NEIL DONCASTER, the SPFL chief executive, has dismissed the effectiveness of strict liability to curb fan misbehaviour and insisted the controversial scheme doesn’t work ‘anywhere throughout the world’.
The conduct of supporters in Scottish football was brought into sharp focus this season as a number of serious incidents saw the game make headlines for all the wrong reasons.
Rangers captain James Tavernier was confronted by a fan at Easter Road just days after a bottle was thrown at Scott Sinclair.
READ MORE: What is strict liability in Scottish football and would it make a difference?
Neil Lennon and Kris Boyd were both hit by coins thrown from the stands, while Steve Clarke and Derek McInnes were vocal in their condemnation of sectarian singing.
SPFL clubs have previously voted against the implementation of strict liability and Doncaster believes the current framework is fit for purpose.
Doncaster said: “There’s a misconception about strict liability.
“Some see it as the answer to unacceptable conduct. If you look at the experience that Uefa has with European competitions, it’s clear that strict liability doesn’t work.
“You can end up punishing the innocent home clubs and if you start to make away clubs responsible of their fans, very quickly you will see away clubs stopping selling tickets to the away fans, putting greater onus on often smaller home clubs. I’ve never seen any examples of it working anywhere throughout the world.
“They (the SPFL clubs) do take responsibility. We very much welcome the actions that have been taken by various clubs this year. They have identified individuals using CCTV, and I think enhanced CCTV will be very much part of the future.
“I think you get unacceptable conduct across Europe. It’s not something unique to Scotland by any means. What is important is the clubs do everything they reasonably can to prevent incidents of unacceptable conduct from occurring. They deal with them appropriately in the moment and following the match they take action.
“It’s important to stress it only happens in the minority of matches and it’s a very small minority who engage in this behaviour.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel