Incompetent SFA challenge fans to boycott the game

Physical embodiment: The SFA

'Understanding' is a two-way process. To be effective, an organisation needs to listen to the opinions of those with whom it deals and not solely provide information. Issuing a barrage of propaganda is not enough in today's open society.

So say none other that the Chartered Institute of Public Relations as a footnote to their definition of what their organisation is all about:

“Public Relations is about reputation – the result of what you do, what you say and what others say about you.

“Public Relations is the discipline which looks after reputation, with the aim of earning understanding and support and influencing opinion and behaviour. It is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics*.”

It is a definition that seems to have passed over the Scottish Football Association's heads at high altitude. But then PR is under the direction of the Communications department, which is headed by Darryl Broadfoot.

Broadfoot always seemed a strange choice for such a wide-ranging role. Having worked his way up – with some assistance – to being Chief Football Writer at The Herald, Broadfoot's path to success was one more appropriate to pre-1980s Britain, eschewing university for a much-sought-after job as a teenage “copy boy” at the title.

He was, by all accounts, well-liked – grafting, doing as he was told and giving no one around him an inferiority complex. His football affiliations were well-known by his workmates, which may well have facilitated a close working relationship with David Murray.

But he did as well as could reasonably be expected of someone with his abilities and some might say he deserved praise for that, though few would accuse him of self-sacrifice in the name of journalistic integrity. He was also the man who referred to the “Greek Sagas” and had a brief but infamous association with Michelle McManus, meaning that to the football-supporting public, he was something of a figure of fun.

At that time he seemed incongruous at The Herald but little did we know that his was the shape of things to come with Chris Jack and Matt Lindsay following in his footsteps.

There was little, then, to suggest that he was in any way suited to heading a major department in the national sport's governing body where modern, outward-looking, strategic communication was a key requirement.

It could even be said that only an organisation that would put the likes of George Peat, Gordon Smith and Campbell Ogilvie at its head would be so backward as to appoint a friendly football writer who had paltry education, no qualifications and a very limited relevant skill set.

To communicate with all the SFA's publics, they turned to someone who had spent his entire career with one newspaper, much of it with wiser heads looking over his shoulder.

Is Broadfoot promoting “goodwill and understanding”, in the CIPR's sense of the words? Could anyone say that the SFA enjoys a strong reputation? Or would it be more accurate to say the the Association transmits a “barrage of propaganda”?

The report from John Clark at the Scottish Football Monitor of his meeting with Broadfoot and Alan McRae makes astonishing reading.

First, the President of the SFA is apparently deemed incompetent to answer any of the most pertinent questions put to him. Let's be clear – the Head of Communications may sit in on an interview and occasionally butt in, should the interviewee drop a clanger that requires clarification.

It is not his job to speak for his boss because, quite simply, the boss is supposed to know better than anyone what his organisation is doing. The PR may handle routine press inquiries and briefings but could you imagine, for example, if Alastair Campbell didn't consider Tony Blair capable of outlining Labour Party policy?

There is only one time when such tactics are used and that is when obfuscation or shooting down dissent is required. And that is when the organisation knows it is not on solid ground in its dealings.

Perhaps even more remarkable than Broadfoot's comment, “for the purposes of this meeting, I am the SFA,” which apart from the hubris is a clear indication of McCrae's perceived competence, is what Clark attributes to him about football supporters' concerns being heard:

“Mr Broadfoot opined that the future would show whether Scottish Football supporters were really concerned about the old club/new club debate, if huge numbers turned their backs on the game.”

There, in a nutshell, is the SFA telling fans that if they keep buying tickets they will be ignored. Only by turning their backs on the game will the issues begin to be addressed.

It is rare for any organisation to challenge its own customers to abandon it but that is exactly what the SFA, through Darryl Broadfoot has done. It is over to the fans to respond.

*(“Publics' are audiences that are important to the organisation. They include customers - existing and potential; employees and management; investors; media; government; suppliers; opinion-formers.)

--