One of the greatest players Scottish rugby has ever produced has said the stadium song Flower of Scotland has become an embarrassing anti-English rant and should be ditched as the nation's sporting anthem.
Finlay Calder, captain of the British Lions in Australia in 1989 and one of the heroes of the Scotland Grand Slam side the following year, made the contentious claim in a wide-ranging interview with the Sunday Herald, claiming that it is time for Scotland to "grow up" and adopt a more mature approach to its rugby rivalry with England.
Calder, who is standing as a candidate in next month's election to become president of the Scottish Rugby Union, compared the respect shown by Ireland's rugby supporters two years ago when England first played at Croke Park - scene of an infamous massacre by British troops in 1920 during the bloody War of Independence - to the jeering the English side routinely receive at Murrayfield.
"It's embarrassing, the lack of respect," he said. "The anti-English stuff has got to stop. I think it's appalling the way we host our English competitors. Before we can go forward we've got to start to grow up a bit."
On the matter of Flower of Scotland, Calder was adamant that the song's time was up.
"I'm not happy with it," said the man who won 34 caps with Scotland before retiring in 1991. "I'd get rid of it tomorrow.
"It's time to get back to what people recognise as being Scottish - being fair and friendly."
Written by the late Roy Williamson of the Corries in 1967, Flower of Scotland grew popular in rugby circles, gaining official status as the national side's anthem in 1989. It was subsequently adopted by the Scottish Football Association as well.
Calder is not the first to court controversy by criticising the song. Two years ago, SFA president George Peat denounced it as "a dirge" and suggested that it should be replaced by something more stirring.
Ironically, perhaps the most famous rendition of the song was at Murrayfield in 1990, when Scotland beat England 13-7 to win the Grand Slam, a match in which Calder played a prominent part.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article