I would like to bring to your attention to what I believe to be a rather curious situation surrounding the SFA Compliance Officer, Vincent Lunny, and the bans he has meted out this season.
Two of the following three televised quotes earned the manager in question a touchline ban.
One of the quotes however, has (in the absence of any action otherwise) been deemed as acceptable by Mr Lunny, and the manager will face no action over the outburst.
Jim McIntyre received a two-match ban for this:
Jim McIntyre 03/12/11: "For the second goal, the ref has had a nightmare. I've just watched it on video and it was never a penalty. It was a really, really poor decision."
Stuart McCall has received a one-match ban for this:
Stuart McCall 11/03/12: "When coming off the park, I calmly spoke to Craig and said I was disappointed he had not used his game intelligence to award us a free-kick after obviously coming to the wrong conclusion by awarding the corner. He replied that he couldn't just invent a free-kick decision, which is fair comment, but it is widely used throughout football and is recognised by both players and managers when such an obvious injustice occurs. My final comment of 'when you see it on TV, you will be embarrassed' is the quote I was sent to the stands for."
No action has been taken against Neil Lennon for this:
Neil Lennon 18/03/12: "It's a stonewall penalty. It's a shocking decision, absolutely shocking. He is clean through, holding the boy off, the guy lunges at him and he takes his legs away. For me, it's a criminal decision and it has cost us the Treble. To rub salt in the wound, he books Anthony for diving, which is awful. Awful refereeing."
I think you will agree that given the quotes above (available from various online media sources), it would appear quite strange as to why Mr Lennon's comments about Willie Collum's performance at the League Cup final on Sunday are not being investigated.
It appears to me that Mr Lunny is not applying consistency in his approach.
David Wallace, by email
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article