David Posted August 7, 2016 Report Share Posted August 7, 2016 The contrast is startling to be honest. No warnings or repercussions for either club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigeeze Posted August 7, 2016 Report Share Posted August 7, 2016 Coz they are "big" clubs not a wee provincial club who never read the script and decided to improvise tghus spoiling the planned glorious return to the ytop tier Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted August 7, 2016 Report Share Posted August 7, 2016 If it wasn't the police, the authorities, the stadium, the clubs or the fans who were to blame, who was?!?! Incidentally, we're still waiting on the footage of ALL the Rangers players being assaulted being released...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdalli10 Posted August 7, 2016 Report Share Posted August 7, 2016 The difference was the cup final was at the SFA's stadium and they organised the occasion whereas the game at Fir Park would be down to us. Maybe we should have released a statement saying we have down an independent review and Motherwell weren't to blame like they have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted August 8, 2016 Report Share Posted August 8, 2016 Surely we would have some sort of legal recourse here should our "suspended" sentence ever come into play again?! Can't say I'm surprised at SFA's decision and statement though...sad indictment of the idiots running our game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted August 8, 2016 Report Share Posted August 8, 2016 Surely we would have some sort of legal recourse here should our "suspended" sentence ever come into play again?! Very much so. In fact I'm surprised the club did not mount a legal challenge to the original report and recommendations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted August 8, 2016 Report Share Posted August 8, 2016 Rangers have released a statement saying they're not happy about it, can't see any obvious reason why, it doesn't appear particularly critical of them or their fans. The police/stewards got caught with their pants down with the injury time winner, when it looked like going to extra time, they weren't in place, why not just admit that. How it can be all Motherwells fault when it happens at Fir Park, but nobodies fault when it's at Hampden is strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigeeze Posted August 8, 2016 Report Share Posted August 8, 2016 Very much so. In fact I'm surprised the club did not mount a legal challenge to the original report and recommendations. Too high a cost for no guaranteed return. Whilst disappointed (but not surprised) at the outcome I'm glad the club decided not to throw good money after bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw Posted September 28, 2016 Report Share Posted September 28, 2016 Next time anyone fancies running on the pitch they should do it in a Scottish cup match . Absolutely nothing that happened in the play off match compared to what happened in the cup final but the SFAs rule book seems different from the SPFLs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Next time anyone fancies running on the pitch they should do it in a Scottish cup match . Absolutely nothing that happened in the play off match compared to what happened in the cup final but the SFAs rule book seems different from the SPFLs Next time someone fancies running on the pitch they should ask their mates to punch them hard in the face until they don't fancy it any more. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Certainly blatant double standards here. The footballing authorities' inconsistent treatment of the issue of fans behaviour and strict liability is nothing short of short of shocking and unacceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoshi-1991 Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 If they punish hibs they need to punish Rangers, and that simply can't happen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Certainly blatant double standards here. The footballing authorities' inconsistent treatment of the issue of fans behaviour and strict liability is nothing short of short of shocking and unacceptable. The SFA organised the game and the security so they can hardly blame the clubs for what happens in Hampden. It is completely consistent with the rules. Motherwell weren't censured for fans going on the park. They were asked what they were doing to identify people that ran on the park and ban them and the threatened punishment was because we hadn't made any effort to do that. Given that 80 odd people have appeared in court since the cup final it's not comparable at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Yeah - I am kind of with Steelboy on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Motherwell weren't censured for fans going on the park. They were asked what they were doing to identify people that ran on the park and ban them and the threatened punishment was because we hadn't made any effort to do that. Given that 80 odd people have appeared in court since the cup final it's not comparable at all. It was more complex and wide ranging than that. If I recall the main charge was that we were deemed to have taken insufficient action to prevent fans from running onto the park (work that one out if you can) and allowing an untrained steward to extinguish a smoke bomb; and a range of other issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Agree with Steelboy. Having looked through the notes of reasons after the announcement yesterday then it seems a logical outcome in light of the rules as they are. http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/Decision%20of%20Judicial%20Panel%20-%20Hibernian%20FC.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Agree with Steelboy. Having looked through the notes of reasons after the announcement yesterday then it seems a logical outcome in light of the rules as they are. http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/Decision%20of%20Judicial%20Panel%20-%20Hibernian%20FC.pdf Its difficult to make much sense of that to be honest as its certainly not written in plain english. However, I have yet to establish how Rangers were held to account for the behaviour of their fans at Fir Park ie throwing missiles, including ripped out seats onto the pitch, albeit under provocation. Again as far as Rangers were concerned what steps did the club take to identify those who indulged in sectarian singing at the cup final? Once again complete inconsistency from the authorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 The authorities are very consistent. They always take a softer line against Rangers and Celtic than they do against smaller clubs. The reason for that are many but include the fact that a significant number of those in power are fans of the clubs in question and/or don't want to upset them for various reasons. It will always be that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daver Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 The SFA organised the game and the security so they can hardly blame the clubs for what happens in Hampden. It is completely consistent with the rules. Motherwell weren't censured for fans going on the park. They were asked what they were doing to identify people that ran on the park and ban them and the threatened punishment was because we hadn't made any effort to do that. Given that 80 odd people have appeared in court since the cup final it's not comparable at all. I generally agree with you but surely the police identified those who ran on to the pitch at the cup final and caused trouble, not the SFA. The same approach should apply to the play-off and those that caused trouble should be identified. Banning everyone who went on to the pitch would be ludicrous as would the double standards. I suppose the other difference is the SFA can't really fine itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 I generally agree with you but surely the police identified those who ran on to the pitch at the cup final and caused trouble, not the SFA. The same approach should apply to the play-off and those that caused trouble should be identified. Banning everyone who went on to the pitch would be ludicrous as would the double standards. I suppose the other difference is the SFA can't really fine itself. I think it was about creating a deterrent to stop it happening again and from the SPFL's point of view everyone on the pitch is causing trouble and MFC saying they can't identify even one person is a bit of a joke. I don't think the SPFL want everyone banned just a few people getting made examples of to make more people think twice in future. Credit to the club for not sticking anyone in though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinjy Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 I always thought this would happen. We were punished because as organisers of the Play Off game the SFA deemed that our arrangements were poor and so allowed the fans onto the park thus we got into bother. Imagine the conversation at the SFA after the Cup Final. That was terrible. We must punish these clubs. Lets have an inquiry. The organisation of the game was poor. Too few stewards not enough police. Who was responsible for organising the match? Oh shit it was us. Ah well lets just forget it. We can hardly fine and warn ourselves like we did to Motherwell. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 It was the SPFL that charged us after the play-off, no? The SFA that runs the Cup Final. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 Pitch invasions happen regularly for a variety of reasons, but what I find hard to stomach is that the SFA appear to be ignoring the fact that players were attacked on the pitch. Set aside the teams involved. If there are to be no sanctions for that (other than prosecutions instigated by the police) Scottish football is in deep shit.... To address that issue would of course highlight poor stewarding/policing, and as a consequence their own inability to properly organise a high profile match from a safety point of view. The SFA is trying to brush the whole thing under a very large carpet as they failed miserably in their Duty of Care towards players, officials and fans. If a Motherwell fan ran onto the pitch during a Scottish Cup tie at Fir Park and punched a player from the opposition does anybody really believe our Club would go unpunished. A very dangerous precedent has been set just to avoid blame being directed at those officials at the SFA that failed to do their job and also police/stewards who failed to react until the Hibs fans had marched from one end of the pitch to the other. But whether it's the SFA or the League Authorities it cannot be right that assault is ignored. I agree that the reason a harder line was taken against Motherwell was probably due to the Club failing to identify fans who went on the pitch. Hibs certainly seemed to learn from that situation given the haste in which they set about identifying people and calling them into Easter Road for a wee chat. But there was also much comment about Motherwell being liable as the home club responsible for putting in place all Security arrangements. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted September 29, 2016 Report Share Posted September 29, 2016 I'm not going to quote your whole post, and while not condoning what did go on, other than a statement from Rangers, I've seen no real evidence of the assaults on Rangers "players and staff". The keeper was pushed, and there's some grainy pictures of someone taking a fresh air swipe at Lee Wallace. That in itself is unacceptable, but not as bad as Rangers are making out. (This was live on tv, in front of 52000 people the majority of whom had camera phones, and all we've seen is 1 push and a fresh air punch) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 The problem is that has came down to semantics and lack of adequate rules to make any sort of real decision. The clubs themselves voted against strict liability. So if the clubs aren't responsible in this instance for the organisation of fans, stewards policing etc then they can't really be prosecuted for anything in simple terms. The SFA could charge the SFA with something. Fine themselves then pay it off though... If Rangers want something done to Hibs then they need to lobby all their friends at the other clubs and get the rules changed... The best that can come out of this is that the stewarding and policing plans are improved and Rangers continue to release statements upon more statements.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.