Common sense has finally prevailed, with the news that the original decision to expel Dunfermline from the Scottish Cup has been overturned and that they and Stenhousemuir will replay their tie at Ochilview, to decide who would meet Celtic in the next round.

There is no doubt that the Pars were in the wrong, but the severity of the punishment has to fit the crime(s). Precedent suggested a fine and/or replay was the most likely outcome and it appeared that the majority of observers took that view.

I quote from this site on January 9th “Should Dunfermline have fielded an ineligible player, precedent would see them forced to replay the game.” and two days later “Though the governing body could dish out a fine, it seems more likely that a replay will be ordered. There has been a precedent set in recent years when similar mistakes have been made.” [These articles were written before it became apparent that there were four rule breaches and not one – ed.]

Even Stenhousemuir didn’t foresee the Pars being thrown out with that same January 11th article stating “Stenhousemuir chairman David Muir has said that they will leave the matter in the hands of the SFA but pointed out that decisions in recent years had been to order the replay.”

Yet the SFA “Emergency Committee” (such an emergency that it took fully five days to convene) decided that four rules had been breached and expulsion was the solution.

Four breaches? When one of the four, sanctioned by the opposition and the match referee, is done purely to correct two of the other errors and, if quotes attributed to former Grade 1 referee Kenny Clark are correct, goes on all the time, then it would appear that the governing body were particularly anxious to condemn Dunfermline to the strongest possible sanction.

Of the four charges laid, the inclusion of the suspended Calum Woods as a substitute, caused the real furore and was presumably the main offence. It’s not the first time this has happened. Arbroath made the same mistake back in 2001, fielding not one, but two players on the suspended list. The outcome? They were ordered to replay their tie. That’s precisely why the same penalty should have been applied in this case.

Nor were the Pars the first team to fail to comply with the rule that at least two players aged 21 or under should be included in the match day squad. St Mirren were fined for such a breach in 2006, although if memory serves they did not correct the error prior to the game. Going by the SFA logic, their crime in failing to correct their mistake and playing the match outwith the rules was a lesser one than Dunfermline’s in making good their mistake before the game. That hardly seems fair, yet a far more stringent punishment was applied.

The one downside of enforcing a replay is that those who were innocent victims, the fans, are also going to suffer, having to fork out cash for a second unnecessary game. My solution? The game should be replayed, but there should be no admission charge. Instead Dunfermline should have to pay all costs - policing, stewarding, ground expenses etc for the replay and additionally all the gate money from the first tie should be handed over to Stenhousemuir as some sort of compensation for the inconvenience caused.

For their part, Dunfermline must take a serious look at the way the club is run. This is not the first time there have been procedural mistakes in recent years. The admin side appears to be a shambles and there are serious questions to be asked about whether those responsible for doing the paper-work are capable of doing the job. The club must ensure that there can be no danger of any such error again.

However, in view of the fact that it appears that almost every season we are hearing of a club who has breached the player eligibility rule, is it not time to also have a look at the system? That’s not to excuse Dunfermline who have clearly made some glaring errors, but to prevent further mistakes. For example, should the governing body for each competition not issue the match referee with a list of players from each club who are properly registered and eligible for each game, in order that this can be cross-checked with the team-lists?

Few have emerged from the affair with much credit, apart perhaps from ‘Muir boss John Coughlin who described the original punishment as “harsh”, and who has at no time used the media to try and influence any decision. If there were more people in the game who showed such integrity, perhaps our national game would not be in the mess that it is.

Now that all the off-field shenanigans have been dealt with, let’s just get on with the replay and the winners can be decided where they should be - on the pitch, not in the offices of Hampden Park.

Football fan articles - These are the views and opinions of genuine fans.  If you'd like to you have your say, over and above commenting on this article, get in touch by writing to sport@stv.tv.

For an alternative view on the SFA decision, read Neil Drysdale's opinion.