Perhaps, at some stage in the future, Scottish football will be populated by forward-thinking administrators in possession of logical ideas and blessed with a sufficient amount of vision to act as the catalysts for a renaissance on the global stage.
Until then, presumably, we will have to make do with a confederacy of dunces!
These thoughts were prompted by the news that Dunfermline FC have won their appeal against their expulsion from the Scottish Cup. Or rather, having initially been kicked out of the competition, despite beating Stenhousemuir 7-1 in the original fixture, the Pars have now been reinstated, but will none the less, be forced to pay around £30,000 for breaching competition rules by fielding an ineligible player, Calum Woods, in addition to perpetrating a string of other administrative errors, including submitting an inaccurate team line-up, altering a named substitute, and not registering two outfield under-21 personnel. It is difficult to imagine how they could have handled the matter worse and, on the basis that rules are rules, and that other clubs have suffered expulsion from the tournament in similar circumstances, Dunfermline appeared to have about as much chance of winning their appeal as a one-legged man in a butt-kicking contest.
This, however, is Scottish football, so maybe we shouldn’t be surprised at the U-turns which seem to a habitual part of the sport’s culture. What does stick in the throat in this instance is the underlying sense of justice being done and that the plucky Fifers have somehow earned a merited reprieve. Even the Stenhousemuir manager, John Coughlin, bought into this culture with the response “Fair play to Dunfermline” last night, before he prepares his side for another crack at the First Division team, with the winners gaining a lucrative tie with Celtic in the next round of the event. Yet, the bottom line is that if the Dunfermline authorities had shown as much attention to the regulations in the first place as they have demonstrated whilst bleating about their plight, in advance of going to an independent panel, they would have avoided plunging themselves and the game into another embarrassing imbroglio. Instead of which, the much-reviled SFA, which behaved swiftly and with due diligence in this matter, by reaching the conclusion that a fine or slap on the wrist wasn’t sufficient penalty for Dunfermline, now finds itself in its default position of being caught on the hop, even when the responsibility lies elsewhere.
It’s hard to escape the feeling this case provides fresh evidence that searching for two lawyers or groups of legal officers who might occasionally arrive at the same verdict is akin to asking Gordon Ramsay to join a Trappist monastery. It will never happen, because any list of rules or governance instructions are invariably open to interpretation, which, of course, ensures that the SFA’s task resembles painting the Forth Bridge.
Yet, Gordon Smith, the association’s chief executive, was surely justified in his puzzlement at the ruling which has allowed Dunfermline an undeserved return to Cup action. On the evidence of their previous encounter, they will be too good for ‘Muir in the replay and that sets them up for a joust with Celtic, which could be worth as much as £100,000, which means even if they fall foul of Tony Mowbray’s men, they could wind up making a significant profit from perpetrating an amateurish series of basic errors.
One wonders what might transpire if Stenhousemuir were to field, consciously or not, an ineligible player when the sides meet again next week. Cynically, the suspicion has to be that they would be meted out a different kind of sanction from their Fife rivals and that there is still one law for the (relatively) rich and another for their poor relations.
In short, this decision stinks. It has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with the big clubs – and let’s not forget that, until recently, Dunfermline were in the SPL - sticking together and feathering one another’s nests. It might not be on the scale of “Boozegate” and Jim Leishman is an altogether more sympathetic character than Barry Ferguson or Allan McGregor. But his club screwed up and they should have expected to pay the price. In the event, they are suddenly contemplating a windfall. Madness!
For an alternative take on the SFA's decision, read Dunfermline fan Roy Murray's opinion.
Neil Drysdale writes in a personal capacity. His views do not necessarily represent those of STV plc.
