It is a well-worn anecdote in Scottish football journalistic circles, the one of a wise old sage of the trade warning a club chairman some years ago that if he gave his club’s fledgling ultras group enough rope, they would ultimately hang him with it.
After an independent report was published yesterday by the Scottish FA into the scenes of fan disorder at last season’s Old Firm Scottish Cup quarter final at Ibrox though, it appears it is not only the clubs, but the football authorities themselves and even the police who have given ultras the leeway - an inch here and an inch there - from which some among their number have ultimately taken a mile. And more.
There is a broad feeling, not entirely unjustified, among many members of ultras groups that within the media, there is distaste for and distrust of a phenomenon that has exploded in popularity in the Scottish football scene over the last decade or so, and that they aren’t given a fair hearing as a result.
It is difficult though even for those of us who are broadly in favour of the existence of ultras, seeing the atmosphere and colour they bring to stadiums as an important part of the Scottish football ecosystem, to mount much of a defence for the behaviour witnessed at Ibrox on that chaotic afternoon back in the Spring.
The systemic failures that created circumstances ripe for such mayhem are, as laid out in the report by independent lead Mark Blackbourne, eye-popping.
Rangers quickly released a statement reiterating their opposition to the SFA decision to award Celtic over 8000 tickets for the tie that afternoon in the context of the reduced allocations that have been in operation over the past eight years or so, but that doesn’t explain why the club’s risk assessment of the fixture was broadly the same as the one for the match a week prior at the same venue, when there were approximately 5600 less Celtic fans in attendance.
The ‘complacency’ that is highlighted in the report though extended far beyond the clubs themselves, with the wholly inadequate punishments meted out by the football authorities to clubs in the past cited as a contributory factor in failing to provide much of a deterrent to such behaviour.
With both Rangers and Celtic now cited by the Judicial Panel for apparent breaches of the SFA's rule 37, which determines whether clubs have taken ‘appropriate measures to identify and deal with supporters who engage in unacceptable conduct’, we’ll soon find out whether the SFA will be following the report’s recommendations to bare their teeth with a great deal more relish. Their hearings will take place on August 13th.
In an even broader context, the report was scathing on the failure of the authorities to hold even one multi‑agency ‘tabletop meeting’ for a match the report classifies as being of ‘national significance’, with Glasgow City Council’s Safety Advisory Group found to have had no pre‑match role, leaving clubs and Police Scotland effectively ‘marking their own homework’ on safety plans.
During the match, and particularly during the four minutes and 28 seconds when fans were on the field of play, the extent of how far police resources were stretched were laid bare. Not only were there just 111 officers inside the stadium, but it was noted that at the off-site Police Scotland control centre ‘where Gold/Silver Command was operational…there was no visual imagery of events at the stadium: no CCTV feed and no Premier Sports subscription broadcast feed. Gold command was therefore managing a major public order incident without real-time visual situational awareness of the ground’.
You might have thought that a confiscated dodgy Firestick or two would be lying around, and could have been deployed in the circumstances, but alas, no.
None of this though excuses the actions of the individuals themselves on the day who are ultimately the ones who decided to behave in such a manner, and as Blackbourne states, could well have put people’s lives at risk.
“It must be stated unequivocally that the events of 8 March constituted two near-miss incidents of the most serious kind,” the report stated.
The two high-risk moments he references are the co-ordinated overwhelming of staff by Celtic ultras at the search lines on Broomloan Road, and the wielding of ‘poles and reinforced gloves’ by Rangers fans as the two sets of supporters confronted one another on the field at the end of the game.
“Responsibility lies squarely with those groups and individuals - almost exclusively male - who behaved in a disorderly and threatening manner with complete disregard for the safety of the majority of fans, and of the stewarding, policing, medical and Rangers FC club personnel whose duty it was to keep them safe,” he continued.
“This Review expects that prosecutions continue with full vigour, that courts apply the most robust sanctions available, and that football authorities pursue disciplinary action to the fullest extent of their powers.
“Across the day: access gates were forced open; stewards and football staff were assaulted, two hospitalised; pyrotechnics were ignited; antagonistic songs were chanted; seats and LED boards were damaged; graffiti was daubed on internal walls; and missiles were thrown at players, officials and supporters. It was a minor miracle that no-one suffered more serious injury.
“The post-match pitch invasion by several hundred Celtic supporters was wholly inexcusable. It provoked an immediate hostile response from sections of the home support, who forced past stewards and police to reach the pitch. Flares and bottles were thrown, a steward and Celtic staff member were accosted, and multiple scuffles broke out before control was re-established.
“It must be emphasised that the initial actions of the disorderly Ultra groups (whose conduct set the tone) were a significant contributory factor in the match end descending into the chaotic and embarrassing scenes that unfolded. These actions were the catalyst. The disorder that followed was the consequence.”
When speaking to representatives of ultras groups, as this paper has done in the past, a common thread is the request from their side for ‘grown-up conversations’ between these groups and the authorities.
But while these representatives and spokespeople are invariably intelligent, articulate and convincing in the advancements of their arguments and the interests of their groups, compromise is a two-way street. Particularly on the issue of pyrotechnics, the stance tends to be that this is how we are going to behave, and it is up to the clubs and the authorities to accommodate it.
Just as I believe the sizeable minorities who engaged in the appalling behaviour on March 8th are not largely representative of the ultras movement as a whole, neither can such an obdurate position be seen as a starting point for a ‘grown-up conversation’.
Some clubs have been able to accommodate their ultra groups to great effect and harness the good they bring to the game by engaging in dialogue and establishing a mutual understanding. But sadly, it appears that the scenes at Ibrox in March and the recommendations of this report, if implemented, will see the window for appeasement closed for good.
The report calls for a change in Scottish legislation to bring in harsher punishments for offences such as pitch incursions, pyrotechnics, tailgating, face coverings. The power of courts to issue Football Banning Orders, recently widened in Scotland, would be broadened further still (though, as Rangers note in their statement, curiously would still omit any mention of tragedy abuse). A new Joint Safety and Security Body is proposed, closing the planning gaps that were so prevalent ahead of this fixture. Digital ticketing is recommended. And above all else, zero tolerance is the order of the day.
The review ends, somewhat optimistically, with the laying out of a potential pathway back to full 'traditional' Old Firm away allocations, something Rangers have immediately signalled they have no appetite for accommodating. Which is a shame for Scottish football, but what many observers on the fateful afternoon remarked would be the inevitable consequence of what was unfolding before our eyes.
It turns out, to paraphrase that wise, erstwhile colleague, it is the unruly faction of the ultras groups that have handed their critics a stick big enough with which to beat them, and the excuse to wield it - and potentially significant new powers - against them.
