IT was with a quite impeccable sense of timing that a group of former and current match day delegates, all of whom had requested anonymity, voiced their concerns about how little the football authorities in this country were doing to tackle sectarianism earlier this week.
Just a day later, amid widespread rejoicing among academics, clubs, officials, police officers, politicians, prominent public figures and supporters, the contentious Offensive Behaviour at Football Act was repealed.
Those who opposed the act argued that it was ineffective and unnecessary and pointed out police and the courts already had sufficient powers to punish the sort of conduct it was introduced to tackle.
“It is wrong to create a law which applies to one demonised sector of society,” a petition which received 9,000 signatures and was handed in to the Scottish parliament three years ago stated with undeniable logic.
“This legislation was a clumsy political response to one football match (the infamous Old Firm game at Celtic Park back in 2011) which serves only to unjustly criminalise football supporters.”
All four opposition parties clearly agreed. The SNP government was outvoted by 62 to 60 at Holyrood on Thursday. The act will be taken off the statute book next month. Few will mourn its passing.
Neil Lennon, a man who knows as well as anyone about the darker side of the game in this country, is of the view that huge strides forward have been made in the battle against this age-old problem in recent years.
“I think it is better,” the Hibernian manager said. “The majority of supporters in the country now are supporting within the laws of the game.”
Alas, the match delegates who spoke to BBC Scotland of their experiences disagreed. They are distressed by the fact that nothing continues to be done to address what they are convinced remains, albeit to a lesser degree than in the past, a problem in the Scottish game.
“It was so frustrating,” said a former delegate. “I know that some of those who are still working today are absolutely appalled that nothing has changed. It seems like the Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL) is content to sweep the issue under the carpet.”
The SPFL employ match delegates to ensure their rules are adhered to during matches and reporting sectarian signing comes within their remit.
But one pointed out: “We had numerous meetings with the police, who told us which songs to look out for, but it was pointless because when we reported them, nothing was ever done.”
The reasons for that is there is, unlike in the Champions League, Europa League, Premier League in England and many other leagues around Europe, no strict liability rule in Scotland.
If a club can show they took all necessary precautions to prevent acts of delinquency before a game and then illustrate they took measures against those responsible for misconduct afterwards then they will escape punishment.
There is no appetite for strict liability to be introduced in this country either. Those who oppose it believe it is open to abuse. A rival fan, they say, could infiltrate the support of the team he detests and act in a manner which will result in a fine or sporting sanction.
But if Scottish football is unprepared to take action then others may be. James Kelly, the Labour MSP stressed that a “much wider and more serious conversation” was needed to tackle sectarianism and offered to work with the government on the issue.
Regardless of how well meaning his intentions are, the prospect of our elected representatives once again involving themselves in to football matters, something which both UEFA and FIFA take a decidedly dim view of, is an unappealing one.
Matches in Scotland are still blighted by chants about “Fenians” and “Huns” and other phrases which have no place in the modern game and the fact they are broadcast around Britain, Europe and the world on television continue to reflect badly on this country.
The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act may be soon be no more, and good riddance to it, but the clubs, the SFA and the SPFL must now act themselves and stamp out what remains a concerning issue.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel