Strict Liability - That will be that then

[The Harp Awakes]

The game is truly ****ed with this clown at the helm:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48500853

[BoomtownHibees]

The game is truly ****ed with this clown at the helm:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48500853

I don’t like him much but have to agree about the strict liability part

Hibs being punished for the actions of 1 or 2 individuals wouldn’t be right imo

[Wilson]

The game is truly ****ed with this clown at the helm:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48500853

I don't like Doncaster but this is the only thing he has ever said that I actually agree with

[Onion]

... but 39 clubs agreed that 2 clubs should be held responsible :greengrin

[marinello59]

He’s right.

[The Modfather]

Easy for Donkey Doncaster to say strict liability isn’t the answer while not giving any solutions himself.

A joke that the clubs, ours included, keep him in a job.

[Hermit Crab]

We don't want liability, we would get done every other week for smoke bombs and pitch encroachment.

[Monts]

We don't want liability, we would get done every other week for smoke bombs and pitch encroachment.

Would we? Or would people stop doing those things?

[Hermit Crab]

Would we? Or would people stop doing those things?


Unlikely.

[BILLYHIBS]

We don't want liability, we would get done every other week for smoke bombs and pitch encroachment.
Celtic and The Rangers dont want it either and I think that is the whole point of the matter but UEFA has it! 😁👍🏾

[Bangkok Hibby]

Would we? Or would people stop doing those things?

Very unlikely. A55holes seldom have the brain power to consider consequences.

[JimBHibees]

The game is truly ****ed with this clown at the helm:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48500853

Well there goes any attempt to stop mainly Rangers signing sectarian songs. Absolute nonsense it doesnt work anywhere UEFA fined Rangers for singing songs the club crapped themselves and suddenly they were telling fans not to sing them and it pretty much stopped. Now no responsibility by the authorities, you struggle to get anyone of any importance actually agreeing it takes place at all. The biggest issue in Scottish football isnt a couple of numpties throwing coins or fronting up a player it is thousands of people singing mainly illegal songs in every game without any recourse or responsibility for that club. Shameful IMO especially the other clubs.

[The Harp Awakes]

Well there goes any attempt to stop mainly Rangers signing sectarian songs. Absolute nonsense it doesnt work anywhere UEFA fined Rangers for singing songs the club crapped themselves and suddenly they were telling fans not to sing them and it pretty much stopped. Now no responsibility by the authorities, you struggle to get anyone of any importance actually agreeing it takes place at all. The biggest issue in Scottish football isnt a couple of numpties throwing coins or fronting up a player it is thousands of people singing mainly illegal songs in every game without any recourse or responsibility for that club. Shameful IMO especially the other clubs.

Agreed.

If Doncaster genuinely believes strict liability will not work, what's his alternative? Nothing it seems as 'there's problems in other parts of Europe'. What a cop out, a complete lack of leadership and abdication of responsibility.

[BILLYHIBS]

Back to 3000 Old Firm morons spewing out their sectarian bile at us for ninety minutes without reproach

Nothing changes but hey it’s Scotland!

Absoluute disgrace we will forever be stuck in the 17th century

The bigots win again

[weecounty hibby]

Only protecting the interests of two clubs here. We have complete fuds in our support but they would be pulled up week in week out if SL was brought in and used correctly. He is really pushing the OF at the moment after his cross border pish the other day. Again only two clubs want that to happen. Scottish football is so much more than the bigot twins but you wouldn't know it when Doncaster speaks

[Sylar]

He's the antithesis of progress for our game, but I agree with him here.

Say it's brought in, and we're at the last game of the season - Celtc are chasing 10 in a row, are level on points with Rangers, and a win secures Celtc the title. The majority of Rangers fans will be rightly watching their own team, but let's say a small band of them decide to provide a bit of insurance. They don Celtc tops for the day, go to wherever Celtc are playing their game and behave like complete dicks - invading the pitch, assaulting players, throwing smoke bombs, screaming all types of abuse...under strict liability, that could result in points deductions and impact the integrity of the league.

It's too easy to manipulate and doesn't deal with the root problem. Quite what the solution is, I don't know, but strict liability is a system to be weaponised.

[CentreLine]

He's the antithesis of progress for our game, but I agree with him here.

Say it's brought in, and we're at the last game of the season - Celtc are chasing 10 in a row, are level on points with Rangers, and a win secures Celtc the title. The majority of Rangers fans will be rightly watching their own team, but let's say a small band of them decide to provide a bit of insurance. They don Celtc tops for the day, go to wherever Celtc are playing their game and behave like complete dicks - invading the pitch, assaulting players, throwing smoke bombs, screaming all types of abuse...under strict liability, that could result in points deductions and impact the integrity of the league.

It's too easy to manipulate and doesn't deal with the root problem. Quite what the solution is, I don't know, but strict liability is a system to be weaponised.

I really don't see it as that simple. If it was that easy fans of opposing clubs would be doing this at European matches, after all that is where the big money is.

Right now the clubs that might be affected are largely in control where their ticket allocation for SPFL matches go.
Both The Rangers and Celtic and to a large extent Hibs, Aberdeen and Hearts, have a sufficient registered fan base to fill their allocation for any away game. It would take a fair bit of collusion from home supporters to allow a malignant group of fans to get tickets and that is unlikely. This argument is a red herring that is rolled out by clubs afraid of the consequences of strict liability, in particular, the two large Glasgow clubs who rely on outpouring of hatred to keep their fan base numbers.

[BILLYHIBS]

The whole point of Strict Liability is self policing

It worked in Italy in the noughties where proper fans shouted down racist chants and pulled down neofascist banners

The consequences for the home clubs was closure of grounds and loss of revenue

Other countries do not understand or comprehend our sectarian problem

It is engrained in our society

It is encouraged by the bigot brothers for their own financial gain and they are happy to call out everyone else apart from themselves even although the whole of Scotland knows they are the two main protagonists

[B.H.F.C]

Only protecting the interests of two clubs here. We have complete fuds in our support but they would be pulled up week in week out if SL was brought in and used correctly. He is really pushing the OF at the moment after his cross border pish the other day. Again only two clubs want that to happen. Scottish football is so much more than the bigot twins but you wouldn't know it when Doncaster speaks

They would be pulled up week in, week out but at what cost to the club?

We’d incur fines every time we had a big game because people would continue to be unable to behave themselves.

[neil7908]

Agreed.

If Doncaster genuinely believes strict liability will not work, what's his alternative? Nothing it seems as 'there's problems in other parts of Europe'. What a cop out, a complete lack of leadership and abdication of responsibility.

Exactly. I'm for strict liability but accept that it's not perfect.

If it's not the answer then what is? What is Doncaster going to do to stop sectarian hate being spewed every Saturday by thousands?

[Antifa Hibs]

Well there goes any attempt to stop mainly Rangers signing sectarian songs. Absolute nonsense it doesnt work anywhere UEFA fined Rangers for singing songs the club crapped themselves and suddenly they were telling fans not to sing them and it pretty much stopped. Now no responsibility by the authorities, you struggle to get anyone of any importance actually agreeing it takes place at all. The biggest issue in Scottish football isnt a couple of numpties throwing coins or fronting up a player it is thousands of people singing mainly illegal songs in every game without any recourse or responsibility for that club. Shameful IMO especially the other clubs.

Should it not be the police and governments problem to deal with sectarian singing? (Which is pie in the sky as i'll guess a decent amount of government and police officials are in the orange order).

What countries have strict liability and does it work? Germany have and there's pyro all the time.

[660]

I don't want strict liability as I want to go on the pitch again when we complete the treble next may.

[Keith_M]

Should it not be the police and governments problem to deal with sectarian singing? (Which is pie in the sky as i'll guess a decent amount of government and police officials are in the orange order).

What countries have strict liability and does it work? Germany have and there's pyro all the time.


Dortmund had a section of their ground closed a couple of years back because the Ultras that inhabit part of that section attacked innocent men, women and children before a game against RB Leipzig. The club were also fined 100k Euros

Story Here (https://www.thelocal.de/20170213/dortmund-to-shut-stand-following-hooligan-attacks-on-families)

It was considered heavy handed by many but sent out a very powerful message that such behaviour won't be tolerated.

I wish our footballing authorities had the balls do do something like that.

[PatHead]

It is up to the police to enforce the law not clubs. Clubs can do their part but it will only help so far.

The police could apply to refuse licences for stands due to the behaviour of supporters. Even just for a game or two. That would put the wind up the support and perhaps begin to change attitudes.

[JeMeSouviens]

Very unlikely. A55holes seldom have the brain power to consider consequences.

The Old Huns (who I think we can all agree were followed by a support with an unsurpassed level of ********ry) stopped singing about the Pope and Fenian blood when under threat of punishment from UEFA. I don't see how Donkey can say that didn't work? It's the only thing that's ever worked with those bigoted muppets.

[JimBHibees]

He's the antithesis of progress for our game, but I agree with him here.

Say it's brought in, and we're at the last game of the season - Celtc are chasing 10 in a row, are level on points with Rangers, and a win secures Celtc the title. The majority of Rangers fans will be rightly watching their own team, but let's say a small band of them decide to provide a bit of insurance. They don Celtc tops for the day, go to wherever Celtc are playing their game and behave like complete dicks - invading the pitch, assaulting players, throwing smoke bombs, screaming all types of abuse...under strict liability, that could result in points deductions and impact the integrity of the league.

It's too easy to manipulate and doesn't deal with the root problem. Quite what the solution is, I don't know, but strict liability is a system to be weaponised.

Old firm fans generally find it difficult to get tickets and they need to be season ticket holders. Also Scotland is a small village and it wouldnt be long in identifying Billy McBoyne in a celtic top for a day.

[JimBHibees]

I really don't see it as that simple. If it was that easy fans of opposing clubs would be doing this at European matches, after all that is where the big money is.

Right now the clubs that might be affected are largely in control where their ticket allocation for SPFL matches go.
Both The Rangers and Celtic and to a large extent Hibs, Aberdeen and Hearts, have a sufficient registered fan base to fill their allocation for any away game. It would take a fair bit of collusion from home supporters to allow a malignant group of fans to get tickets and that is unlikely. This argument is a red herring that is rolled out by clubs afraid of the consequences of strict liability, in particular, the two large Glasgow clubs who rely on outpouring of hatred to keep their fan base numbers.

Totally agree.

[JimBHibees]

The Old Huns (who I think we can all agree were followed by a support with an unsurpassed level of ********ry) stopped singing about the Pope and Fenian blood when under threat of punishment from UEFA. I don't see how Donkey can say that didn't work? It's the only thing that's ever worked with those bigoted muppets.

It worked because it was done by someone external to this country as no one in Scotland had the backbone to do what was needed.

[JimBHibees]

It is up to the police to enforce the law not clubs. Clubs can do their part but it will only help so far.

The police could apply to refuse licences for stands due to the behaviour of supporters. Even just for a game or two. That would put the wind up the support and perhaps begin to change attitudes.

When have the police ever got involved in this. It is up to football authorities to deal with behaviour in football grounds and clubs to abide with those rules. If football authorities dont put in place a suitable structure then government should force them to do so.

[Antifa Hibs]

Dortmund had a section of their ground closed a couple of years back because the Ultras that inhabit part of that section attacked innocent men, women and children before a game against RB Leipzig. The club were also fined 100k Euros

Story Here (https://www.thelocal.de/20170213/dortmund-to-shut-stand-following-hooligan-attacks-on-families)

It was considered heavy handed by many but sent out a very powerful message that such behaviour won't be tolerated.

I wish our footballing authorities had the balls do do something like that.

2 things. When have we seen innocent men, woman and children attacked before or after a game in this country? Also the fact Frankfurt and Hamburg have had stand closures around the same time as this kinda proves its not really a deterrent?

If a group of hardcore ultras/fanatics/hooligans physically attack a group of innocent opposing supporters they should be put through the courts, not closing a wee section of their stand.

Let's be honest the worst thing to happen in Scotland on a weekly basis is a few dodgy chants. If strict liability was brought in there is no chance we're seeing fines and ground closures for singing BJK, up the ra/uda or the billy boys.

[PatHead]

When have the police ever got involved in this. It is up to football authorities to deal with behaviour in football grounds and clubs to abide with those rules. If football authorities dont put in place a suitable structure then government should force them to do so.

Since when did the law of the land not apply inside football grounds?

[Bristolhibby]

Unlikely.

If the team lost points it would stop overnight. The fans would enforce it.

J

[Bristolhibby]

He's the antithesis of progress for our game, but I agree with him here.

Say it's brought in, and we're at the last game of the season - Celtc are chasing 10 in a row, are level on points with Rangers, and a win secures Celtc the title. The majority of Rangers fans will be rightly watching their own team, but let's say a small band of them decide to provide a bit of insurance. They don Celtc tops for the day, go to wherever Celtc are playing their game and behave like complete dicks - invading the pitch, assaulting players, throwing smoke bombs, screaming all types of abuse...under strict liability, that could result in points deductions and impact the integrity of the league.

It's too easy to manipulate and doesn't deal with the root problem. Quite what the solution is, I don't know, but strict liability is a system to be weaponised.

Sell tickets to pointed members of the Celtic travel club only.

J

[wills]

Why not introduce it for a trial season then see if it works

[Wilson]

Dortmund had a section of their ground closed a couple of years back because the Ultras that inhabit part of that section attacked innocent men, women and children before a game against RB Leipzig. The club were also fined 100k Euros

Story Here (https://www.thelocal.de/20170213/dortmund-to-shut-stand-following-hooligan-attacks-on-families)

It was considered heavy handed by many but sent out a very powerful message that such behaviour won't be tolerated.

I wish our footballing authorities had the balls do do something like that.

Does it work though? The story you reference is from 2017. For all the posturing there were still similar scenes at this year's derby with Schalke. Fans like this only care about themselves and their roles within their group. They aren't stopping to worry about the effect on the club and would likely play the victim over sanctions. Claiming they only add to the atmosphere. Claiming the sanctions are heavy handed. Pointing fingers and indulging in a bit of whataboutery (seem familiar?).

Folk seem to think strict liability will be used as some sort of crusade against sectarianism. That Rangers and Celtic would be on the sharp end of it. I am almost certain that incidents from hibs, hearts, and Aberdeen fans will be overblown. That one flare will outweigh a thousand singers. We will be made to look bad and they will get nothing like the sanctions people are hoping for.

Putting the old firm aside and outlining what strict liability means for hibs. I don't want our club to be defined by the one or two morons that follow us. The majority being affected by a high profile minority. The club paying trumped up fines better spent on playing staff. Voting for strict liability, in our case, isnt striking a blow against sectarianism. It would be like turkies voting for Christmas.

[Keith_M]

2 things. When have we seen innocent men, woman and children attacked before or after a game in this country? Also the fact Frankfurt and Hamburg have had stand closures around the same time as this kinda proves its not really a deterrent?

If a group of hardcore ultras/fanatics/hooligans physically attack a group of innocent opposing supporters they should be put through the courts, not closing a wee section of their stand.

Let's be honest the worst thing to happen in Scotland on a weekly basis is a few dodgy chants. If strict liability was brought in there is no chance we're seeing fines and ground closures for singing BJK, up the ra/uda or the billy boys.


How do you know that it didn't have an effect on the behavour of that segment of their support?

For one thing, they really wern't popular with other Dortmund Fans because of this, and certainly not with the club.

When Rangers were fined by UEFA, they clamped down on sectarian singing, something the current owners show no interest in.

I'm not saying violence is the same as sectarianisn. The people engaging in either need to be dealt with, though, and if their club needs a push to do that, then so be it.

[Chorley Hibee]

Doncaster, as usual, offering us problems rather than solutions.

The first sign of a lack of leadership.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Does it work though? The story you reference is from 2017. For all the posturing there were still similar scenes at this year's derby with Schalke. Fans like this only care about themselves and their roles within their group. They aren't stopping to worry about the effect on the club and would likely play the victim over sanctions. Claiming they only add to the atmosphere. Claiming the sanctions are heavy handed. Pointing fingers and indulging in a bit of whataboutery (seem familiar?).

Folk seem to think strict liability will be used as some sort of crusade against sectarianism. That Rangers and Celtic would be on the sharp end of it. I am almost certain that incidents from hibs, hearts, and Aberdeen fans will be overblown. That one flare will outweigh a thousand singers. We will be made to look bad and they will get nothing like the sanctions people are hoping for.

Putting the old firm aside and outlining what strict liability means for hibs. I don't want our club to be defined by the one or two morons that follow us. The majority being affected by a high profile minority. The club paying trumped up fines better spent on playing staff. Voting for strict liability, in our case, isnt striking a blow against sectarianism. It would be like turkies voting for Christmas.

This all day long. If any law is broken the police should deal with it. Now like insurance policies, if used the charge goes up, but punishing the club for the actions of a minority is wrong

[BILLYHIBS]

Strict liability or a diluted form as they have in England would be better than what we have in Scotland just now which is anarchy

It would certainly help tackle the problem of sectarianism which once again appears to be getting brushed under the carpet by the SFA

It will be back in all its glory in the new season

Hibs Celtic and The Rangers have all suffered recently under UEFAs Strict Liability regulations in the form of fines and as others have pointed out it did seem to have an affect on The Rangers songbook albeit for a brief spell

[Moulin Yarns]

Well there goes any attempt to stop mainly Rangers signing sectarian songs.

Are there a lot of deaf rangers supporters? 😉

[PatHead]

Strict liability or a diluted form as they have in England would be better than what we have in Scotland just now which is anarchy

It would certainly help tackle the problem of sectarianism which once again appears to be getting brushed under the carpet by the SFA

It will be back in all its glory in the new season

Hibs Celtic and The Rangers have all suffered recently under UEFAs Strict Liability regulations in the form of fines and as others have pointed out it did seem to have an affect on The Rangers songbook albeit for a brief spell

The fine we received didn't stop supporters using flares this season.

[Perd Hapley]

To me it's about whether those in charge simply want to stop being embarrassed by chants at football matches or are serious about rooting out sectarianism in Scottish society. The football gives the songs a platform for a good anti-establishment airing for sure and I'm not sure it's ever possible or desirable to completely separate politics from football, but on that same note if we accept that what sectarianism exists in Scottish football is contorted onto the Old Firm then we have to face up to the stone cold fact that doing what's in our power - between Holyrood and Hampden - would be a hell of a first step in solving a wider societal problem. But it needs to be understood on those terms - legislation can't change bigots, but it can nudge society in the right direction over generations.

As for those who play the free speech card on lyrical content, free speech is a right that comes with it the responsibility to engage with disagreement, and if more billy boy/up the ra types understood that and made the effort to do so then maybe they'd realise that there's a lot more going on - not to draw false equivalences or lazy conclusions like - my whole point is that the lazy stereotypes underpinning sectarianism and the game as something exclusive to either of them should be challenged in the media and in society if we want to get anywhere with actually making the country more tolerant.

Though in truth I suspect the SFA and the MSPs are playing a totally different game right now.

[BILLYHIBS]

The fine we received didn't stop supporters using flares this season.

Agree

I was talking about Der Hun didn’t stop them for long either

[Antifa Hibs]

How do you know that it didn't have an effect on the behavour of that segment of their support?

For one thing, they really wern't popular with other Dortmund Fans because of this, and certainly not with the club.

When Rangers were fined by UEFA, they clamped down on sectarian singing, something the current owners show no interest in.

I'm not saying violence is the same as sectarianisn. The people engaging in either need to be dealt with, though, and if their club needs a push to do that, then so be it.

The stadium closure was only for incidents that happened inside the stadium, mostly the banners, laser pen's and pints being launched onto the pitch.

If stadium closures were such a deterrent would the Dortmund ultras not look back to when Eintracht recieved a couple of stand closures? Hamburg rioted when they got relegated and risked a stand closure, they know the consequences but still didn't stop them behaving in such away it needed riot police on the pitch for 20 minutes while the game got stopped.

Regarding the huns and their singing - strict liability might stop 1 or 2 of the blatant anti-catholic dittys in the stands but they can still sing them on the buses, in the clubs and pubs and in the streets etc. All you're doing then is sweeping the problem under the carpet by not allowing it to be broadcast on SS or BT every second week.

[PeeKay]

Folk seem to think strict liability will be used as some sort of crusade against sectarianism. That Rangers and Celtic would be on the sharp end of it. I am almost certain that incidents from hibs, hearts, and Aberdeen fans will be overblown. That one flare will outweigh a thousand singers. We will be made to look bad and they will get nothing like the sanctions people are hoping for..

Totally agree. Look at the mess the authorities have made of the disciplinary process this year. Does anyone believe that Scottish football's regulatory bodies are capable of producing a robust, even-handed, and transparent system to underpin strict liability?