LAST October, after Rangers legend Ian Durrant had been filmed slurring ‘F*** the Pope’ into a microphone at a private dinner to rapturous applause, I wrote in this column about the ’90-minute bigot’. Football fans, predominantly but not exclusively from either side of the Old Firm, who believe the sectarian tit-for-tat is all part of the matchday experience, and that as long as they are in a ‘safe space’ they are free to spout this bile.
Four months on, it is no surprise to see sectarianism back on the agenda as Kilmarnock manager Steve Clarke hit out at Rangers supporters for calling him a fenian b*****d just days after Kris Boyd had called out Celtic fans for labelling him an orange b*****d. Go back a year, go back 10, 20, 30 or longer. Nothing has changed.
What was particularly depressing following Clarke’s emotional press conference after his side’s defeat at Ibrox was just how wearily predictable the fallout was.
You can argue all you like about whether Clarke should have been as vocal about his own player being on the receiving end of sectarian abuse on Sunday as he was when he received it himself on Wednesday, and accuse him of being selective if you wish. But none of that absolves the Rangers support over what took place.
READ MORE: MSP James Dornan renews calls for strict liability
If your defence is to point fingers at an opposing faction and indulge in whataboutery, Scottish football’s other favourite pastime, then you have already lost the argument. Crying ‘they are just as bad’ is a low bar to set when it comes to a standard for your behaviour. Two wrongs have never made a right.
It’s all deflection, with both sides entrenched in the belief they are free to be as despicable as they like so long as the other is doing so in an equal and opposite manner.
For the majority who engage in sectarianism, and this in no way absolves their behaviour, they see it as harmless ‘banter’. No one was ever hurt by being called a name, right? But intentionally or not, this stuff normalises and validates the more extreme element when they decide to lamp someone who is wearing the wrong colour of shirt or who went to the wrong school.
Religion is the third-highest aggravating factor in hate crimes in Scotland behind race and sexual orientation. The top two religions targeted? Catholics (around half of cases), and then protestants (at around 27%).
As Clarke pointed out, racial abuse is mercifully now widely regarded as unacceptable, and along with hate crimes against people based on sexuality, are on a downward trend. Hate crimes based on religion though remain steady. And anyone who has been at a football match involving Rangers or Celtic this season will tell you, this nonsense is as prevalent in stadiums as ever.
So, what is the answer? The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act has been repealed, but Clarke’s comments shouldn’t be a vehicle for political point-scoring on that issue. The OBFA was flawed and had little to no impact on the core issue it was set up to address.
Strict liability? The clubs have already made it clear they won’t vote for this, with SPFL board member Mike Mulraney previously asking what clubs can reasonably do to avoid thousands of people singing these songs? Rooting offenders out and hammering them with lifetime bans would be a start, and would perhaps make others think twice.
READ MORE: SFA condemn fans' behaviour and plan major clampdown
The issue is complex and to a degree, football is an amplifier for what is a societal problem. You are a product of your environment after all, and hatred of others is either learnt in the home or close to it. But football shouldn’t go on burying its head in the sand either to the evidence all around us.
Each club should take responsibility for their own fans and take real action against them, not just offer mealy-mouthed platitudes whenever the issue is raised before the needle returns to the start of the song once more.
Right now, we should be eulogising over Alfredo Morelos and his four-goal haul. It is embarrassing that we are not.
Scottish football has a decision to make. Will it continue to be one of sectarianism’s last safe havens, or will clubs finally hold up a mirror to their own supports and tackle the ugly truth, warts and all?
AND ANOTHER THING...
IT was interesting to hear the comments of Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson in regards to 'trial by Sportscene' during the week, with his feeling being that misdemeanours by players from his club were being unduly highlighted on national television. Let's be honest, every club in the division probably feels the same.
Ironically enough, Rangers' opponents on Wednesday night, Kilmarnock, may now be the ones to feel aggrieved, as their forthcoming appeal against goalkeeper Daniel Bachmann's red card looks to have been undermined by an angle of the incident shown on the BBC's highlights programme following the game.
READ MORE: Rangers boss Steven Gerrard: Abuse from stands must end
From the original angle, the dismissal of the Killie keeper looked incredibly harsh, and the sort of ten-a-penny incident you see in goalmouths every week, but a different angle certainly seemed to suggest intent on behalf of the big Austrian to elbow Rangers midfielder Glen Kamara, and it now looks like a stonewall sending off.
For all that Steve Clarke got right in his post-match comments, and his side certainly should have had an early penalty for Joe Worrall's pull on Eamonn Brophy, this is one area where he may owe the officials on the night an apology.
And it may also be another piece of supporting evidence for how VAR could help to get these decisions spot on, and avoid some of the acrimony afterwards.
For now though, when it comes to flagging up incidents, the boys at the Beeb will just have to accept that they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
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