Celtic's Bolingoli fiasco – one idiot, many culprits

Rather than continually waiting for the next act of stupidity or deliberate wrecking of the competitions, 
we should call for the charade to be ended and the season to be suspended now

Only a week ago the greatest problem vexing the minds of most Celtic fans was the awful prospect of signing a 33-year-old Steven Fletcher and the fearful possibility that he was being considered as a replacement for Odsonne Edouard.

And if a week is a long time in politics, it can seem like a lifetime in football.

Some of us thought we had problems on Sunday when a repeat of the performances we've seen all too often over the last two or three years at Rugby Park saw us dropping two points in our second game of the season.

The team showing was contemptible, Chris Jullien showed again why he won second prize in the wet paper bag fighting contest and there were serious questions over the approach of the coaching staff who have yet to find an answer to the Kilmarnock high press on their admittedly poor pitch.

If Jullien thought he would be the major talking point there were plenty of other contenders, namely the tiresome lack of availability of Tom Rogic, the paper-thin squad (particularly after the departure of Simunovic, thankfully, and Jonny Hayes), Bayo not being available and the mystery of Shved continuing.

Five substitutions should favour teams with stronger squads but with misfiring in all departments in a tactically hopeless mess, Neil Lennon clearly felt short of quality options to replace the underperforming players on show on Sunday.

Ironically one chink of light came in the form of Boli Bolingoli Nbombo who, coming on late, contributed to three good chances that our foxes in the box managed to foxup entirely.

Those few moments from Bolingoli were the equal of anything he has produced in his risible time at Celtic and if not quite a hurrah they will certainly represent his last contribution to the club.

The facts of what happened are indisputable. Bolingoli went on a moonlight jaunt to Spain for reasons as yet unclear and broke Covid-19 regulations, actually having the audacity to play at Rugby Park without telling anyone at the club about his exploits.

That provided Nicola Sturgeon and her SNP leadership cult with a perfect opportunity to indulge two of their great pleasures: deflecting from negative at media attention directed at the first minister and taking a swipe at Scottish football.

So, under pressure from the Joint Response Group, which was under the direction of Nicola Sturgeon, the SPFL decided to cancel Celtic's next 2 League games; one with Aberdeen who also had their Covid-19 issues.

If the facts of what happened are clear enough,  who's to blame and what should be done do not lend themselves so easily to such simplistic answers as might be imagined.

Bolingoli is certainly to blame. His actions were inexcusable and indefensible and no amount of apologies - sincere or otherwise - can mitigate those actions in any way.

He should certainly be punished to a far greater degree than the £480 fixed penalty notice imposed by police Scotland even if the apparent prompting of the Justice Minister, of whom the police are supposed to be independent, should cause concern.

In my view his punishment should be the maximum fine allowable under the rules as well as a substantial ban, preferably taking him beyond the next transfer window.

But simply ripping up his contract should not be an option. There were some suggestions on Twitter yesterday that Celtic could even sue him for breach of contract and recover some of ridiculous outlay they paid for a player who will surely go down as one of the worst purchases in the club's history.

To me, suing would be a step too far unless it could be proven that his trip (which looks very much like it was intended to discuss a transfer) was planned as some intricate scheme to get thrown out of Celtic. I doubt very much that he possesses is that intelligence.

On the other hand making a free agent of a £3m-pound footballer we dare not play - and who wants a move - would simply be rewarding a scurrilous activity that has already damaged Celtic and has been to the detriment and peril of Scottish football entirely.

Those actions should be non-starters but so, too, should be the suggestion of sending Bolingoli out on loan with an option to buy. That would be in the club's best financial interests but it would do nothing to protect the integrity of football or to protect Celtic or the game in general from potential sabotage through such reprehensible actions, in times of crisis, such as these.

Of course, the club must be careful to observe the law and not give Bolingoli any opportunity to leave through constructive dismissal or breach of contract. This is where the football authorities should show leadership and impose the most significant penalties within their powers.

But we should also remember that Bolingoli's culpability is not in any way diminished by having other targets in our sights.

The SPFL

It may been news to some that resisting the attempts of The Rangers to bring Scottish football to its knees - and force last season to be voided due to the pandemic - is not the same as endorsing the

leadership of the SPFL.

I do not and never have believed that this season would be completed.

Successfully completing the season might be possible in countries where there are clear policies and rules; effective, disciplined compliance and competent administration of the game.

Scotland is not one of those countries.

The SPFL may believe its guidelines are clear and that they can be sure that every club has communicated them effectively to young athletes of varied backgrounds, including different linguistic origins.

But there's a problem with that. With the best will in the world, it's difficult to convey a clear, simple message concerning complex and often vague conditions.

That may somewhat mitigate the actions of the Aberdeen players who went to pubs, legally opened and overcrowded, and found themselves in breach of distancing rules and guidelines over groups from more than 3 households.

And to Aberdeen's credit they did nothing to try to escape the consequences of their players' actions -  and were even quite ready to face what would surely have been a sound drubbing at the hands of a full-strength Celtic team, minus eight first-team players.

But the SPFL, having been quite frankly too afraid to punish the Rangers after fielding players without waiting for their covid-19 tests, have created an atmosphere in which it is difficult to know if any transgressions will be taken seriously, even in the unlikely event of every player understanding their responsibilities.

On top of that, the SPFL simply rolled over in the face of pressure from a government that has been hell-bent on attacking Scottish football ever since the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act was repealed.

Let's not forget that the government were threatening to intervene in Scottish football over crowd-control issues for more than a year, pre-covid-19, and now it has flexed its muscles over eight players in a pub and one player on a trip to Spain.

With weak-kneed leadership, being feart in the face of the Rangers and completely capitulating to the Scottish government, the SPFL and SFA have walked into a situation whereby the Scottish government can constantly threaten to bring the game crashing down.

And, if they can do so while apportioning the blame to others, they will.

SNP and Tories

Celtic are now in the unenviable position of being at the centre of an unedifying fight between the SNP and the Tories for the votes of the Rangers supporting loyalist Orange members of Scottish society.

We are often called paranoid but with buffoons such as Professor Adam Tomkins and Murdo Fraser openly courting the Rangers Supporters online; with their new Tory leader Douglas Ross insisting that he will still run the line in games; and on the other side with Ibrox Park being in the constituency of Nicola Sturgeon there is every reason to believe that damaging Celtic and stopping 10 in a row could be a major vote-winner fin next year's elections.

It doesn't help that Labour in the LibDems are so appallingly ineffective that nobody in their right mind would vote for them.

 

But, with the SNP, it seems that there is a genuine distaste for football and the football supporter. The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act, first introduced by Alex Salmond and defended to the hilt by Nicola Sturgeon criminalised ordinary actions in the context of football that would not be seen as illegal elsewhere. 

There is every reason to believe that football supporters are still considered an underclass in Scotland that is despised by the SNP.

It is also a convenient scapegoat while negative headlines are attached to the party or its leader.

Without strong, effective responses from the SPFL, including Peter Lawwell, who is on its board, Scottish football will continue to be battered by the Scottish government and Celtic will be the biggest losers.

Celtic

And as a club just what have Celtic done about all this? 

They issued the usual necessary statements against Bolingoli but have they done anything to defend the interests of the club and the fans? I see little evidence of that.

What they have done is completely capitulate when, without any requirement under the rules, our club has been penalised by politicians.

Thee club is exceptionally vocal when touting season tickets for matches that they know are unlikely to take place and even less likely to take place in front of fans. They indulge in wall-to-wall marketing of football strips, merchandise, Celtic media and every opportunity for the fan to put money into the clubs coffers. But when the fans need someone to stand up for them, Celtic - Dermot Desmond, Peter Lawwell and Ian Bankier - observe a "dignified silence".

While these people indulge in a high-stakes game of corporate Moneyball the last thing on their minds is the interests of the fans who simply want to see a strong team on the park playing on an even field. 

And what no one in the media - mainstream or independent -seems to have asked is did anyone in Scottish football really believe that this season would be completed when they were selling season tickets in advance.

It defies all expectations of scientists and public health professionals and I for one believe that together they have perpetrated one of the biggest frauds in sport

The people who run Celtic are a disgrace but they have been enabled.

Fans

But the fans also have to take some share of the blame.

Firstly, by the annual act of faith of buying 53,000 season tickets, clearing the shelves of strips and pouring money into the club all on promises that are rarely fulfilled.

Yes we have won 9 titles in a row and that is a memorable achievement. It theoretically puts us in a similar category to Bayern Munich, who have achieved the same in the Bundesliga, and one step ahead of Juventus and New Quay Saints of Wales who have both won eight consecutive titles.

The point is that being a little better than extremely poor for a very long time should not be the aspiration of Celtic fans.

But it has been enough to mollify sufficient numbers to stop any protests in the only meaningful way possible - by hitting the club and its executives and directors in the pocket.

Similarly, amid the backlash against Bolingoli, numerous Celtic fans were only too quick to bend over and accept any punishment meted out, like children in the class all being belted over the transgressions of one and accepting that it was fully deserved.

What chance do we have of fairness, never mind improvement, while our own fans play into the hands of those who either don't care about us or despise us?

This is the club we've made and this is the game that our club has allowed to become.

Rather than continually waiting for the next act of stupidity or deliberate wrecking of the competitions, we should call for the charade to be ended and the season to be suspended now, with all season tickets being valid for 2021/22.

That may seem like a crime but I would see it as a mercy killing.

Pride - in the Name of Celtic

Like many others in the Celtic support, I was brought up in a deeply-religious, Catholic family.

My mother was from County Donegal and an enthusiastic advocate - aka enforcer - of Catholic doctrine and dogma.

There were barely enough Masses in the year for mum, who grudgingly accepted the liberal reforms of the Second Vatican Council through deference to Papal infallibility, whether invoked by the Holy Father or not.

You could have accurately referred to her as a Catholic fundamentalist, well-versed in the Catechism that declared the only valid sexual activity as being "open to procreation within the confines of marriage".

I even once heard her quoting the American spiritual, "Give me that old-time religion".

I never said it was easy.

And like most brought up in the years before Eastenders scandalised British society with a pre-watershed Gay kiss, the idea of Gay equality was anathema to me.

Yes, I held the same prejudices as the vast majority of my peers and I doled out the homophobic epithets with the same frequency most "normal" people of the age.

I am not proud of that.

Though I refer to my Catholic upbringing, seeing homosexuality as some form of social disease was very much the accepted view of the time, outwith the extreme fringes of society.

I even remember a story of a young man who killed his cousin because he tried to kiss him. The charge was reduced from murder to manslaughter and he was given a short sentence as that sort of thing was considered extreme provocation outraging common decency.

Likewise, two men holding hands - never mind kissing - would be at a high risk of assault with charges unlikely to be brought against their assailants.

In my case, I gradually changed and I found myself a subject of grave concern when, as a supporter of the Scottish Fight the Clause campaign, literature arrived at the family home, the envelopes conspicuously stamped.

Ironically, the subject was considered too awful to talk about, so I was spared a grilling, which would likely have comforted my parents as I would truthfully have said: "I'm not Gay; I just don't think what's happening is right and I want to know more."

In 2018, we don't have to tiptoe around the subject of sexuality any more and many younger people may not recognise how different that is to the experiences of previous generations.

Sexuality is, in most societies, still one of the most vexed subjects in terms of morality and social norms.

One way or another, there always seem to be people looking to police what goes on it the bedroom (or other available venue) and we are usually brought up with values from our parents or others who we love and respect but whose values do not necessarily match ours.

My view is that we all retain the right to our own values and opinions but that we should not project our moral values on others who are doing no harm.

By that, I mean that tolerance means accepting the diversity of moral and religious or areligious values, most of which are genuinely held, as well as according equal respect to those whose expressions of their own selves are "different".

Celtic is "a club open to all". The Irish Catholics who landed in Scotland in the 19th century were "different" and branded unacceptable due to their beliefs, customs and behaviours.

And yet Celtic is  a club for Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Sikh, Atheist, Agnostic or any other believer or non-believer.

I'm proud of that fact.

I'm also proud that Celtic can openly offer an equally welcoming environment to people of any and all sexualities.

Anyone who wishes to support Celtic should be embraced with equal respect and, if the first high-profile Gay footballer in Scotland should happen to play for Celtic, I am confident that he or she would find that support from the Celtic family that has sustained many in the past.

The words should be synonymous.

Pride in the name of Celtic.
--

End racism - and Show Shay Logan the Red Card

I have a pal (really), Eamon, who has devoted most of his adult life to socialism.

He's one of those guys who left Labour behind years ago, as being a party incompatible with his socialist ideals. He is also the sort of guy who does unglamorous work in his community, like volunteering to referee kids' football matches that might promote integration and understanding between communities.

He is unlikely to ever get a medal for this and he would never seek one, despite doing more for the public good than many - more celebrated - elected politicians.

We broadly agree on the vast majority of subjects - politics of the left, trade unionism, anti-Fascism, ant-racism, a loathing of the Conservative party, disdain for Labour, being unconvinced by the SNP, etc. And we are both passionate about Celtic.

But we are also both forthright with each other and willing to let the other know when we disagree with certain opinions or actions.

One such occasion centred around one of those very matches that Eamon was giving up his free time to referee.

He recounted an unpleasant incident, when one boy accused another on the opposing team of using a racist epithet, during an increasingly niggly game.

Eamon immediately asked the other boy to apologise, which he refused to do, pleading his innocence. Eamon asked who had heard it and nobody else had.

The boy continued to deny using racist language and refusing to apologise until Eamon asked him, "Will you just say sorry, anyway - for me?"

The boy acquiesced, though still proclaiming his innocence,  which Eamon thought a good outcome.

But I disagreed and I said so.

Was that because I thought racism a trivial thing? No.

It was because I considered Eamon to have, in his well-meaning way, confused two fundamental principles - the right of someone claiming to be a victim to be taken seriously and believed against the right of someone facing a harmful accusation to defend his reputation, when faced with nothing stronger than the word of the accuser and innuendo.

These are sensitive situations and there are no perfect solutions.

But my point to Eamon was that some happenings are simply unjust and while nobody has a right to abuse another person, being coerced into apologising for something that you know you haven't done is intolerable to most people and, especially to a child, may leave a lingering scar and even plant the seed for an antipathy that was not previously there.

And so we come to Shay Logan.

We all know that Logan was racially abused by Aleksandr Tonev as it is a matter of official record with that redoubtable body, the Scottish Football Association.

Tonev was, you may recall, banned and his loan deal from Aston Villa cut short, based only on Logan's certainty that he had heard the words he claimed were uttered, though there was no corroborating evidence.

This decision was lauded by the likes of Tom English, to whom an accusation is as good as a conviction.

Now, if Tonev did make racist remarks, I would be the first to say that he should have been kicked out of  Celtic. And, even without that, I can't say that losing him has kept me up at night.

I know what it's like to be abused for my background and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

I also don't believe that people from certain minorities should keep quiet for fear of drawing bigoted attention to themselves. After all, we heard the Scottish media saying that about Neil Lennon, who was undoubtedly racially abused on a regular basis.

But I do object to the good name of Celtic being smeared by any unsupported allegations, as is happening now - coincidentally on the say-so of Shay Logan.

I intended to ignore his latest accusation as the attention-seeking it clearly was.

Because, let's face it, Logan is an insufferable idiot who, when not getting attention, uses his Twitter account to send some antagonistic message to Celtic fans and who declared the derisive boos that he so clearly seeks to be racist, when nobody was talking or even thinking about the dishwater-potent talents.

In doing so, he evokes the same logic  shown by Neymar, when the Tartan Army were ahead of the curve in booing his cheating in a friendly international. Neymar, apparently unable to think of any other reason for his being booed, declared the reaction to be racist.

And that was what the first and most-read headlines said.

But, today, Show Racism the Red Card Scotland, decided to pipe in, days late, with remarks decrying the Celtic supports reaction to Logan as "racist".

Of course, SRtRC offers no evidence, as they don't need to. The slur is enough and SRtRC, who not for the first time, appear to be a selective Scottish imitation of the more respected UK-wide group, have decided to sling mud when it suits them.

Are there racists within the Celtic support? Undoubtedly, and sadly, yes, as with every other type of buffoon.

Is it fair to describe fans as racists because they boo a player whose very raison d'etre seems to be to make the news by goading Celtic fans? No, it is not.

Logan simply follows in a line of players such as Ally McCoist and Nacho Novo, who get a kick out of annoying Celtic fans.

Steven Naismith and his manager Craig Levein are currently doing the same at Hearts.

Most clubs have players who enjoy the notoriety of seeing opposition fans getting angry and we have had our own.

When the new season starts, you can expect to hear the fans rain down abuse on Naismith, Levein, Kenny Miller, half the Motherwell team and management, Graeme Shinnie and Logan.

There may well be idiotic remarks amongst them and I would call on any fan who hears racist abuse to challenge it whenever they hear it. They will be strongly supported by fellow fans.

Logan and SRtRC have reduced the serious issue of racism in football to the level of a Sasha Baron Cohen Ali G routine.

You may find this hard to believe, Shaleon, but few Celtic fans care about you at all and those who do - almost without exception - simply think you're  a fool.

And the same goes for the Scottish branch office of SRtRC. --