The Notts Forest Case Is Another One Non-Celtic Fans Don’t Want To Talk About.

Back in the late Roman Republic, Julius Caesar won election to the post of Pontifex Maximus; basically, the head of the state religion. It was a job for life, and elevated him from his role as a clever senator to the status of being a major player. It was in this role that he was caught up in the Bona Dei affair, when another Roman nobleman, Clodius Pulcher, dressed as a woman and invaded a meeting of the Vestal Virgins, hosted by Caesar’s wife Pompeia.

When Caesar was publicly asked about the growing scandal he divorced his wife on the spot, stunning the onlookers, including Cicero, who wrote of it afterwards. When questioned on the reasons why he would do so if neither he or she had anything to hide, he uttered the famous words, “Because Caeser’s wife must be above suspicion.”

In Scottish football, we would call that “sporting integrity.”

Yesterday, we learned that we are going to have John Beaton refereeing us again at the weekend. It’s beyond belief. You could not have made that up. This is Scottish football, where the SFA seems determined to teach us a lesson because we’ve questioned their decision making. All you can do faced with their behaviour is question their decision making.

As this was happening, I was sent a clip of an MP called Toby Perkins, standing up in the House of Commons and making a statement on the football regulations south of the border and the need for robust club ownership and continued vigilance on financial fair play. He invoked two clubs who had spent more than they earned, to their detriment; Derby County and Rangers. We know that one of those clubs did not survive that experience.

They have their act together down there. They have systems in place which allow for clubs to get answers to key questions. They are introducing stronger rules all the time, and a guarantee for the fans, which protects the heritage of clubs, which essentially belongs to the fans and should be given real safeguards. The SFA doesn’t give a toss about that stuff.

As everyone is aware, they have actually made it easier for people to get their claws into our teams, even people who already own clubs in England. One of the reasons these new regulations are being brought in is that even with their governing bodies being determined on FFP that ownership rules need tightened up good and proper … and as they are strengthening theirs, we are making ours weaker in direction proportion to that.

But as everyone knows, where they are miles ahead of it is on officiating. They make their referees and officials declare their allegiances. VAR is run by a private company, although it is under the aegis of the FA itself, but this still means that they clubs can demand independent review and officials are graded and given real scrutiny.

And it hasn’t been perfect … Professional Game Match Officials Ltd has been the subject of much controversy all season long. But it is accountable and it is held to account, which is why there will certainly be repercussions from the weekend’s latest one.

Notts Forest have demanded the VAR records from their game against Everton at the weekend, in which there were three key penalty decisions which they felt merited intervention and none of which were properly considered by the video replay guys. Two were fouls and the other was a handball. Everton went on to win the game 2-0.

Forest’s complaint revolves around the loyalties of the VAR official Stuart Attwell. Forest claim to have raised concerns about him before the game even kicked off; he is a Luton fan, and they are Forest’s relegation battle rivals. Their contention is that no such person should ever have been in a position to influence one of their matches.

The FA is not happy about this. But Forest believes that they have a case. They have highlighted the fact that PGMOL officials have to declare their allegiances already, to prevent clubs from being managed by supporters of their local rivals, and that’s how this came to light. But they also want there to be new regulations on “contextual rivalries” and that’s a more complicated issue but one they and others believe to be serious enough for a debate.

“This is currently not within the criteria but should be,” their statement says. “Mere reliance on match officials to recuse themselves if contextual rivalries exist invites conjecture, as some have recused themselves where others have not.”

The FA knows this is a problem. They know it’s a problem because, as Forest’s statement makes clear, they already have a system which encourages self-regulation. Which is a noble effort, but something that fundamentally doesn’t work because, of course “some have recused themselves where others have not.” So, Forest’s argument is more than reasonable.

The FA has to be aware of that, and what’s happened here has opened a can of worms down there and will put the authorities under real pressure to formalise their approach to “contextual rivalries” and the potential issues which arise from them. Forest have not made their anger public for nothing; they know they are risking an FA sanction for it but they want to bring into the public sphere this gaping hole in the rules. They think the debate is important.

No-one up here wants such a debate. It’s ridiculous. The media pretends that referees having clear preferences is just one of those things, and that there’s nothing we can do about it. There is a real problem in Scottish football and it is not the bias issue itself, it’s the absolute refusal on the part of some people, and the media, to acknowledge that bias might even exist far less that it might be having an influence on the fixtures.

But we’re creating an atmosphere here in which anything goes.

If a ref is corrupt, he can basically go about his business without fear. In the meantime, other officials who may be entirely innocent, are targeted for criticism and have their decisions shrouded on doubt because some surmise that they have something to hide … not only do the clubs and the fans not have the security of knowing we’re watching a straight game but the officials themselves do not have the ability to put their own integrity beyond reproach.

“Caeser’s wife must be above suspicion,” the dictator said when the Pulcher affair threatened to cast a shadow over his own standing. Doesn’t our game deserve the same? Shouldn’t our officials be above suspicion, and shouldn’t we be able to say that they are? Instead, John Beaton will get another high-profile game involving our club, and another chance to influence this title race when in England he wouldn’t get near any fixture involving us.

Why are some people up here pretending that this is okay? The Forest affair was another opportunity for our media to have a full and proper discussion about this matter but once again it’s the silence, not the sound of the debate, which is deafening.