Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?


I am clearly misinformed and simply in error. I had …

Comment on Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed? by alexander276.

I am clearly misinformed and simply in error. I had the notion that the reason cup finals and semi finals were held on neutral terrain was to do with fairness and in all kind of senses ‘a level playing field’. When did this change? We got to be consistent. Celtic in a final at Parkhead would be similarly intolerable.

And if Dundee United get 11,000 seats, how many do their opponents get? The same? There are no precedents.

By the SFA formula how many would Aberdeen have been allocated had they been drawn in lieu of DU? And the fact is in the NEW ORDER they could fill Ibrox. for the chance of attending the inaugural Aberdeen V Faux Rangers match.

alexander276 Also Commented

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Someone suggested a two leg semi. What a great imaginative solution. No it was not from Hampden.

This thread has been demonstrating a default victimhood tendency. I just want to remind colleagues here that Scottish football is not same as Glasgow football.. The great Aberdeen pre match display was the second attempt after the first was vetoed by the police as it featured a sunburst back ground. I think uniformly the reaction of anyone from outside the bubble is ‘What the heck’.We just are not party to the codes, the symbols and historical feuds. I suppose I could find out what was offensive about the sunburst on Google but I DO NOT CAREenough. So don’t trouble telling me – unless of course this is nonsense and they just ran out of yellow card.

And while I am at it, the wasted seating at the final was an insult to two good natured provincial supports.. It was Glasgow rules for a teuchter day.

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
I note above reference to ‘a horribly poisonous affair at Tynecastle. ‘ I must have missed that . Are there reports from press witnesses present at the game or perhaps the report of an official investigation? Or is this a myth growing by the week?

By way I think Tom English of BBC, among others have a cheek suggesting Thompson of DU has no reason to worry about his safety at Ibrox. The BBC alone spread the story that a manager was seriously abused and endangered at a neutral ground. It was the BBC that raised the ante.

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
He also admitted that with Rangers gone from the top flight the level of abuse that he has personally had to suffer (Aberdeen fans at that semi aside) has gone down and that this was welcome also

Not more a moment would I claim that Aberdeen fans are without fault, but I am uneasy that a generalisation about all Aberdeen fans seems to have developed based on a conversation between two persons who were not present (one had an interest in building up sympathy for his client and the other is a famously easily (mis) lead misreporter. Can we wait on the result of the inquiry before we smear all Aberdeen fans? What could explain the delay?
Aberdeen fans throwing money away … surely not .

Recent Comments by alexander276

Staying On The Problem
The use of Sutton and Stewart for the draw is significant. They knew they had a process under suspicion and they knew most of the media pack are  under  even more suspicion. I think Stewart and Sutton are seen as not part of the contamination.  Maybe the message is getting through. Certainly there are few others who could deliver that outcome without feeding my scepticism …

.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers

This is a report on the consultation about supporter involvement in clubs. I think many points could have been clearer had they consulted about the report …

.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers
At last someone in the media has answered a question. (I obviously discount the cut and paste formula replies from the BBC).
I am rather tired of the regurgitated vomit of sycophancy that passes for football journalism. The little boxes advising where to buy your season tickets for a certain team struck me as undeclared advertising and I wondered if cash or kind was exchanged.
The feedback editor of the Times replied at the second time of asking – which is good by the standards of the league she plays in. The answers does not remove my concerns bur it IS an answer and I thank her for it.
My translation is ‘This is not journalism  and should not be judged as such: it is cosying up to the big boys.’
There is no breach of ethics in our football reporting, as you suggest. It is common practice for newspapers in Scotland to be invited to press conferences by, especially, the Scottish FA, Celtic and Rangers, with an understanding that the copy which results from the conference (which is never about the actual thing being promoted) will be followed by a reference to the ticket sales (or whatever is being promoted). This is quite clear in the references, eg, “Miller was promoting Rangers’ season-ticket sales. Over 37,000 have been sold and they are still available via, the Rangers ticket centre or by calling 0871 702 1972”This practice is by no means restricted to Rangers. Celtic, for example, made many of its players available at press conferences last season, which were specifically called in order to boost ticket sales before home fixtures.Yours sincerely,

XXX Feedback editor

.. and they wonder why nobody buys papers
Call it serendipity but on the page facing the modest piece in Private Eye there is an ad for a Centre for Investigative Journalism conference 14-16 July. If we could persuade one of our leading contributors to attend I am sure we could crowd fund to share the burden. Alternatively could we generate  a couple of pages to establish the problem of market censorship with a prize bursary for say £500 to any young journalist who best tackles the topic.  If something happens in either direction I would chip in …
We are making little headway with the faux journalists in the Scottish press. Maybe real ones could be attracted to the topic. Like others here I am uneasy that there is more to this than a minor sports matter …

The Offline Game
Like Castothousands I am interested in the timeline of events at Armageddon.
I was gratified that the resources of the BBC allowed them to give us details:
16:51:48 – Final Whistle
16:51:58 – Pitch invasion begins
16:53:25 – Fans smash goalpost
16:54:54 – Rival fans clash
16:55:38 – Police horses on pitch
16:57:00 – Police line established

Their commentator actually said something along the lines of Rangers supporters are making their way on to the pitch at 3.52.27 on their clock. That was 54 seconds after the Hibs invasion was mentioned. So is 3.52.27 not a more relevant time (both sides on pitch) than when the cross bar broke (Traditional Scottish exuberance?)
What did the rival fans do between 3.52.27 and 16.54.54/ 3.54.29 when ‘rival fans clashed’. Take selfies?
Of course the BBC timeline is more compatible with the idea of 3 minutes of Hibs supporters traducing Rangers players before noble rescue efforts …
Thank goodness an independent commission under Gordon Smith will sort this out .

About the author