A journalist, banned by Celtic, attacked the club in the Daily Record today, suggesting the SFA chief exec Stuart Regan should have told Peter Lawwell to ‘wind his neck in’ and ‘remind him of his duty to the game’ after he wrote asking for clarification after Sunday’s game.
The hyperbole was raised to the extent the notion “Lawwell dragged our game back into a very dark place – somewhere dangerously close to disrepute” was put into hundreds of thousands of hands today.
A dark place, close to disrepute? For writing a letter asking for clarification? Sounds to me like the know the trouble Peter Lawwell is causing to the vested interests at Hampden and they want him stopped.
By remarkable coincidence, this happens to be the same journo who wrote the puff piece for SFA president, Campbell ‘What school did you go to?’ Ogilvie for writing to Uefa demanding a referee was demoted (while circumventing due process) and asking for a player to be banned.
No mention of winding a neck in or duty to the game for a vastly farther reaching letter.
The same paper gives a platform to Barry ‘EBT’ Ferguson to level wholly inaccurate accusations against Celtic:
“By questioning the reasoning behind [the failure to award a penalty]in the name of their supporters, they were nodding towards all manner of hoary old conspiracy theories.”
Conspiracy you say, Barry? Who mentioned conspiracy? An explanation that the standard of refereeing is not good enough and that having 6 officials at Hampden hindered good decision making didn’t occur to you?
Some people are quick to deny conspiracies when a far less controversial response is available.
A concerted campaign has run for days now to ensure that Celtic cannot ask questions without being demonised. When the media demonise those who question authority we are in a very dark place indeed.
This is intolerable. It would not happen in England, where the breadth of media is wide enough to escape narrow seams of authority. It doesn’t matter if it is the government, the Church, the police, big business or sport, if media collaborate with power, you have problems.
Some of it comes from people perhaps bitter that Celtic called them out and banned them, some from those unable to find perspective or consistency between writing about a Campbell Ogilvie letter and a Peter Lawwell letter. All of them are time-served opinion formers who make money from Celtic’s actions.
We are the last superpower in the game, survivors in the battle of the ages. This antagonism isn’t going away. Not until their grandchildren are in place, anyway.
Clubs need to write letters when improvement is needed. I hear estimates that income to Celtic from winning the Scottish Cup would have been in the region of £1m. Football is big business and processes and resources need to as good as they possibly can be. If they are not, the very least you can do is ask for improvement.
On Meekings appeal yesterday….
The player’s appeal was right to be upheld, the case should never have been put before the SFA panel in the first place. The referee Steven McLean saw the incident. That was not disputed. He asked his assistant for his opinion. That was not disputed either.
Meekings representatives pointed out at the hearing that officials are not allowed to re-referee a game after watching TV. This is a central tenant of the game and was accepted by the judicial panel.
Retrospective action is only allowed for incidents which referees did not see. It is not permitted for referees to reconsider an incident he saw. It is blindingly embarrassing to our game that the SFA didn’t know the rules well enough before taking this action. I hear there was incredulity at Celtic when they heard Meekings was banned in the first place.
…… and you wonder why Celtic write letters.