Jim44
07-08-2016, 09:26 AM
Copied and Pasted from FollowFollow. I presume it's from the Sunday Mail.
SFA must punish Hibs and Rangers - Gordon Waddell
AMAZING that the more time passes, the more innocent the two clubs and their fans seem to think they are.
Which is why the reaction to Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen QC’s report into the scenes at the end of the Scottish Cup Final has been so predictable.
Anyone expecting it to come out all guns blazing obviously had never read the brief of what it was supposed to be in the first place.
But all you have to do is read between the lines to realise that he has done just enough – barely – of what the SFA needed him to do to get the job done.
Which was give them enough rope.
Now it’s up to them to tie the noose. Punish Hibs and Rangers with enough that it stops it happening again.
The whole purpose of the independent inquiry was procedural. It was perfectly clear at the time.
Were the SFA and Hampden Park Limited responsible for what happened? Did they have all the plans in place that they reasonably could? Had they communicated with the clubs, the police, the stewards?
Yes, to all of the above? Fine. Backsides covered.
With just enough explanation of why things did happen for them to now go and apply their rules without any blowback.
Unlike our other competitions, the Scottish Cup’s Rule 28 on Disorderly Conduct does apply strict liability for the behaviour of their fans to the clubs. And it gives the SFA power to use their Judicial Panel protocols to censure, fine, eject the club from the competition or suspend them if they’re found guilty.
While the report prevaricates on the degree of that guilt, there’s enough there for Compliance Officer Tony McGlennan to get his teeth into.
The aggression of the Hibs invasion’s vanguard who crossed the halfway line, their “hostile and irresponsible attitude”. The “incidents involving direct physical confrontation with Rangers players which included the hurling of obscene language and sectarian abuse”. A scene most Hibs fans now seem to deny ever happened.
And at the other end? Plenty more to go on. The visceral reaction of a portion of the Rangers support to the taunting.
The fact the police had to spend time in their end dealing with sectarian singing and pyrotechnics.
It’s all there. Same as it was when some of us wrote all of that on the day.
It hasn’t gone away, despite the best efforts of everyone involved to convince people it had.
Including social media’s finest, the vast majority of whom weren’t at the game, support neither club and saw very little of what went on thanks to TV pulling away from it. They all still know better though.
So the SFA now have to take their responsibility to the game seriously and deal with it.
You’ve wanted strict liability for long enough through the whole game, so use the luxury of the rule to which your members subscribed here to do something that will act as a proper deterrent. The clubs will protest.
Predictably, Rangers already have. Not that their over-reaction is entirely without cause.
Bowen does contradict himself. In paragraph 7.1.7, he claims if Hibs fans hadn’t crossed the halfway line, there would’ve been no need for him to write his report. Yet he condemns the physical confrontations with the Rangers players, most of which took place inside the Hibs half. It can’t be both. What he should have said – what I’ve always said – is that if Hibs fans hadn’t left the stands, there would be no need for this report.
That’s the genesis of the whole thing, 114 years of pent-up high spirits or not.
Hibs, equally predictably, are keeping their own counsel. Leeann Dempster has said they’ve identified fans and taken appropriate action. But every time she’s asked how many and what action, she refuses to answer.
They don’t want to give the SFA any more rope but at some point they’re going to have to properly acknowledge their fans’ unacceptable conduct, which hasn’t happened yet. From either end, to be fair.
All they’ve done is invite more legislation, more political nose-poking, with Bowen’s conclusion that it would be an idea for government to pass a law putting the illegality of pitch invasions on the books. At least he acknowledges the fact the laws currently on the statute, if used properly, should be enough to prevent it. But he has cracked open the door for Holyrood’s Dudley-Do-gooders to use the game as a vehicle for their own political gain.
One final point about the whole episode – at least until the punishments start getting doled out.
And that’s about the SFA choosing to release the report at ten to five on a Friday.
On the eve of a new league season, they obliterated the kick-off from the news agenda, despite the short-order deadlines. Secondly, they did it at a time when their phones were off and their mobiles were all straight to answering services.
And thirdly, it’s clear they hope that by the time everyone’s back to work tomorrow, the world will have moved on. It’s becoming a habitual tool of theirs when it comes to fronting up news that will prompt a reaction.
They’ll claim transparency doesn’t work to a set timetable but the most see-through aspect of it is the use of one of the oldest tricks in the PR manual.
Hopefully they’ll take more responsibility in the next part of the process. Because for those of us who haven’t let 77 days cloud memories, that’s the most important bit.
SFA must punish Hibs and Rangers - Gordon Waddell
AMAZING that the more time passes, the more innocent the two clubs and their fans seem to think they are.
Which is why the reaction to Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen QC’s report into the scenes at the end of the Scottish Cup Final has been so predictable.
Anyone expecting it to come out all guns blazing obviously had never read the brief of what it was supposed to be in the first place.
But all you have to do is read between the lines to realise that he has done just enough – barely – of what the SFA needed him to do to get the job done.
Which was give them enough rope.
Now it’s up to them to tie the noose. Punish Hibs and Rangers with enough that it stops it happening again.
The whole purpose of the independent inquiry was procedural. It was perfectly clear at the time.
Were the SFA and Hampden Park Limited responsible for what happened? Did they have all the plans in place that they reasonably could? Had they communicated with the clubs, the police, the stewards?
Yes, to all of the above? Fine. Backsides covered.
With just enough explanation of why things did happen for them to now go and apply their rules without any blowback.
Unlike our other competitions, the Scottish Cup’s Rule 28 on Disorderly Conduct does apply strict liability for the behaviour of their fans to the clubs. And it gives the SFA power to use their Judicial Panel protocols to censure, fine, eject the club from the competition or suspend them if they’re found guilty.
While the report prevaricates on the degree of that guilt, there’s enough there for Compliance Officer Tony McGlennan to get his teeth into.
The aggression of the Hibs invasion’s vanguard who crossed the halfway line, their “hostile and irresponsible attitude”. The “incidents involving direct physical confrontation with Rangers players which included the hurling of obscene language and sectarian abuse”. A scene most Hibs fans now seem to deny ever happened.
And at the other end? Plenty more to go on. The visceral reaction of a portion of the Rangers support to the taunting.
The fact the police had to spend time in their end dealing with sectarian singing and pyrotechnics.
It’s all there. Same as it was when some of us wrote all of that on the day.
It hasn’t gone away, despite the best efforts of everyone involved to convince people it had.
Including social media’s finest, the vast majority of whom weren’t at the game, support neither club and saw very little of what went on thanks to TV pulling away from it. They all still know better though.
So the SFA now have to take their responsibility to the game seriously and deal with it.
You’ve wanted strict liability for long enough through the whole game, so use the luxury of the rule to which your members subscribed here to do something that will act as a proper deterrent. The clubs will protest.
Predictably, Rangers already have. Not that their over-reaction is entirely without cause.
Bowen does contradict himself. In paragraph 7.1.7, he claims if Hibs fans hadn’t crossed the halfway line, there would’ve been no need for him to write his report. Yet he condemns the physical confrontations with the Rangers players, most of which took place inside the Hibs half. It can’t be both. What he should have said – what I’ve always said – is that if Hibs fans hadn’t left the stands, there would be no need for this report.
That’s the genesis of the whole thing, 114 years of pent-up high spirits or not.
Hibs, equally predictably, are keeping their own counsel. Leeann Dempster has said they’ve identified fans and taken appropriate action. But every time she’s asked how many and what action, she refuses to answer.
They don’t want to give the SFA any more rope but at some point they’re going to have to properly acknowledge their fans’ unacceptable conduct, which hasn’t happened yet. From either end, to be fair.
All they’ve done is invite more legislation, more political nose-poking, with Bowen’s conclusion that it would be an idea for government to pass a law putting the illegality of pitch invasions on the books. At least he acknowledges the fact the laws currently on the statute, if used properly, should be enough to prevent it. But he has cracked open the door for Holyrood’s Dudley-Do-gooders to use the game as a vehicle for their own political gain.
One final point about the whole episode – at least until the punishments start getting doled out.
And that’s about the SFA choosing to release the report at ten to five on a Friday.
On the eve of a new league season, they obliterated the kick-off from the news agenda, despite the short-order deadlines. Secondly, they did it at a time when their phones were off and their mobiles were all straight to answering services.
And thirdly, it’s clear they hope that by the time everyone’s back to work tomorrow, the world will have moved on. It’s becoming a habitual tool of theirs when it comes to fronting up news that will prompt a reaction.
They’ll claim transparency doesn’t work to a set timetable but the most see-through aspect of it is the use of one of the oldest tricks in the PR manual.
Hopefully they’ll take more responsibility in the next part of the process. Because for those of us who haven’t let 77 days cloud memories, that’s the most important bit.