Hibs been invited to talk to SFA

[hibsbollah]

Since a commitment to anti racism is actually, The Law, if the SFA arent helpful in this meeting, or try to constrain our ticket reduction in some way, we might need to consider a legal route. A Hate Crime bill was passed in the Scottish parliament in 2021, or we could even consider Health and Safety at Work legislation.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh to be a fly on the wall..

He's having a go at the insects now!

[WeeRussell]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's having a go at the insects now!

Do they have jobs?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do they have jobs?

Web designers.

[WeeRussell]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Web designers.

You’re pulling my legs?

[matty_f]

Were any of you aware of this?

https://x.com/zeshankenzo/status/176...Ggie80A2m3HH1A

There’s a link to the full document in the thread, and it’s from 2014 so no doubt some water under the bridge since then, but it’s absolutely astonishing from the SFA in defence of Rangers.

[Hibiza]

The SFA / League have knowingly ignored all this for decades , perhaps half a century .

[B.H.F.C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Trying to decide whether this is a welcome invitation or one with undertones of threat.

The SFA are totally complicit in it and have been for all the time it’s been happening. They won’t like it being called out and, as this progresses, we’re going to have all sorts of folk whether in governance or the media looking to undermine our position. Any indiscretion from our own support will get all sorts of coverage.

[LaMotta]

I think this invitation is for a friendly chat, and could be around setting the ball rolling for strict liability.

Scotland is the only country in Europe that does not have some kind of strict liability for supporter behaviour and overall security in football grounds. If it was to eventually come in then following the Fifa sanctions regime, punishment to clubs would work as follows - in order of severity/number of incidents, and decided by a committee:

1) Fines for simple breaches
2) Increased fines for continuation of problems
3) Closing sections of ground where incidents occur
4) Closing stadium for all spectators
5) Dock Points
6) Expulsion from competition

Host clubs are responsible for order and security inside and around the stadium, before during and after matches. They are liable for incidents of any kind unless they can prove that they have not been negligent in any way in organisation of the match.

However all clubs are liable for inappropriate behaviour on the part of their supporters for the following indiscretions:

a) pitch invasions
b) throwing objects
c) lighting fireworks/pyro
d) laser pen use
e) the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit a provocative message not fit for a sports event - particularly messages of political, ideological, religious or offensive nature
f) acts of damage
g) causing a disturbance during national anthems
h) any other lack of order or discipline observed

It's the only way IMO to seriously reduce poor behaviour from fans.

[The Tubs]

Who would enforce strict liability? It can't be the SFA as it will just turn out like VAR.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Who would enforce strict liability? It can't be the SFA as it will just turn out like VAR.

It would likely be a newly formed SFA disciplinary commitee. But yeah questions would always arise around certain teams getting away with stuff....

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Since a commitment to anti racism is actually, The Law, if the SFA arent helpful in this meeting, or try to constrain our ticket reduction in some way, we might need to consider a legal route. A Hate Crime bill was passed in the Scottish parliament in 2021, or we could even consider Health and Safety at Work legislation.

This is a good shout.

Why is it that football players are forced to endure discriminatory hate speech directed to them at work?

If I was getting called the same things Hibs players are at my work I'd be demanding something was done about it ASAP and I'm sure the law would have something to say if my employer allowed it too continue.

[The Tubs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It would likely be a newly formed SFA disciplinary commitee. But yeah questions would always arise around certain teams getting away with stuff....

So the SFA will probably tell us at this meeting: "Shut the **** up or we'll hammer you with strict liability like we do with VAR".

[PHeffernan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So in Oct 2022 Kyle Lafferty was banned for 10 games by the SFA for breaching a rule which forbids the use of insulting language which includes reference to the likes of ethnic origin, race, nationality, religion or belief.

The 35-year-old Northern Ireland international appeared to use the phrase “pack of Fenian b*******”?

Well well SFA. Why have you not condoned the bigoted sectarian bile sung at Martin Boyle as he lay on the ER Pitch.


Then we have the Orange Order reporting Hibs fans for a banner depicting them with a red line through it.

So If they can report an incident like this to the Police maybe a couple of hundred or maybe thousand Hibs fans can report this sectarian singing as a hate crime to the Police.

Kyle Lafferty is a player and players behaviour is governed by the SFA disciplinary code

Our clubs voted not to be governed by strict liability in relation to supporter behaviour
Martin Boyle was subject to supporters behaviour which is not governed by the SFA

[Aldo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Kyle Lafferty is a player and players behaviour is governed by the SFA disciplinary code

Our clubs voted not to governed by strict liability in relation to supporter behaviour
Martin Boyle was subject to supporters behaviour which is not governed by the SFA

Thanks for clearing that up

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So the SFA will probably tell us at this meeting: "Shut the **** up or we'll hammer you with strict liability like we do with VAR".

Well Hibs are open to the idea of strict liability I believe.

[Musselbound]

I totally understand why everybody seems sceptical. But it's an interesting development - the issue is highlighted and something is happening. Maybe we should wait to see what the outcome of that is before reacting or trying to predict it?

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I totally understand why everybody seems sceptical. But it's an interesting development - the issue is highlighted and something is happening. Maybe we should wait to see what the outcome of that is before reacting or trying to predict it?

This place would be boring without speculation

[WhileTheChief..]

Based on everyone’s views on the SFA, do any of you have any confidence that strict liability would be enforced fairly and robustly?

Similar to the chat on VAR, it could easily lead to Hibs and others being fined, with the old firm facing zero consequences.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Based on everyone’s views on the SFA, do any of you have any confidence that strict liability would be enforced fairly and robustly?

Similar to the chat on VAR, it could easily lead to Hibs and others being fined, with the old firm facing zero consequences.

That's the worry for me.

The SFA clearly have no interest in making any changes and I don't trust them to run a school raffle fairly.

Having said that, I think it's time we try something.

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I totally understand why everybody seems sceptical. But it's an interesting development - the issue is highlighted and something is happening. Maybe we should wait to see what the outcome of that is before reacting or trying to predict it?

Are you new here?

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Based on everyone’s views on the SFA, do any of you have any confidence that strict liability would be enforced fairly and robustly?

Similar to the chat on VAR, it could easily lead to Hibs and others being fined, with the old firm facing zero consequences.

We’d have a game like Sunday night where Rangers get no punishment and we land a fine for an exit light bulb being out.

[Billy Whizz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this invitation is for a friendly chat, and could be around setting the ball rolling for strict liability.

Scotland is the only country in Europe that does not have some kind of strict liability for supporter behaviour and overall security in football grounds. If it was to eventually come in then following the Fifa sanctions regime, punishment to clubs would work as follows - in order of severity/number of incidents, and decided by a committee:

1) Fines for simple breaches
2) Increased fines for continuation of problems
3) Closing sections of ground where incidents occur
4) Closing stadium for all spectators
5) Dock Points
6) Expulsion from competition

Host clubs are responsible for order and security inside and around the stadium, before during and after matches. They are liable for incidents of any kind unless they can prove that they have not been negligent in any way in organisation of the match.

However all clubs are liable for inappropriate behaviour on the part of their supporters for the following indiscretions:

a) pitch invasions
b) throwing objects
c) lighting fireworks/pyro
d) laser pen use
e) the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit a provocative message not fit for a sports event - particularly messages of political, ideological, religious or offensive nature
f) acts of damage
g) causing a disturbance during national anthems
h) any other lack of order or discipline observed

It's the only way IMO to seriously reduce poor behaviour from fans.

Out of curiosity, what do they have in England

[PatHead]

The SFA had no option but to invite Hibs to a meeting. To do nothing would have left them open to further criticism. (I know, I know).

I would assume that their interest is in finding out more about the why we are doing it rather than about the cutting allocation. If the SFA had ignored the comments on fan behaviour it would reflect really badly on them in the non-football world and give the equally inept politicians someone to blame.

As someone who gave up their season ticket a couple of years ago and had no intention of going to matches against that pair I will support the board in their actions by attending these matches in addition to the odd ones I attend throughout the season.

[PHeffernan]

A lot of folk on this thread are blaming the SFA for what are SPFL issues which have arisen as a result of our clubs, including Hibs, voting against strict liability in relation to supporter behaviour.
The Hibs turkey appearing to call for Christmas last night has resulted in a quick invite from the SFA.
The SPFL will be gutted that Hibs have broken ranks after years of collective silence and strict liability could be on the menu again, watch them mobilise.
I think the SFA are going to make the SPFL squirm with the help of one of their member clubs. An opportunity to bloody the nose of the SPFL just fell into their lap.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Out of curiosity, what do they have in England

I think that FA is aligned to UEFA competition rules, which is also aligned to FIFA rules so the options open to them are as outlined above in previous post.

[Billy Whizz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think that FA is aligned to UEFA competition rules, which is also aligned to FIFA rules so the options open to them are as outlined above in previous post.

Ok thanks
Seems like we are out of step with the rest of Europe

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A lot of folk on this thread are blaming the SFA for what are SPFL created issues which have arisen as a result of our clubs, including Hibs, voting against strict liability in relation to supporter behaviour.
The Hibs turkey appearing to call for Christmas last night has resulted in a quick invite from the SFA.
The SPFL will be gutted that Hibs have broken ranks after years of collective silence and strict liability could be on the menu again, watch them mobilise.
I think the SFA are going to make the SPFL squirm with the help of one of their member clubs. An opportunity to bloody the nose of the SPFL just fell into their lap.

Neil Doncaster has come out very strongly against strict liability on a number of occasions - his stance is that individual fans should be punished more severly. However we know that Police Scotland would face an almost impossible task with that so it wont get us anywhere.

[CapitalGreen]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Based on everyone’s views on the SFA, do any of you have any confidence that strict liability would be enforced fairly and robustly?

Similar to the chat on VAR, it could easily lead to Hibs and others being fined, with the old firm facing zero consequences.

Absolutely not. Anything administered by the SFA will continue to punish smaller clubs disproportionately to the Old Firm while probably charging us for the privilege.

[LaMotta]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Based on everyone’s views on the SFA, do any of you have any confidence that strict liability would be enforced fairly and robustly?

Similar to the chat on VAR, it could easily lead to Hibs and others being fined, with the old firm facing zero consequences.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's the worry for me.

The SFA clearly have no interest in making any changes and I don't trust them to run a school raffle fairly.

Having said that, I think it's time we try something.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We’d have a game like Sunday night where Rangers get no punishment and we land a fine for an exit light bulb being out.

Understand this view.....but with punishments and offences clearly listed at the beginning of any implementation, you would hope there would be less room for the type of wooly and inconsistent interpretation we see from Scottish officials.

I'm probably living in cloud cuckoo land with that hope though....