the
Scottish FA within six (6) days of the day of the match.

28.5 In the event of a match being abandoned due to field invasion by spectators the Judicial
Panel may impose such penalties as prescribed within the Judicial Panel Protocol.

28.6 A club playing at its own ground or allowing its ground to be used for a match in which
it is not participating must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, (i) good order and
security, (ii) that policies and procedures have been adopted and are implemented to
prevent instances of Unacceptable Conduct, and (iii) that any instance of Unacceptable
Conduct is effectively dealt with, all at its own ground, on the occasion of a match.

28.7 Each club must ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that its players, officials,
supporters and any person exercising a function for or in connection with the club do not
engage in Unacceptable Conduct at any club’s ground on the occasion of a match. Any
failure by a club to discharge a requirement to which it is subject by virtue of Article 28.6
and this Article 28.7 shall constitute a breach of these Articles.

28.8 In any proceedings in terms of these Articles against a club in which it is alleged that
there has been a failure by the club to discharge a requirement to which it is subject by
virtue of Articles 28.6 and 28.7, it shall be for the club concerned to prove that it was not
reasonably practicable to do more than was in fact done or (as the case may be) there
was no better practicable means than were in fact used to discharge such requirement.

28.9 Proceedings in terms of these Articles against a club in which it is alleged that there has
been a failure by that club to comply as required in accordance with Article 28 may be
commenced where the Scottish FA has received a written complaint or other written
communication or has by any other means been brought to the attention of the Scottish
FA which, in the opinion of the Scottish FA, provides grounds to believe that there has
been a failure to so comply. The Judicial Panel shall have jurisdiction in the case of an
alleged or apparent breach of Article 28.

28.10 The provisions of Articles 28.1 to 28.9 (both inclusive) shall not apply in the case of any
match played under the jurisdiction of the Scottish Professional Football League, unless
the board of directors of the Scottish Professional Football League shall request the Board
to invoke the powers granted to it under these Articles.

Notwithstanding the above terms of Article 28.10, the Judicial Panel shall have
jurisdiction in the case of an alleged or apparent breach of Articles 28.1 to 28.9 (both
inclusive) arising as a result, directly or indirectly, of the actions or omissions of the
Scottish Professional Football League.

28.11 Guidance in respect of the application of the terms of this Article 28 shall be promulgated
by the Scottish FA from time to time. Observance with such guidance shall be taken
cognisance of in respect of any proceedings under the jurisdiction of the Judicial Panel
Protocol.



This says to me that Hibs can only be punished for the pitch invasion if they can't prove that they done everything that was reasonably practical for them to do to prevent it from happening. Given that Hibs were not responsible for stewarding or policing at Hampden all they could do was to make Hibs fans aware of the rules and ask for us to behave?

Weststandwanab
30-05-2016, 02:42 PM
Good shout.

The barricades will not have been locked -Hillsborough- and the pitch may have been the safest option under those circumstances

Iggy Pope
30-05-2016, 03:22 PM
Will this result in a massive fine to QPFC? Or 'Hampden' being the body? Or the SFA themselves? Or closure of Hampden due to those obvious inadequacies? I think we should be told.'Hammering' Hibernian certainly cannot be one of the options.

Onion
30-05-2016, 03:35 PM
This says to me that Hibs can only be punished for the pitch invasion if they can't prove that they done everything that was reasonably practical for them to do to prevent it from happening. Given that Hibs were not responsible for stewarding or policing at Hampden all they could do was to make Hibs fans aware of the rules and ask for us to behave? [/QUOTE]

Which makes the media and Sevco's hysterical statements all the more laughable. Both would have known fine well that Hibs could not be held responsible for the few fans who lost their senses, but still chose to castigate the whole of the Hibs support and deflect from what was a fantastic game and victory. ALL focus should have been on the failure of the police and Hampden security which let Hibs, Sevco and the game down badly. It was the police's own incompetence and poor planning (verging on negligence) that has yet again shown football in a bad light - when there was simply no need for it. If anything serious had happened to a player or fans, then the police would have had to be held to account, just as they have in other much higher profile cases.

The further we get away from Sat 21 May, the more we will see a focus on the real problems that day - abject failure by the police, over-reaction by Sevco and mass hysteria of the media.

JeMeSouviens
30-05-2016, 03:48 PM
Will this result in a massive fine to QPFC? Or 'Hampden' being the body? Or the SFA themselves? Or closure of Hampden due to those obvious inadequacies? I think we should be told.'Hammering' Hibernian certainly cannot be one of the options.

You will no doubt be amazed to hear :rolleyes: that the only sanction available against a "recognised football body" for failing to take "reasonable and practicable steps" to ensure safety and good conduct of spectators is a fine, max £10K.

Meanwhile, a club can have result annulled, suspended from cup, fined up to £100K max, points deductions, plagues of locusts etc. etc.

I still don't see what Hibs could have done differently that comes under the heading "reasonable and practical steps"? :confused:

Iggy Pope
30-05-2016, 03:54 PM
You will no doubt be amazed to hear :rolleyes: that the only sanction available against a "recognised football body" for failing to take "reasonable and practicable steps" to ensure safety and good conduct of spectators is a fine, max £10K.

Meanwhile, a club can have result annulled, suspended from cup, fined up to £100K max, points deductions, plagues of locusts etc. etc.

I still don't see what Hibs could have done differently that comes under the heading "reasonable and practical steps"? :confused:

I'm not amazed to hear that, no. (Rolls eyes).
In this situation, I would be amazed however, if they managed to levy any of that second paragraph of yours against the Hibs.....

s.a.m
30-05-2016, 04:01 PM
This says to me that Hibs can only be punished for the pitch invasion if they can't prove that they done everything that was reasonably practical for them to do to prevent it from happening. Given that Hibs were not responsible for stewarding or policing at Hampden all they could do was to make Hibs fans aware of the rules and ask for us to behave?


I'm not sure. Although I'm prepared to admit I may be entirely wrong.:greengrin

The sections that have been quoted deal specifically with a club or body having failed to take reasonable precautions that would have prevented misbehaviour. Sub-section 4* reads to me like a catch-all fan misbehaviour clause. There is no qualification to do with failure to take precautions .
I think, possibly, that you're not being pedantic enough.:greengrin

*28.4 In the event of misbehaviour of spectators being reported to or otherwise being brought
to the attention of the Scottish FA, the Judicial Panel will have jurisdiction to deal with
the matter and to impose sanctions in respect thereof as prescribed within the Judicial
Panel Protocol. Such misbehaviour must be reported to or brought to the attention of the
Scottish FA within six (6) days of the day of the match.

JeMeSouviens
30-05-2016, 04:07 PM
I'm not sure. Although I'm prepared to admit I may be entirely wrong.:greengrin

The sections that have been quoted deal specifically with a club or body having failed to take reasonable precautions that would have prevented misbehaviour. Sub-section 4* reads to me like a catch-all fan misbehaviour clause. There is no qualification, to do with failure too take responsibility.
I think, possibly, that you're not being pedantic enough.:greengrin

*28.4 In the event of misbehaviour of spectators being reported to or otherwise being brought
to the attention of the Scottish FA, the Judicial Panel will have jurisdiction to deal with
the matter and to impose sanctions in respect thereof as prescribed within the Judicial
Panel Protocol. Such misbehaviour must be reported to or brought to the attention of the
Scottish FA within six (6) days of the day of the match.

Don't think so. It specifies that the Judicial Panel will deal with it and that it has to be reported within 6 days. The compliance officer will have done that, so there will be a case to answer.

All the actual offences listed are couched in the language of "reasonable and practicable".

Remember we have a lawyer on the board. :wink:


"Obviously my professional skills I would hope will be useful," says Jones. "I am a fairly well qualified solicitor with considerable experience of contractual matters, especially football. I am familiar with Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football Association rules."


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/competitions/premiership/hibs-have-law-on-their-side-as-jones-joins-board-1-682541

Waxy
30-05-2016, 04:08 PM
What did Rangers and Celtic get for 1980?

marinello59
30-05-2016, 04:12 PM
What did Rangers and Celtic get for 1980?

That was 36 years ago, hardly relavent now.