Hibs been invited to talk to SFA

[Irish_Steve]

May be worthy of s separate discussion but it looks like we may have started the ball rolling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68542255

[Scottie]

May be worthy of s separate discussion but it looks like we may have started the ball rolling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68542255
Where no doubt we will be slapped with a fine for 'bringing the game into dispute' or a points deduction.

But well done Hibs for having the balls to stand up for whats right & calling this out. Proud its our club that has started the ball rolling.:not worth

[Pedantic_Hibee]

The SFA should be ****ing ashamed of themselves for it to get to this stage.

[Aldo]

Where no doubt we will be slapped with a fine for 'bringing the game into dispute' or a points deduction.

But well done Hibs for having the balls to stand up for whats right & calling this out. Proud its our club that has started the ball rolling.:not worth

Can’t see them fining or a points deduction. We gave done what they should have done years ago. Condemned it but gave went decades either way their heads in the sand. They are as complicit.

[NAE NOOKIE]

May be worthy of s separate discussion but it looks like we may have started the ball rolling

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68542255

Hopefully be able to point to the letter to the club thread on this forum. This isn't simply Hibs behind this, the call for a ban on certain away fans is coming from our own supporters, and there is little doubt Hibs deciding to act now has been prompted to a fair extent by Hibs.Net. Something Hibs should point out to the SFA at the very start of this 'meeting'

[One Day Soon]

The SFA should be ****ing ashamed of themselves for it to get to this stage.


This a million times. The ****ing governing body of our game and they only belatedly act at this point rather than taking the lead and even then it's just for 'talks'.

They're interested in one thing and one thing only - and that's how to massage this problem away from the limelight without upsetting the established order.

[Hibs90]

This a million times. The ****ing governing body of our game and they only belatedly act at this point rather than taking the lead and even then it's just for 'talks'.

They're interested in one thing and one thing only - and that's how to massage this problem away from the limelight without upsetting the established order.

Spot on.

[kentao]

Probably going to discuss how we cant cut allocations for the SFA`s beloved Glasgow Rangers and how dare we claim their fans sang and behaved in a abhorrent manner. resulting in a fine and a slapped arse for our troubles.

[Winston Ingram]

This a million times. The ****ing governing body of our game and they only belatedly act at this point rather than taking the lead and even then it's just for 'talks'.

They're interested in one thing and one thing only - and that's how to massage this problem away from the limelight without upsetting the established order.

Yep. The instruction will be to stop talking about it.

I still find it absolutely incredible that in every game that either of the uglies play here without fail, we get this barrage of bigoted bile and it always goes unchallenged and unreported.

[SHODAN]

Tell them to **** off.

They only care about it now it actually affects their golden children.

[CapitalGreen]

Do the SFA not have eyes and ears, why is the onus on a member club to do this rather than our governing body take the lead themselves.

[Scorrie]

We’ll probably get a 10 point deduction

[K-Zazu]

Did they do the same with hearts when they cut the allocation?

[One Day Soon]

Literally IDGAF what the SFA want to say to us on this. The blazers have been actively enabling this sectarian bile for over 100 years. To not act is to endorse.

Time for talk is over.

[BoomtownHibees]

Did they do the same with hearts when they cut the allocation?

The 2 situations are not alike, other than both reducing their allocations.

Hearts reduced them to allow more of their own fans in (no laughing at the back)

Hibs are reducing due to their behaviour and it’s that which the SFA want to talk about

[Basildon Hibs]

Tell them to **** off.

They only care about it now it actually affects their golden children.

Spot on. No way should we turn up and entertain those *******s.
It's our stadium and we decide who gets in and who doesn't.

[Kato]

This a million times. The ****ing governing body of our game and they only belatedly act at this point rather than taking the lead and even then it's just for 'talks'.

They're interested in one thing and one thing only - and that's how to massage this problem away from the limelight without upsetting the established order....while allowing it to stay firmly in the limelight.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[green day]

The SFA can do nothing about what allocation Hibs give Rangers (except in the Scottish Cup), as evidenced by the "no Rangers/Celtic away fans" at that derby.

Perhaps they have been waiting for a club to say something?

[blackpoolhibs]

I hope we go in there all guns blazing, enough is enough. Tell them twats to get their house in order.

This has gone on for decades too long, man up Hibs and the SFA and call it out for what it is once and for all.

It's time for proper penalties, points deductions have to be threatened now. Start with a clean sheet, first infringement a warning, 2nd 5 point deduction, 3rd, 10 points, 4th, relegation.

[weecounty hibby]

I hope we just tell them how it is. Decades if inaction from the football authorities has allowed two teams fans, but the hun in particular, to behave however they want to. Sectarianism, bullying, harassment, anti social behaviour around the streets etc etc. The bigotry from them has got worse and worse since they got away with cheating almost scot free. We have made our decision based on what's best for Hibs, our support and the local community who must hate it when they come to town in their thousands

[Carheenlea]

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

[WeeRussell]

Oh to be a fly on the wall..

[Alex Trager]

Disappointed, was hoping this was for the decisions we’ve had against us over the last few weeks.

[.Sean.]

Conveniently takes the heat off their ***** refs

Might be a daft question but are the refs freelance for r do they work for SFA or SPFL?

[CropleyWasGod]

Conveniently takes the heat off their ***** refs

Might be a daft question but are the refs freelance for r do they work for SFA or SPFL?

Self-employed.

[HoboHarry]

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

They f****d with a wealthy American (or Canadian?) before and got ragdolled. Hopefully even those morons learned a lesson.

[greenlex]

Self-employed.
and we keep employing them. :rolleyes:

[Jack]

If the SFA want to discuss it they can get out their ivory tower and come through to Easter Road and we'll discuss it there.

[The Harp]

Do the SFA not have eyes and ears, why is the onus on a member club to do this rather than our governing body take the lead themselves.

Exactly so. It shouldn't have been left to a member club to take action against the bigots. This should have been dealt with by the SFA decades ago.
Shame on them.

[Aldo]

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.

[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]

Oh to be a fly on the wall..

He's having a go at the insects now!

[WeeRussell]

He's having a go at the insects now!

Do they have jobs?

[CropleyWasGod]

Do they have jobs?

Web designers.

[WeeRussell]

Web designers.

You’re pulling my legs?

[matty_f]

Were any of you aware of this?

https://x.com/zeshankenzo/status/1767563030403981465?s=46&t=9ECFsSDsGgie80A2m3HH1A

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 [emoji1303]

[LaMotta]

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]

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:greengrin

[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]

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]

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? :greengrin

[matty_f]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

:agree: 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]

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]

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.


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....

[CapitalGreen]

:agree: 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.

Punishing individual fans is a waste of time when dealing with the Old Firm as they have so many supporters, you ban one bigot and there is another 1000 waiting to take their place.

[HoboHarry]

:agree: 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.

If Celtic and Sevco wanted strict liability Doncaster would be strongly in favour of it.

[LaMotta]

Punishing individual fans is a waste of time when dealing with the Old Firm as they have so many supporters, you ban one bigot and there is another 1000 waiting to take their place.

:agree:


If Celtic and Sevco wanted strict liability Doncaster would be strongly in favour of it.

:agree:

Thats why I think its worth pushing for. In general we have a miniority committing offences, and only on an occasional basis. Rangers have thousands every week committing offences punishable under strict liability.

[CapitalGreen]

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 interpration we see from Scottish officials.

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

But the punishment stage only comes once their has been an investigation and charges brought. Like with VAR, if the SFA investigate and claim there are no charges to answer then (certain) clubs won’t be punished.

Like with VAR, they’ll just claim they didn’t see/hear any offence.

[LaMotta]

But the punishment stage only comes once their has been an investigation and charges brought. Like with VAR, if the SFA investigate and claim there are no charges to answer then (certain) clubs won’t be punished.

Like with VAR, they’ll just claim they didn’t see/hear any offence.

Yeh I'm scepitical too to be fair.

[matty_f]

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....
Have you seen what they’ve done with VAR?

[PatHead]

Can only imagine the fine we would have had at Tynecastle for these idiots throwing things on the pitch.

[Malthibby]

But the punishment stage only comes once their has been an investigation and charges brought. Like with VAR, if the SFA investigate and claim there are no charges to answer then (certain) clubs won’t be punished.

Like with VAR, they’ll just claim they didn’t see/hear any offence.


Got to start somewhere - if clubs put in decent digital gear to evidentially pick up the bile we all hear it will be increasingly difficult to get away with 'Move on, nothing to hear here,' especially if wealthy benefactors
are happy to threaten court action if the playing field is obviously less than even.
Been so long since I thought anything could change & so meybes suddenly over-optimistic but this has been so long coming, it's difficult not to think, 'This time, finally.....'

[Malthibby]

Can only imagine the fine we would have had at Tynecastle for these idiots throwing things on the pitch.

Aye but we would have deserved it. Hopefully the morons engaging it that kind of behaviour would accept it was utterly counter-productive, assuming they are actually genuine fans and
pack it in.
As long as the Old firm get the same treatment.....

[truehibernian]

Sorry but why just invite Hibs ? Invite all the top tier clubs, the match delegates they employ, and all the safety managers at clubs too. This sounds like an appeasement exercise in the hope “it goes away”.

[VoltaireHibs]

This will be a damage limitation exercise by the SFA. An attempt at a wee cozy arm around the shoulder 'Is there anything we can do to calm this down...' etc. The good cop approach whilst secretly wishing we'd stfu and let the bigot brothers get on with it.

Cats well and truly out the bag now though.

[VoltaireHibs]

If our ultra guys can't behave themselves then I'd give them their own section, and fence them in. Give them that full 'Italian Ultra' look that most of them are so desperately trying to impersonate. Now we've put our heads above the parapet we will need to be squeaky clean.

No whataboutery required.

[VoltaireHibs]

Sorry but why just invite Hibs ? Invite all the top tier clubs, the match delegates they employ, and all the safety managers at clubs too. This sounds like an appeasement exercise in the hope “it goes away”.

Spot on. Cup of tea, wee chat, promise to look into it ...blah blah blah.

[LaMotta]

Have you seen what they’ve done with VAR?

Yes, hence my final sentence :greengrin

[Dashing Bob S]

Only sensible path the football authorities can take is to ban the Huns from Scottish football.

[Carheenlea]

I think we could manage Strict Liability.

A club who has had some very recent incidents of fan misbehaviour taking the lead sends a positive message, and points to a genuine will to eradicate such incidents from within our own support.

Strict Liability is no guarantee of stopping the likes of missile throwing, but when it’s made very clear to fans what the consequences of such actions would be to the club, you’d have to feel confident in taking a big step into improving matters. Self policing may come more prevalent in groups where the more hot headed fans are reigned in a bit from friends.

While our breaches have been sporadic, some clubs would be in breach almost every single week. Certainly at every away game.
There will be no will from a certain club in adopting Strict Liability.

[LaMotta]

I think we could manage Strict Liability.

A club who has had some very recent incidents of fan misbehaviour taking the lead sends a positive message, and points to a genuine will to eradicate such incidents from within our own support.

Strict Liability is no guarantee of stopping the likes of missile throwing, but when it’s made very clear to fans what the consequences of such actions would be to the club, you’d have to feel confident in taking a big step into improving matters. Self policing may come more prevalent in groups where the more hot headed fans are reigned in a bit from friends.

While our breaches have been sporadic, some clubs would be in breach almost every single week. Certainly at every away game.
There will be no will from a certain club in adopting Strict Liability.

:agree:

The alternative is to just accept things as they are.

[MKHIBEE]

Only sensible path the football authorities can take is to ban the Huns from Scottish football.
We can only live in hope

[SteveHFC]

Spot on. Cup of tea, wee chat, promise to look into it ...blah blah blah.

think we are passed that stage the cans been opened lets see what comes out of it

[kentao]

Can only imagine the fine we would have had at Tynecastle for these idiots throwing things on the pitch.

If the SFA employed decent Refs who could referee a game properly then the non penalty wouldn't have cause such a backlash with the fans especially after we have witnessed poor decision after another for the last 4 weeks. Our 4 biggest games have been spoiled by useless officials even with the option of viewing their mistakes on a monitor they either decide not to bother or go over and still get the decision wrong. There's only so much fans will put up with before pushing back.

[.Sean.]

Just been discussed on Reporting Scotland and they had Chris Maclaughlin on and unless I’m going deef, he mentioned everything except sectarian singing? 😂

[we are hibs]

Typical BBC there on the news.


Apparently Hibs raised the issue about multiple things.

Not sectarian singing if you listen to the BBC. Just conveniently swept under the carpet and not even mentioned by the reporter.

[Libby Hibby]

The BBC should be called out too, part of the overall problem.

[Not In The Know]

Just been discussed on Reporting Scotland and they had Chris Maclaughlin on and unless I’m going deef, he mentioned everything except sectarian singing? 😂


Absolutely disgusting how they tip toe round it.

[ancient hibee]

Just been discussed on Reporting Scotland and they had Chris Maclaughlin on and unless I’m going deef, he mentioned everything except sectarian singing? 😂
Just what I was going to post. I got the impression that our supporters behaviour is very much on trial.

[Libby Hibby]

Just what I was going to post. I got the impression that our supporters behaviour is very much on trial.

And so it should. I was at Tiny a few weeks back and it was the worst I’ve ever seen it, needs addressed as well as the away fans.

[OstKurve Hibs]

Sfa going through the motions, fk them

[hibsbollah]

Just been discussed on Reporting Scotland and they had Chris Maclaughlin on and unless I’m going deef, he mentioned everything except sectarian singing? 😂

The word ‘sectarian’ didnt appear on the bbc report until almost at the end of the report, and only because the word appears in our Hibs press release.

My cousin from down south messaged me earlier to ask me what sort of bad behaviour it was all about. It’s deliberate, the BBC will not talk about this.

[ancient hibee]

And so it should. I was at Tiny a few weeks back and it was the worst I’ve ever seen it, needs addressed as well as the away fans.

I agree however our supporters behaviour is not what has prompted this move and the real reason for it was totally ignored by McLaughlin. He should be ashamed of himself unless he was muzzled by the BBC.He seemed very ill at ease.

[bod]

Think he’ll put his report in & someone else will edit it for it to read out

[Kato]

The BBC is the institution George Orwell based the Ministry of Truth on.

Just remember how they treated Hibs after the 2016 Cup Final and that'll tell you what they think of Hibs.

Not to be trusted on this issue.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Just_Jimmy]

Hibs will be told to silence it or else.

Scottish football is bent.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[MrSmith]

Hibs will be told to silence it or else.

Scottish football is bent.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

Silence Bill Foley and the BK group? Good luck with that one!

[LunasBoots]

Hibs will be told to silence it or else.

Scottish football is bent.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

Yup, they'll be told to tone it down...SFA will just give them a list of things that is being done and tell us its just a 'minority' the usual crap line that's been spouted for as long as I can remember.

[Jim44]

Farting against thunder. We are drawing attention to an issue which, deep down, they are supportive of and relish. It’s the lifeblood of their existence………. how dare minion members like us rock the boat. That’ll be a ten thousand pound fine for subordination, thank you very much, and a warning of points deduction if we push the issue further.

[Carheenlea]

Ibrox on the 30th is going to be real family fun day out isn’t it..?

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Politics aside, Wonder what Jack McConnell makes of all of this

[PHeffernan]

:agree: 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.

Neil Doncaster is a hired hand and the voice of the SPFL. As such he says exactly what the SPFL wants him to say. They are a business and are all about maximising revenues for it's members.
The members of the SPFL, including Hibs, voted against strict liability to avoid responsibility for their supporters behaviour.
It is a strategy that saved us a massive fine and penalties in 2016 and has continued to save us on many occasions since including numerous times this season.
Hibs made a statement last night because our supporters forced their hand. It's something they have strenuously avoided even acknowleging for many years. The SPFL and especially the OF will be very annoyed that they have broken company lines and will work hard behind the scenes to get the genie back in the bottle.

[Just_Jimmy]

Silence Bill Foley and the BK group? Good luck with that one!25% of hibs ownership? It's endemic and it's been that way for decades. A rich American outsider isn't changing that, especially with only a 25% ownership.

They'll just punish the club in other ways. Good luck getting a decision (I know it's already bent), good luck getting a home or favourable cup draw.

Don't underestimate how bent it is. How far they'll go to protect it.

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

[Onion]

Hibs invited to Glasgow so they can have a good old laugh. No a chance in Hell the SFA will do anything meaningful and we all know that. Like expecting a snake cutting its own head off.

[Lago]

Just been discussed on Reporting Scotland and they had Chris Maclaughlin on and unless I’m going deef, he mentioned everything except sectarian singing? 😂
Danced round it, he couldn't bring himself to say the word sectarian, laughable.

[paddy1875]

Probably tell us to keep quiet and we’ll start getting the decisions we should be getting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wills]

For too long we’ve sat back and accepted these vile and offensive chants.
The SFA, media outlets have been complicit in the cover up, refusing to address the issue directly with the offenders and turning down the audio as not to offend viewers. The club statement is spot on, rattling a few cages.
If the situation is ignored, I hope the club follow through on reducing away fans allocations. I’d also like them to ban media outlets who cover up the issues, no reporters and no cameras

[LaMotta]

Neil Doncaster is a hired hand and the voice of the SPFL. As such he says exactly what the SPFL wants him to say. They are a business and are all about maximising revenues for it's members.
The members of the SPFL, including Hibs, voted against strict liability to avoid responsibility for their supporters behaviour.
It is a strategy that saved us a massive fine and penalties in 2016 and has continued to save us on many occasions since including numerous times this season.
Hibs made a statement last night because our supporters forced their hand. It's something they have strenuously avoided even acknowleging for many years. The SPFL and especially the OF will be very annoyed that they have broken company lines and will work hard behind the scenes to get the genie back in the bottle.

Yes, but not all SPFL clubs voted against Strict Liability and Hibs appear to be open to exploring the idea further now ( I'm not sure we ever publicly stated our position either previously). The Scottish Government has already warned clubs if fan behaviour isn't sorted out then they may force Strict Liability on them., which would be far worse for them than coming up with a solution themselves. Hibs don't appear to be looking at saving ourselves anymore - I think they want genuine change in fan behaviour.

[gbhibby]

Ibrox on the 30th is going to be real family fun day out isn’t it..?
We should boycott the game.

[Forza Fred]

I first attended a Hibs v Rangers game in 1961 and that’s when I first heard the term ‘ Fenian ******* used’

I think every Rangers game I attended since I heard it too, and other sectarian nonsense of course.

Now resident in Oz, every Hibs v Rangers game I get up early in the morning to watch on tv, at the other side of the world I can clearly hear their sectarian bile…..60 years later.

Pardon me for thinking that if after all these years of the SFA doing SFA about it,
a fireside chat with Hibs isn’t suddenly going to change things.

The SFA are simply engaging in Condescending Management 1.01……pretending to be taking the problem seriously, but all they really want is for Hibs to STFU and get on with it.

[SHODAN]

We should boycott the game.

Way ahead of you mate, last time I was an Ibrox one of them threw a bottle into a crowd of our fans as we were all getting off the subway and it smashed metres from me. No intention of ever going back.

Also it was the last time we won there, which helps.

[VoltaireHibs]

Assuming as it's an 'invite' we can politely tell them to away and take a flying one? Keep it in-club, no need to get involved with anyone else. Just look after ourselves.

[Hibernian Verse]

Assuming as it's an 'invite' we can politely tell them to away and take a flying one? Keep it in-club, no need to get involved with anyone else. Just look after ourselves.

If the club are serious they need to take the lead and I expect we will.

[JimBHibees]

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.

Totally agree. All in the game including Hibs have allowed this to happen in terms of a deterioration in fan behaviour.

[JimBHibees]

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

Shock

[gbhibby]

Way ahead of you mate, last time I was an Ibrox one of them threw a bottle into a crowd of our fans as we were all getting off the subway and it smashed metres from me. No intention of ever going back.

Also it was the last time we won there, which helps.
At the semi final at Hampden at the end of the game 6 bottles thrown from the Rangers fans into the Hibs fans celebrating in the Toryglen end also three or four bottles thrown at Hibs players at the side of the pitch when celebrating a goal. Not a peep from the media

[Radium]

Presuming it will be the

Professional Game Board

Chair:
Andrew McKinlay (SPFL) Hearts

Members:
Ian Maxwell (Scottish FA),
Neil Doncaster (SPFL),
Leslie Gray (SPFL),
Alan Burrows (SPFL), Aberdeen
Stewart Robertson (SPFL), Rangers
Finlay Noble (SHFL) and
Tom Brown (SLFL)

… can’t see a rules committee on the SFA website

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish-fa/organisation/strategy-structure/who-we-are/board-committees/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

I first attended a Hibs v Rangers game in 1961 and that’s when I first heard the term ‘ Fenian ******* used’

I think every Rangers game I attended since I heard it too, and other sectarian nonsense of course.

Now resident in Oz, every Hibs v Rangers game I get up early in the morning to watch on tv, at the other side of the world I can clearly hear their sectarian bile…..60 years later.

Pardon me for thinking that if after all these years of the SFA doing SFA about it,
a fireside chat with Hibs isn’t suddenly going to change things.

The SFA are simply engaging in Condescending Management 1.01……pretending to be taking the problem seriously, but all they really want is for Hibs to STFU and get on with it.

Absolutely

[Se7enUp]

Danced round it, he couldn't bring himself to say the word sectarian, laughable.

Probably because his life has already previously been made a misery by the hun mob after highlighting sectarianism by their fans (at ER, as it happens).

[JimBHibees]

Probably because his life has already previously been made a misery by the hun mob after highlighting sectarianism by their fans (at ER, as it happens).

Shouldn’t be doing the job if he isn’t able to report properly

[gbhibby]

I first attended a Hibs v Rangers game in 1961 and that’s when I first heard the term ‘ Fenian ******* used’

I think every Rangers game I attended since I heard it too, and other sectarian nonsense of course.

Now resident in Oz, every Hibs v Rangers game I get up early in the morning to watch on tv, at the other side of the world I can clearly hear their sectarian bile…..60 years later.

Pardon me for thinking that if after all these years of the SFA doing SFA about it,
a fireside chat with Hibs isn’t suddenly going to change things.

The SFA are simply engaging in Condescending Management 1.01……pretending to be taking the problem seriously, but all they really want is for Hibs to STFU and get on with it.

You would think after 60 odd years things would have got better in fact it is worse now than its ever been when it comes to that club. I started going to games in 1968 and was attacked by an adult Rangers fan kicked and punched when I was 11 years old. I was called a Fenian by Rangers fans who lived in my area of Edinburgh because I went to a different school. Most bigotry is taught in the home. It's a scurge on any society that claims to be civilised.
Fred you went all the way to Australia but you couldn't escape from the Orange Lodges which are in most states

[Ringothedog]

Neil Doncaster is a hired hand and the voice of the SPFL. As such he says exactly what the SPFL wants him to say. They are a business and are all about maximising revenues for it's members.
The members of the SPFL, including Hibs, voted against strict liability to avoid responsibility for their supporters behaviour.
It is a strategy that saved us a massive fine and penalties in 2016 and has continued to save us on many occasions since including numerous times this season.
Hibs made a statement last night because our supporters forced their hand. It's something they have strenuously avoided even acknowleging for many years. The SPFL and especially the OF will be very annoyed that they have broken company lines and will work hard behind the scenes to get the genie back in the bottle.
It still doesn’t stop us reducing the allocation of the Glasgow club’s that is a choice neither the SFA or the SPFL can do anything about. The rest of the issues will be interesting to see how the governing authorities will react to this

[PHeffernan]

Yes, but not all SPFL clubs voted against Strict Liability and Hibs appear to be open to exploring the idea further now ( I'm not sure we ever publicly stated our position either previously). The Scottish Government has already warned clubs if fan behaviour isn't sorted out then they may force Strict Liability on them., which would be far worse for them than coming up with a solution themselves. Hibs don't appear to be looking at saving ourselves anymore - I think they want genuine change in fan behaviour.

39 SPFL clubs out of 42 voted against strict liability, including Hibs and it's been a long time since the Scottish Government made any meaningful noises about imposing strict liability on clubs.
Pressure from Hibs supporters finally made the club cave on this and it will be interesting to see what develops out of it. No doubt the SPFL power brokers will be meeting in secret to discuss their response and they will no doubt make behind the scenes attempts to get the genie back in the bottle.
It's all on ice until Hibs start speaking specifics and that is unlikely to be imminent. Looking like the SFA are going to use Hibs to lever strict liability back onto the menu for the reluctant SPFL.
All very interesting.

[O'Rourke3]

It's a win /win. Either the SFA agree and commits to do something or the next statement from the club is along the lines of"We've been censored and "requested" to stop making statements". Scottish media might crap themselves but there's loads out there that will make this news. Genie's out the bottle.

Sent from my SM-G990B using Tapatalk

[PHeffernan]

It still doesn’t stop us reducing the allocation of the Glasgow club’s that is a choice neither the SFA or the SPFL can do anything about. The rest of the issues will be interesting to see how the governing authorities will react to this

Yes, any Scottish club can indeed decide the number of away supporters they will allow in their stadium for league games.
Allowing very few is a decision best made when you can consistently fill all the seats with your own supporters.
At this time, that is only three clubs in the Scottish top flight.
It saves money on stewarding and especially policing but is a poor financial strategy if there are thousands of empty seats losing the club £30 a pop.

[Hibbyradge]

Yes, any Scottish club can indeed decide the number of away supporters they will allow in their stadium for league games.
Allowing very few is a decision best made when you can consistently fill all the seats with your own supporters.
At this time, that is only three clubs in the Scottish top flight.
It saves money on stewarding and especially policing but is a poor financial strategy if there are thousands of empty seats losing the club £30 a pop.

I used to hold that same view, but now I would rather Hibs lost out financially than allow that evil singing and behaviour to continue.

[LaMotta]

39 SPFL clubs out of 42 voted against strict liability, including Hibs and it's been a long time since the Scottish Government made any meaningful noises about imposing strict liability on clubs.
Pressure from Hibs supporters finally made the club cave on this and it will be interesting to see what develops out of it. No doubt the SPFL power brokers will be meeting in secret to discuss their response and they will no doubt make behind the scenes attempts to get the genie back in the bottle.
It's all on ice until Hibs start speaking specifics and that is unlikely to be imminent. Looking like the SFA are going to use Hibs to lever strict liability back onto the menu for the reluctant SPFL.
All very interesting.

Agree with much of your post but I'm not sure thats right about 39 clubs voting against strict liability.

There was a BBC poll ran in 2019 which they invited all clubs to respond to. Whilst only 3 clubs voted for SL, 14 voted against and the remainder either provided no comment or simply didnt respond. Hibs provided no comment so they didnt actually reveal their stance on the matter.

Scottish Government last brought up the Strict Liability threat in 2021 so wouldnt say it was that long ago!

All interesting to see where things go as you say.

[JimBHibees]

I used to hold that same view, but now I would rather Hibs lost out financially than allow that evil singing and behaviour to continue.

Totally agree some things are worth much more than money. Hopefully more Hibs fans including families feel more comfortable attending these games.

[Phil MaGlass]

I reckon the hit to Hibs wouldnt end up being that bad, less police costs,which must be pretty high for these games, less stewarding costs,more actual Hibs fans coming to the game, maybe not sell out but folk thinking we will take a hit of 400,000 a year will be way off the mark in my opinion and for every penny lost will still be worth not having these ****my hun *******s at ER.

[CropleyWasGod]

I reckon the hit to Hibs wouldnt end up being that bad, less police costs,which must be pretty high for these games, less stewarding costs,more actual Hibs fans coming to the game, maybe not sell out but folk thinking we will take a hit of 400,000 a year will be way off the mark in my opinion and for every penny lost will still be worth not having these ****my hun *******s at ER.

There's precedent for this, in the years that Rangers weren't in the top league, and we were.

Remember "Armageddon"? :cb

[One Day Soon]

There's precedent for this, in the years that Rangers weren't in the top league, and we were.

Remember "Armageddon"? :cb

Like

[snedzuk]

It still doesn’t stop us reducing the allocation of the Glasgow club’s that is a choice neither the SFA or the SPFL can do anything about. The rest of the issues will be interesting to see how the governing authorities will react to this

This. We can do this anyway so why shouldn't we. At the very least there is a case to say 'you give us x% of your ground in away tickets, so we will give you x% of ours'

[one day maybe...]

For too long we’ve sat back and accepted these vile and offensive chants.
The SFA, media outlets have been complicit in the cover up, refusing to address the issue directly with the offenders and turning down the audio as not to offend viewers. The club statement is spot on, rattling a few cages.
If the situation is ignored, I hope the club follow through on reducing away fans allocations. I’d also like them to ban media outlets who cover up the issues, no reporters and no cameras

Love to see Hibs ban any cameras for OF games, even our own unless it’s on a delayed broadcast so no one can stream the games. This would absolutely ruin their fans weekends. No way to watch the games would hurt even more.. Time for Scottish football to sort out its cancer. If this was any other ism, such as racism, sexism it would be called out. Yet sectarianism seems untouchable

[Jack]

Yes, any Scottish club can indeed decide the number of away supporters they will allow in their stadium for league games.
Allowing very few is a decision best made when you can consistently fill all the seats with your own supporters.
At this time, that is only three clubs in the Scottish top flight.
It saves money on stewarding and especially policing but is a poor financial strategy if there are thousands of empty seats losing the club £30 a pop.

3,000 in the away end at the weekend, 14,297 total attendance.

11,000 Hibbies where on a regular league game there's probably upwards of 15,000. All Hibs need to do is encourage their regular support to these games and they're in the money.

[Maybe 3,500 in the away end makes the Hibs turnout for a Sevco game even worse!]

Don't sell them any tickets.

[hhibs]

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.




think you are an optimist,this will be a meeting to tell Hibs,get back in your box,maybe our response with the new ownership profile will not be to just take it............I Hope

[Caversham Green]

It's a bit depressing that the vast majority assume this is an attempt by the SFA to put Hibs in their place. A competent and impartial association would be inviting a discussion on how to progress the entirely valid points made by Hibs but history tells us that the SFA is not that association.

However, call me naive if you must but in this case I think that's what is taking place. There is absolutely no justification for reprimand or punishment on the back of the club's statement - the facts were irrefutable, the club's intentions were made clear and are reasonable, and no club or group were singled out. In any case the SFA don't have the power to deduct points and any other sanctions would be laughed out of any arbitration court.

On the other hand Hibs have coherently argued within the statement that football should be an inclusive spectator sport and the transgressions they cited seriously restrict that ambition. Are the SFA really so foolish that they will nip that in the bud, or are they seeking to bring the Scottish game forward from the 17th century. I suppose time will tell.

[greenginger]

It's a bit depressing that the vast majority assume this is an attempt by the SFA to put Hibs in their place. A competent and impartial association would be inviting a discussion on how to progress the entirely valid points made by Hibs but history tells us that the SFA is not that association.

However, call me naive if you must but in this case I think that's what is taking place. There is absolutely no justification for reprimand or punishment on the back of the club's statement - the facts were irrefutable, the club's intentions were made clear and are reasonable, and no club or group were singled out. In any case the SFA don't have the power to deduct points and any other sanctions would be laughed out of any arbitration court.

On the other hand Hibs have coherently argued within the statement that football should be an inclusive spectator sport and the transgressions they cited seriously restrict that ambition. Are the SFA really so foolish that they will nip that in the bud, or are they seeking to bring the Scottish game forward from the 17th century. I suppose time will tell.


I agree. Was it not the SFA who were prime movers when strict liability was offered a few years ago.

Maybe the Association hopes that Hibs can bring a few more round to voting for it if it ever gets that far.

Does anyone know if it’s a majority vote ?

[Aldo]

I agree. Was it not the SFA who were prime movers when strict liability was offered a few years ago.

Maybe the Association hopes that Hibs can bring a few more round to voting for it if it ever gets that far.

Does anyone know if it’s a majority vote ?

I think someone posted it’s 11-1

[HoboHarry]

It's a bit depressing that the vast majority assume this is an attempt by the SFA to put Hibs in their place. A competent and impartial association would be inviting a discussion on how to progress the entirely valid points made by Hibs but history tells us that the SFA is not that association.

However, call me naive if you must but in this case I think that's what is taking place. There is absolutely no justification for reprimand or punishment on the back of the club's statement - the facts were irrefutable, the club's intentions were made clear and are reasonable, and no club or group were singled out. In any case the SFA don't have the power to deduct points and any other sanctions would be laughed out of any arbitration court.

On the other hand Hibs have coherently argued within the statement that football should be an inclusive spectator sport and the transgressions they cited seriously restrict that ambition. Are the SFA really so foolish that they will nip that in the bud, or are they seeking to bring the Scottish game forward from the 17th century. I suppose time will tell.
I'm not disagreeing with you. There's a part of me hoping that Bill Foley has told the SFA that there is an opportunity to take the game forward financially (not necessarily from him) but that Scottish football needs to clean up its act first before that can happen. If this is pie in the sky then I'm back to wondering why Bill Foley would join a game with a stacked deck, it's not something he has previous form for.

[CropleyWasGod]

I agree. Was it not the SFA who were prime movers when strict liability was offered a few years ago.

Maybe the Association hopes that Hibs can bring a few more round to voting for it if it ever gets that far.

Does anyone know if it’s a majority vote ?


I think someone posted it’s 11-1

Think that's getting the SFA mixed up with the top league, which has an 11-1 requirement for some issues.

Strict liability would be an SFA rule, presumably applied to all SPFL clubs (ie all 42), and maybe all senior clubs .

No idea what the voting weighting would be, or the majority needed.

[Aldo]

Think that's getting the SFA mixed up with the top league, which has an 11-1 requirement for some issues.

Strict liability would be an SFA rule, presumably applied to all SPFL clubs (ie all 42), or maybe all senior clubs .

No idea whether all senior clubs would be voting, and what the weight would be, or the majority.

CWG yeah I’m getting mixed up. You are correct. It would be all senior clubs.

[Not In The Know]

Totally agree some things are worth much more than money. Hopefully more Hibs fans including families feel more comfortable attending these games.


I'd make the extra effort to goto games they were getting limited seats.

[Not In The Know]

I think someone posted it’s 11-1


Blame Aberdeen for that - muppets!

[CropleyWasGod]

Blame Aberdeen for that - muppets!

It's not relevant here, though.

[CropleyWasGod]

CWG yeah I’m getting mixed up. You are correct. It would be all senior clubs.

Just had a quick squint at the SFA rules.

They have the usual 50% requirement for rule changing, and 75% for special resolutions.

I suspect that 50% would be enough, but I can't see who gets to vote. My guess is that, if the proposal is (say) strict liability for all SPFL clubs, then only SPFL clubs would be voting; similarly, if it's only for top league clubs, only they vote... and likewise for all senior clubs.

There's 332 pages if you want to have a go. :greengrin

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/9881/sfa_handbook-2022-23-digital.pdf

[Aldo]

Just had a quick squint at the SFA rules.

They have the usual 50% requirement for rule changing, and 75% for special resolutions.

I suspect that 50% would be enough, but I can't see who gets to vote.

There's 332 pages if you want to have a go. :greengrin

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/9881/sfa_handbook-2022-23-digital.pdf

I’ll take your word for it on this occasion [emoji12]

[Viva_Palmeiras]

It's not relevant here, though.

I wonder what they traded that for…

[gbhibby]

Just had a quick squint at the SFA rules.

They have the usual 50% requirement for rule changing, and 75% for special resolutions.

I suspect that 50% would be enough, but I can't see who gets to vote. My guess is that, if the proposal is (say) strict liability for all SPFL clubs, then only SPFL clubs would be voting; similarly, if it's only for top league clubs, only they vote... and likewise for all senior clubs.

There's 332 pages if you want to have a go. :greengrin

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/9881/sfa_handbook-2022-23-digital.pdf
Surprised that there is only 332 pages

[Argylehibby]

Yep. The instruction will be to stop talking about it.

I still find it absolutely incredible that in every game that either of the uglies play here without fail, we get this barrage of bigoted bile and it always goes unchallenged and unreported.

I think the club should raise the point of the differing press treatment of sectarian and racist abuse. If we are successful in getting collaboration of all parties involved with football in this country they need to include the press who abuse their power to influence many aspects of the game up here.

[MKHIBEE]

It's a bit depressing that the vast majority assume this is an attempt by the SFA to put Hibs in their place. A competent and impartial association would be inviting a discussion on how to progress the entirely valid points made by Hibs but history tells us that the SFA is not that association.

However, call me naive if you must but in this case I think that's what is taking place. There is absolutely no justification for reprimand or punishment on the back of the club's statement - the facts were irrefutable, the club's intentions were made clear and are reasonable, and no club or group were singled out. In any case the SFA don't have the power to deduct points and any other sanctions would be laughed out of any arbitration court.

On the other hand Hibs have coherently argued within the statement that football should be an inclusive spectator sport and the transgressions they cited seriously restrict that ambition. Are the SFA really so foolish that they will nip that in the bud, or are they seeking to bring the Scottish game forward from the 17th century. I suppose time will tell.

And there is the problem

[Dashing Bob S]

It's a bit depressing that the vast majority assume this is an attempt by the SFA to put Hibs in their place. A competent and impartial association would be inviting a discussion on how to progress the entirely valid points made by Hibs but history tells us that the SFA is not that association.

However, call me naive if you must but in this case I think that's what is taking place. There is absolutely no justification for reprimand or punishment on the back of the club's statement - the facts were irrefutable, the club's intentions were made clear and are reasonable, and no club or group were singled out. In any case the SFA don't have the power to deduct points and any other sanctions would be laughed out of any arbitration court.

On the other hand Hibs have coherently argued within the statement that football should be an inclusive spectator sport and the transgressions they cited seriously restrict that ambition. Are the SFA really so foolish that they will nip that in the bud, or are they seeking to bring the Scottish game forward from the 17th century. I suppose time will tell.

Agreed. It was a well worded and reasonable statement from Hibs and it forced the football authorities to respond. Whatever they want to do, to come down hard edged and vengeful on Hibs now would not be a good look at all.

[Se7enUp]

Yes, any Scottish club can indeed decide the number of away supporters they will allow in their stadium for league games.
Allowing very few is a decision best made when you can consistently fill all the seats with your own supporters.
At this time, that is only three clubs in the Scottish top flight.
It saves money on stewarding and especially policing but is a poor financial strategy if there are thousands of empty seats losing the club £30 a pop.

Haven't seen anyone other than the old firm filling their stadium with their own supporters. You must be on a different planet.

[Se7enUp]

3,000 in the away end at the weekend, 14,297 total attendance.

11,000 Hibbies where on a regular league game there's probably upwards of 15,000. All Hibs need to do is encourage their regular support to these games and they're in the money.

[Maybe 3,500 in the away end makes the Hibs turnout for a Sevco game even worse!]

Don't sell them any tickets.


This

[silverhibee]

I'm not disagreeing with you. There's a part of me hoping that Bill Foley has told the SFA that there is an opportunity to take the game forward financially (not necessarily from him) but that Scottish football needs to clean up its act first before that can happen. If this is pie in the sky then I'm back to wondering why Bill Foley would join a game with a stacked deck, it's not something he has previous form for.

For starters he will want European football every season, he won’t ever get that with Bournemouth that’s for sure, consolidate top 4 finishes and then push on for hopefully a champions league spot, splitting the old firm dominance has to be his priority, here is hoping anyway.

I’m a dreamer. :thumbsup:

[Carheenlea]

Do still find it a bit disappointing that we are ploughing a lone furrow with this at present. I genuinely believed that some other clubs may have offered their support of our statement and similarly put on record that they have had enough of sectarianism in our game.
Doesn’t really augur well for moving towards strict liability.

[Eyrie]

Do still find it a bit disappointing that we are ploughing a lone furrow with this at present. I genuinely believed that some other clubs may have offered their support of our statement and similarly put on record that they have had enough of sectarianism in our game.
Doesn’t really augur well for moving towards strict liability.

That frustrates me as well.

We've broken the conspiracy of silence and yet not one club has had the decency to join us. I know it's early days but the signs are not promising.

[Jones28]

That frustrates me as well.

We've broken the conspiracy of silence and yet not one club has had the decency to join us. I know it's early days but the signs are not promising.

I’m hoping that clubs have got eyes on their midweek games and will start to take action thereafter.

The more likely scenario is that clubs will do so on a case by case basis when they get visits from the uglies, but I just can’t see the likes of St Johnston, Motherwell or Dundee taking the financial hit. I hope I’m wrong.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Do still find it a bit disappointing that we are ploughing a lone furrow with this at present. I genuinely believed that some other clubs may have offered their support of our statement and similarly put on record that they have had enough of sectarianism in our game.
Doesn’t really augur well for moving towards strict liability.

I think that The Huns hordes will just go for it with even more vigor than ever.

[Haymaker]

I think that The Huns hordes will just go for it with even more vigor than ever.

Hopefully they do. And then more clubs release similar responses like ours.

Let then dig their own graves.

[Callum_62]

Can we also ask them when we are there why we get allocated refs that Celtic and Rangers don't

I'm not even meaning OF games I mean any game involving Celtic or Rangers

Is making rookie errors ok for the other teams but not Celtic and Rangers?

Another example of Scottish football being set up to advantage 2 teams

Surley the pool of refs for any league should be allocated randomly without exclusions for not being good enough for the big 2

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[cubehindthegoal]

Hopefully they do. And then more clubs release similar responses like ours.

Let then dig their own graves.

They’ve managed to keep it going for decades … they’re not stupid. Just corrupt.

[HoboHarry]

They’ve managed to keep it going for decades … they’re not stupid. Just corrupt.
Exactly, stupidity (and incompetence) doesn't have a pattern.

[Se7enUp]

I’m hoping that clubs have got eyes on their midweek games and will start to take action thereafter.

The more likely scenario is that clubs will do so on a case by case basis when they get visits from the uglies, but I just can’t see the likes of St Johnston, Motherwell or Dundee taking the financial hit. I hope I’m wrong.

Dundee called the huns out for their poison earlier this season, albeit without any actual action taken. No-one backed them up.

[PHeffernan]

Haven't seen anyone other than the old firm filling their stadium with their own supporters. You must be on a different planet.

There is another team that sold out their season tickets and have a waiting list ...



but you knew that.

[DaveF]

Has the invite been sent yet?

[BILLYHIBS]

Wonder what time the SFA had ?

[HarpOnHibee]

Wonder what time the SFA had ?

Another Penalty to Rangers o'clock?

[DarlingtonHibee]

Wonder what time the SFA had ?

Brilliant 👏 😆