THE Scottish Football Association yesterday announced the appointment of their first full-time compliance officer.

The role was created in the summer as part of the governing body’s extensive overhaul of their disciplinary procedures.

It involves reviewing incidents across Scottish football and deciding whether they should be referred to the SFA judicial panel in instances when it is deemed there has been a breach of the rules that was not reported by the match officials.

A temporary stand-in has carried out the job since the start of the season but the vacancy has now been filled by Vincent Lunny, a 38-year-old from Lanarkshire who is said to bring with him a wealth of experience in legal practice from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

Until recently, he was the Crown Office representative at the International Co-operation Unit, where his time was split between Edinburgh and The Hague. Previously, Lunny was seconded as a Legal Officer for the United Nations’ International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, also at The Hague, working in war crimes prosecutions.

“I am delighted to take on such an exciting and challenging role within the Scottish FA,” he said. “Having been impressed by the changes to the disciplinary procedures in the summer I am looking forward to working in the unique environment of Scottish football.”

The appointment was given a cautious welcome by Fraser Wishart, chief executive of PFA Scotland, although he would like to see the role extended so the compliance officer is also given powers to review incidents in which a player has been wrongly sent off.

“We supported the principle of the judicial panel and moving the decision-making from the committees,” he said. “Someone has to start the process and that’s the compliance officer who acts like a procurator fiscal; I’ve no issue with that.

“But what I would like to see is the compliance officer being given the powers to look at an incident and think, ‘that player has been sent off wrongly’. At the moment, it’s down to the player and his club to appeal in that scenario.”

Wishart was less enthusiastic about the make-up of the judicial panel in which “non-football people” can sit in judgment of players and their actions.

“We’ve been out to speak with a lot of our players and they have issues with how any charge is adjudicated upon. We pushed through a change to the appeal panel about 18 months ago so cases would be heard by a former referee, a former player and a former manager. It meant players were judged by those with a knowledge of on-field activities.

“But that was changed unilaterally in the summer by the SFA and now the judicial panel is often made up of people who haven’t been around football and haven’t played the game. It’s people who are nominated by the SFA board who sit in judgment.”

Wishart would also like to see the scope of appeal for a player who has been sent off extended beyond those who were dimissed either for denying a goalscoring opportunity or for violent conduct.

He cited the example of Ross County’s Steven Craig, who amassed an eight-game ban, part of which was for allegedly putting his hands on the match referee, a charge the player denied but couldn’t appeal.

“We want to see fairness across the board. We don’t want it to be just for prosecuting players and managers,” he added.