Articles

The Campaign To Gag Sutton Makes You Wonder What Refs Have To Hide

|
Image for The Campaign To Gag Sutton Makes You Wonder What Refs Have To Hide

There are two people in Scottish football right now whose every comment is the subject of a media story. The very different ways in which both are being treated is indicative of a wider problem in our game here, and one that I’ve covered on this site before.

It’s about hypocrisy.

It’s about a double standard that runs through our sport like red through a stick of rock.

On the one hand, Joey Barton can say whatever the Hell he likes.

Neither his club nor officialdom strains to get a grip on him.

His comments are passed off as banter, even when they are of the most offensive kind. He is employed by Sevco; his behaviour comes under the umbrella of the SFA Disciplinary Board. If his own club won’t control him, it’s their job to. I have no doubt they are watching his comments carefully. Equally, I have no doubt that they won’t act on anything he says, no matter how ludicrous or inflammatory it might be.

Chris Sutton, on the other hand, is being put under tremendous pressure.

The people he works for, BT Sport, are being leaned on by folk within the Association after his comments about Craig Thomson provoked a petty response from the official when he started the second half of a live game a minute early, and deprived BT Sport of advertising income.

People inside the SFA have denied this, but then they would.

But they’ve clearly taken a side, that of Thomson, and that’s pretty telling in itself.

One of the Sunday papers says that at the meeting BT Sport were told to “muzzle him” or risk non-co-operation from the refs.

Sutton says he hasn’t been muzzled, which suggests BT Sport told them where to stick that idea.

Thomson should have been carpeted for what he did. It was a reckless and childish act of spite, which could have had repercussions for a lot of people. The SFA had a meeting with BT over the issue last week, and the word around the campfire is that it’s Sutton the SFA wants to see punished. We’re back in this old argument again, the one over the accountability of referees, because although this comes up time after time after time it never gets settled properly.

Referees don’t think they are accountable.

The SFA protects them to a ridiculous and potentially corrupting degree. I’ve seen decisions in the last few seasons that’ve been so utterly scandalous that the people involved in them should never have gotten a Grade 1 game to officiate again. Those same people – and Thomson is one of them – are still in their roles, and still continuing to insist that they’re entitled to some special protection enjoyed by no-one else in the sport.

Of course, the last time they were being given real scrutiny they and the media concocted one of the worst, most dangerous, lies that has ever been forced on the supporters in Scotland, that of the “threats” which resulted in a strike.

Our club was blamed for that, for “forcing” referees to take that action, when in actual fact they’d been looking for an excuse to do it, and there was plenty of evidence of it. The strike was over money; pure and simple greed, but even the incident that incited it was twisted so we got the blame; in fact, we were the one’s who’d been lied to and we’d proved that. The narrative of the time was that we were involved in a witch hunt.

Well, that’s to be expected where there are witches.

What sparked all the controversy this time was Sutton’s comments on Thomson’s handling of the Harry Forrester affair, in the match between Sevco and Dundee, and which prompted this site to publish a scathing piece on the Honest Mistakes which contributed to the Ibrox side’s win.

I watched that game and Thomson’s officiating was horrendous throughout and Sutton clearly thought so too, labelling the ref a bottler for not showing the Sevco winger the red card after he was allowed to make several very naughty challenges even after being booked.

I thought it reeked myself, especially when Thomson was seen to turn to the Sevco dugout and practically implore the manager to sub his player after he’d already decided not to bother just a few minutes before. Forrester, of course, was allowed one more foul before the manager decided it was becoming ridiculous and did the necessary.

Every commentator should have said the same. Every media outlet should have been howling its disgust. Most chose to remain silent, as per usual. They don’t like critising refs here in Scotland, and every time someone does we hear the usual accusations that it’s all a conspiracy theory.

But we’d not be the first country in Europe where refs were bent.

We’d not be the first where they allowed inherent bias to get in the way of doing their jobs.

In fact, we might be one of the few countries where, at least officially, it hasn’t happened.

If it doesn’t we’d be the exception to the rule.

You dare not say that. Even a media pundit like Sutton dare not. Because these people have been shielded from scrutiny for so long that they – like their SFA bosses – think they no longer have to answer to anybody. Eventually silence and that kind of arrogance provokes its own questions.

Perhaps they’ll go on strike again, if Sutton doesn’t keep his opinions to himself.

Except Sutton is paid to highlight these things. If a guy isn’t going to be allowed to state his opinion what’s the point in having him there? Note that Sutton wasn’t alleging bias. He was simply declaring the ref to be useless, and out of his depth. Few who’ve watched Thomson over time would disagree with that verdict, and some would even use the word the former Celtic striker wouldn’t. Thomson doesn’t belong in a Grade 1 slot; he’s proved it time and again.

In the meantime, Barton continues to let fly with any ridiculous thought that pops into his head. The difference between the two is that Sutton is paid to give his opinion, and Barton is payed to (allegedly) play football. Sutton is not within the purview of the disciplinary board, whereas Barton is.

Yet it’s Sutton football has a problem with.

For daring to try to hold referees to account, something which is long overdue.

Go figure.

Only in Scotland.

Share this article