I must admit, the Scottish Football Association has managed to surprise me once again. And believe me, it takes quite something to surprise a Celtic supporter who has become accustomed to the extraordinary standards of the Scottish football authorities.

The SFA’s decision to uphold its own suspending of Celtic from having supporters attend their next Scottish Cup home game is not only grossly disproportionate, but also raises some very serious questions about the consistency, fairness and, dare I say it, common sense of those making decisions at Hampden.

Honestly, what the fucking hell is going on here?

Let me examine this wonderful piece of administrative genius. Celtic are being punished in exactly the same way as the Ibrox club, by having their supporters banned from a home Scottish Cup fixture, despite the fact that the circumstances surrounding the disorder at Ibrox were far from identical for both clubs.

Yet apparently the SFA has decided that treating everybody identically is much easier than examining what actually happened and acting accordingly. What a convenient approach to disciplinary proceedings. Why bother investigating the differences when you can simply produce a punishment that looks suitably tough on paper?

And this is precisely where my frustration begins.

I am not suggesting that Celtic should be above disciplinary procedures. Absolutely not. If Celtic or their supporters are responsible for misconduct, then the matter should be examined properly and dealt with accordingly.

However, there is a rather fundamental difference between holding a club accountable for its own conduct and punishing that club for circumstances largely associated with the actions and responsibilities of another.

Apparently, that distinction has escaped the SFA.

Let us focus on the Ibrox mob for a moment. The conduct of the home club and the conduct of Celtic supporters were not identical. The circumstances were different, the responsibilities were different, and the incidents should have been assessed accordingly.

Yet the SFA has somehow managed to arrive at a decision that treats both clubs as though they were equally responsible for everything that happened.

Perhaps the next disciplinary meeting could be replaced with a coin toss. It would probably save everybody some time, and the outcome might be just as logical.

What particularly irritates me is the apparent willingness to punish Celtic supporters by removing their participation in a future Scottish Cup fixture.

Why should our supporters lose the opportunity to attend a match at Hampden or at Celtic Park because of incidents for which the home club at Ibrox carried significant responsibility? Why should Celtic be made to suffer consequences that do not properly reflect the different conduct of those involved?

I would genuinely like somebody at Hampden to explain that particular piece of reasoning.

And please, spare me the usual speeches about setting examples, protecting the reputation of Scottish football and demonstrating that the authorities are taking matters seriously.

We have heard it all before.

The SFA seems particularly enthusiastic about making grand gestures whenever there is an opportunity to demonstrate its authority. One might almost think that looking decisive in front of outside audiences, including the Scottish Government, has become more important than delivering genuinely fair and proportionate disciplinary decisions.

Of course, I cannot claim to know the private motivations behind this decision.

But the impression it creates is hardly flattering.

There is a difference between being firm and being vindictive. There is a difference between applying disciplinary regulations and applying them without properly considering individual circumstances. And there is certainly a difference between accountability and collective punishment.

The SFA should understand all three.

I also find it rather extraordinary that Celtic supporters are once again expected to accept decisions that appear to disregard the circumstances surrounding their treatment.

We pay our money, support our club, travel to matches and contribute to the atmosphere that makes Scottish football worth watching. Yet when something goes wrong, the authorities seem perfectly comfortable making decisions that affect ordinary supporters who have absolutely no control over the disciplinary process.

What about fairness? What about proportionality? What about examining the actual evidence before reaching a conclusion?

Apparently, those concepts were taking the day off.

And here is another question: why is the SFA so keen to demonstrate its authority through punishments that affect supporters rather than addressing the underlying responsibilities of the clubs involved?

If the intention is to prevent similar incidents in the future, then surely the priority should be identifying precisely what went wrong, who was responsible and what measures each club must take to prevent a repeat.

That would be proper governance. That would be accountability.

Simply imposing a punishment that catches Celtic supporters in the process does not automatically constitute justice.

I am particularly tired of this apparent inability of the Scottish football authorities to distinguish between different circumstances.

Treating two clubs identically might look wonderfully neat in a disciplinary announcement, but fairness does not mean pretending that every situation is the same.

Fairness means examining the evidence, recognising differences in responsibility and applying sanctions that reflect the actual conduct involved.

It is not rocket science, Hampden.

And Celtic supporters should not have to remind the people responsible for governing Scottish football of something so fundamental.

My verdict? This decision deserves serious scrutiny, and the SFA should be prepared to explain exactly how it reached its conclusions.

Celtic should challenge the decision and demand that the different circumstances and responsibilities are properly recognised. Our supporters deserve better than being caught in the middle of an administrative exercise designed to demonstrate how tough the authorities can be.

I will finish with one thing.

If the SFA want to demonstrate that they are capable of governing Scottish football, they should perhaps start by demonstrating that they understand the meaning of proportionality.

Punishing Celtic supporters for circumstances largely associated with the actions of the Ibrox club is not an impressive display of authority. It is a decision that risks undermining confidence in the very disciplinary system you are supposed to administer.

And honestly, if this is your idea of fairness, I would hate to see your idea of injustice.

Celtic supporters are not your convenient punching bag. And Celtic should not be expected to accept a punishment simply because the SFA finds it easier to treat two entirely different sets of circumstances as though they were one and the same.

Choose The CelticBlog as a Preferred Source on Google News…