|
|
Topic Originator: twin par
Date: Sat 30 May 10:38
To be fair,seems a bit harsh,considering what happens at old firm games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Sat 30 May 10:57
Indeed - also, how does visiting club control this ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Sat 30 May 12:35
It’s just a potential ban at the moment.
Slap on the wrist basically but I agree. How the old firm get away with worse things is not surprising however
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Sat 30 May 12:47
Quote:
veteraneastender, Sat 30 May 10:15
https://falkirkfc.co.uk/sfa-disciplinary-sanction-imposed-on-the-club-following-rejection-of-appeal
I can`t see the logic in a partial closure of a stadium. Using EEP as an example, if we were hit with a 25% closure, the club could opt to close either the North or East Stand. The numpties that let off the pyros could simply move to another stand for the former, or visiting fans could be housed in the NE for the latter, depending on the size of the away support. A one match stadium closure is very harsh but it would ensure there was no repeat.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: BouncyPar
Date: Sat 30 May 13:25
How many times have the OF been hit with a 25% stadium closure as a result of fan disorder, home or away?
Post Edited (Sat 30 May 13:41)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Sat 30 May 13:34
Quote:
BouncyPar, Sat 30 May 13:25
How many times have the OF been hit with a 26% stadium closure as a result of fan disorder, home or away?
Celtuc will have to hold flag day behind closed doors surely? Given thats 3 pitch invasions in a row? wont hold my breath mind you 🙄
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sat 30 May 14:09
C’mon Dave… you don’t expect the SFA to apply rules and standard equally now do you?
Maybe the little bit of spot light we got on our league last season only highlighted how lop sided the set up is.
They 2 get all the decisions, their fans are the worst behaved and they demand everything goes their way or it’s a conspiracy…
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: saltonsgonagetu
Date: Sat 30 May 23:30
Its not what Scottish football didnt expect
Rangers and Celtic should have been relegated to the Championship, after the Ibrox mess, Celtic should be relegated to the 2nd division after the incursion at Motherwell, and Celtic relegated to the 3rd division after the Hearts mess .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Sun 31 May 12:00
Quote:
saltonsgonagetu, Sat 30 May 23:30
Its not what Scottish football didnt expect
Rangers and Celtic should have been relegated to the Championship, after the Ibrox mess, Celtic should be relegated to the 2nd division after the incursion at Motherwell, and Celtic relegated to the 3rd division after the Hearts mess .
Just daft.
For a start the nonsense at Ibrox was a Scottish Cup fixture, the SPFL have no jurisdiction.
Crowd trouble can be punished by ground closures if required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Playup_Pompey
Date: Tue 21 Jul 15:08
for those that were getting worked up about "what about the old firm"
the independent review completed an notice of complaint issued as per below.
Alleged Party in Breach: Rangers FC
Match: Rangers FC v Celtic FC on Sunday, 8 March 2026
Competition: The Scottish Cup
Offence: Disciplinary Rule 37 - A club playing a match at its own ground, or allowing its ground to be used for a match in which it is not participating, or a club using a third party’s ground for the playing of a match in which it is participating must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, (i) good order and security. (ii) that policies and procedures have been adopted and are implemented to prevent instances of Unacceptable Conduct. and (iii) that any instance of Unacceptable Conduct is effectively dealt with on the occasion of a match. Each club participating in a match must also ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that its players, officials, supporters and any person exercising a function for or in connection with the club do not engage in Unacceptable Conduct at any ground on the occasion of a match. Each club must ensure, so far as is reasonably
practicable, that it identifies any of its supporters who engage in Unacceptable Conduct at a match take proportionate disciplinary measures in respect of such supporters.
Hearing Date: Thursday, 13 August 2026
4.1.2 Failure Summary
• Lack of multi-agency meetings. first multi-agency meeting - consider the significant operational changes (1) ingress for 8,000 (2) largest away fan allocation since 2017 - 5 March, three days before the match. No tabletop exercise was ever conducted.
• Risk Assessment near-identical to the 1 March league fixture despite 5,600 additional away supporters and penalty jeopardy. Pitch incursion rated ‘Unlikely’. A number of interviewees independently used the word: complacency.
• Five search lanes deployed for 8,042 supporters. seven were used for 5,600 fewer supporters at the 10 May league fixture at Celtic Park between both clubs. No fan-flow calculations carried out by Rangers FC or Police Scotland.
• From Police Scotland interview no plan for ticketless fans left on the stadium footprint allowing for repeated attempts to enter by doubling-up, forgery or forcing gates.
• Celtic FC Safety Officer was not consulted on planning the away ingress plan, but raised concerns to the Rangers FC Safety Officer, prior to and at the pre match Ops meeting 3 days before the fixture.
• Neither the Rangers FC Safety Officer nor the Police Scotland EPL had conversation in regard to which end to use for penalties, a safety issue, not a football preference – allowed under IFAB Laws of the Game Law 10.3 ‘Unless there are other considerations (e.g. ground conditions, safety etc.), the referee tosses a coin to decide
the goal at which the kicks will be taken, which may only be changed for safety reasons or if the goal or playing surface becomes unusableâ€
|
|
|
|
|
|
