Disciplinary Outcomes | Scottish Cup Final

[ian1964 10,372]

I don't think Hibs are responsible for the behaviour of their fans. As such I don't think they can be punished. Do we think that The Stone Roses or Calvin Harris should be fined because of the violence that took place at T In The Park this summer? The people responsible for policing T In The Park are the organisers and the police, not the bands performing.

 

Likewise neither Rangers or Hibs can seriously be held responsible for the behaviour of supporters surely? Short of running onto the park and pushing fans off it the director's of Hibs have no control over what fully grown adults will do in any particular situation. Neither do the Rangers directors, or officials or employees.

 

This whole thing has been a smokescreen. Those who should be held responsible for what happened are the individuals who took part in invading the park, vandalism and assaults, the SFA as the organisers of the match and the police. Crimes took place, assaults took place. It's the job of the police to firstly prevent this, something they clearly failed at, then secondly to bring the perpetrators to justice. Fining Hibs or Rangers for something neither club has any control over is simply passing the buck. The fact that it was the SFA who were holding this enquiry simply underlines the absurdity of it. Rangers in particlular should be taking legal action against them for failing to provide protection and a safe working environment.

 

The cries of 'strict liability' are once again buck passing. This simply means the police and the organisers, both who make money from simply doing their jobs at these events, don't want to take responsibility for what happens at them. I think that's absurd.

 

Rangers supporters are rightly angry that our players were assaulted and some of our fans put in danger. The responsibility for this lies with the SFA and with the police, both of who are looking for someone else to blame. We shouldn't help them do this.

 

Plod are not responsible for preventing anyone entering the pitch/playing area,that is the job of the stewards!,but plod were negligent after the pitch invasion.

The SFA are the main culprits in this,it was there show!,it is being swept under the carpet and they will escape any punishment,Rangers should seek legal advice for the assaults on players & staff

Edited September 30, 2016 by ian1964

[Frankie 8,114]

I don't think Hibs are responsible for the behaviour of their fans. As such I don't think they can be punished. Do we think that The Stone Roses or Calvin Harris should be fined because of the violence that took place at T In The Park this summer? The people responsible for policing T In The Park are the organisers and the police, not the bands performing.

 

Likewise neither Rangers or Hibs can seriously be held responsible for the behaviour of supporters surely? Short of running onto the park and pushing fans off it the director's of Hibs have no control over what fully grown adults will do in any particular situation. Neither do the Rangers directors, or officials or employees.

 

This whole thing has been a smokescreen. Those who should be held responsible for what happened are the individuals who took part in invading the park, vandalism and assaults, the SFA as the organisers of the match and the police. Crimes took place, assaults took place. It's the job of the police to firstly prevent this, something they clearly failed at, then secondly to bring the perpetrators to justice. Fining Hibs or Rangers for something neither club has any control over is simply passing the buck. The fact that it was the SFA who were holding this enquiry simply underlines the absurdity of it. Rangers in particlular should be taking legal action against them for failing to provide protection and a safe working environment.

 

The cries of 'strict liability' are once again buck passing. This simply means the police and the organisers, both who make money from simply doing their jobs at these events, don't want to take responsibility for what happens at them. I think that's absurd.

 

Rangers supporters are rightly angry that our players were assaulted and some of our fans put in danger. The responsibility for this lies with the SFA and with the police, both of who are looking for someone else to blame. We shouldn't help them do this.

 

In many ways I agree with you but let's remember the panel here rejected the Hibs lawyer's (remember that 'low level paper gatherer' from 2012) argument that the rules did not cover clubs being responsible for the actions of supporters. To not then censure them for what happened borders on the bizarre.

 

Do you think Rangers would have got off Scot-free if the shoe had been on the other foot? We're wandering into the realms of paranoia but I'd strongly suggest we would not.

 

Quite frankly the behaviour of the Hibs fans and their chairman that day was reprehensible. The same can go for the comments of politicians and the police immediately after the fact. The subsequent whitewash has left a similar bad taste in the mouth.

 

Anything goes. And, I suspect it will in the coming weeks and months as others take liberties with the SFA's impotence.

[Yorkie Bear 496]

I don't understand how the SFA and EUPFA's policy on matchday incidents are completely opposite.

 

UEFAs rules are clear:

all associations and clubs are liable for the following inappropriate

behaviour on the part of their supporters and may be subject to disciplinary

measures and directives even if they can prove the absence of any negligence in

relation to the organisation of the match:

a. the invasion or attempted invasion of the field of play;

b. the throwing of objects;

c. the lighting of fireworks or any other objects;

d. the use of laser pointers or similar electronic devices;

e. the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit any message

that is not fit for a sports event, particularly messages that are of a political,

ideological, religious, offensive or provocative nature;

f. acts of damage;

g. causing a disturbance during national anthems;

h. any other lack of order or discipline observed inside or around the stadium

 

In other words, had this been a match played in a UEFA competition, Hibs would be guilty for their fans behaviour and sentenced appropriately. Rangers may also have been found guilty for their fans on the pitch but their case of self defense may have carried some weight. Any punishment for Rangers would have been much lighter than for Hibs owing to the number of fans on the pitch and the violence of their fans towards the Rangers team.

 

It seems ludicrous that the SFA as a member association of UEFA can wash their hands of any action . They may be an independent association, but you would have thought that the "higher" bodies rules should have some influence on the national rules. Obviously not.

 

Meanwhile Rangers rightly feel aggrieved while HIbs laugh in our face. Truly a scandal.

[Scott7 5,105]

In the good old days the City of Glasgow Police were never slow to stop folk from climbing the wall though I accept that even they could have done nothing to stop the Hibs invasion. They would, however, have intervened early and decisively and there might have been twenty or thirty in Court on the Monday. Unfair on the twenty or thirty, no doubt, but that sort of action discourages the others at a future event.

 

Break ins were comparatively rare and didn't impede the progress of the game the exception being a notorious match at Ibrox. Don't worry it wasn't the Rangers. Neutral venue for a Scottish Cup semi-final, celtic three - nil down to St Mirren fifteen minutes to go. One set of fans was disgruntled and invaded the field in big numbers and it wasn't Buddies upset bcause their goal tally wasn't big enough.

 

I can't rememberwhat punishment, if any, was given to celtic but as John Mc says, you couldn't expect the Kellys, the Whites and the Devlins to race on to the pitch to restrain their fans' exhuberance. They did the next best thing. They conceded the tie.

 

If that happened today, the host club would have been heavily fined, Ibrox removed from the venue list and a replay ordered at celtic park on the basis that a game at Hampden would give the winning team an advantage over the other finalist and other than cp no other ground would have been big enough.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

So to sum this up according to the sfa.

 

Hibs did nothing they can be punished for.

 

The police did nothing wrong

 

The sfa did nothing wrong.

 

 

I must have imagined the riot I saw.

 

People outside Scotland must think we are laughable or utterly corrupt.

 

If this was Italy people would be screaming corruption or mafia involvement.

[Scott7 5,105]

The self styled "Scottish Goverment" displeased with the panel outcome apparently. Bit of a surprise unless they're miffed because Rangers have escaped punishment.

[calscot 0]

I can almost see a point where they can't punish the club directly, but they CAN punish the fans and ban them from several Scottish Cup games. We're talking the amount that invaded the pitch was about 50% of their normal home attendance or more. That the club suffers financially from that is an unavoidable side effect, but judging by their complicity, well deserved.

 

I also think that there is a case here to vastly reduce the number of tickets of clubs in cup finals to me more in proportion to their normal attendances when against the OF - I can't help but think that the attendance of so many infrequent attendees potentially makes the behaviour far worse than it would be - and that is bourne out by the Motherwell fans in the play offs also (even though that was a home game, the home crowd was far larger than normal).

[cooponthewing 1,139]

So to sum this up according to the sfa.

 

Hibs did nothing they can be punished for.

 

The police did nothing wrong

 

The sfa did nothing wrong.

 

 

I must have imagined the riot I saw.

 

People outside Scotland must think we are laughable or utterly corrupt.

 

If this was Italy people would be screaming corruption or mafia involvement.

 

Agree with your earlier point too GS re pulling out of Scottish Cup. It will get media coverage outside of our shores and highlight the corruption at the core of football in this country. We should also go after those at the heart of it. Some kind of "sting" operation similar to what's going on down south at the moment. It may take a while, but we will get them in the end.

[ian1964 10,372]

Pulling out of the SC isn't a viable option for the club to take IMO,the financial loss the club would harm the club!,closing a route to European football!,the penalites handed out by the cabal/SFA for breaking rules!,not to mention the gutter press attacking the club again!.

 

I think Rangers FC refuse tickets for away games in the SC saying they can't ensure the safety of our fans as the reason,this would at least highlight to Sky TV & BT sports why and may harm any agreed contracts with them!

[aweebluesoandso 290]

We need some show of protest, sitting back moaning and doing nothing doesn't cut it. Another protest to Hampden is the first thing, secondly the club needs to take this further, by legal means and or calling for a motion of no confidence in the SFA by the majority of it's members clubs.