Ibrox can issue all the threats it wants. That club is still accountable for its actions.

Ibrox’s anger over the Scottish Cup quarter-final continues to amaze and amuse me in equal measure. The same pattern will repeat itself when Derek McInnes appears in front of the SFA’s Appellate Tribunal at the end of the month.

They will wail, they will scream, they will bitch and moan, and they will leak to the media in advance how unhappy they are with the whole process and how they think the world is somehow against them.

The media will call it an uncompromising stand, just as they have before and before and before. Ibrox is forever taking uncompromising stands. It is just not clear that any of those uncompromising stands ever actually changes an outcome into something they would prefer.

In fact, I cannot remember the last time one of these grand Ibrox declarations altered the outcome of an investigation or disciplinary case in any significant way.

Look at how they have behaved since the Scottish Cup issue began.

Their uncompromising stand essentially comes down to a complaint about Celtic receiving a large away allocation for the quarter-final, even though Scottish Cup rules explicitly give away clubs the right to claim up to 20 per cent of the stadium capacity.

At Ibrox that would actually amount to around 10,000 tickets, although the eventual agreed allocation was the full Broomloan Stand, around 7,500.

They wanted something closer to the normal league allocation, but this was not a league game. One competition is governed by the SPFL and the other by the SFA, and they operate under different ticketing rules.

The Scottish Cup has long contained a provision allowing visiting clubs to claim a significant share of the attendance, subject to the practical arrangements being agreed between the clubs and the police.

So, Celtic receiving the Broomloan Stand was not some extraordinary special favour. It was an application of rules which were already there.

The behaviour of a section of the home support that day was reprehensible, and there is no escaping that. Police Scotland described officers and stewards facing sustained hostility and violence, while the subsequent independent review warned that the disorder came frighteningly close to far more serious consequences.

The report does not absolve Celtic, the SFA, the police or anyone else involved.

In fact, it spreads criticism widely. It concluded that there were failures in planning, communication, stewarding and preparedness across several organisations, which is precisely why both clubs were charged.

But it also contains some extraordinary findings about what went on inside Ibrox.

Their own mascot was twice recorded by the match delegate provoking the Celtic support and was personally warned by the safety officer. If even the man inside the giant bear costume has to be told to calm himself down, perhaps this was not quite the impeccably managed operation they would now like everyone to believe.

By the time you read this, there may already be a verdict in the public domain.

But I have little doubt that whatever happens, Ibrox will continue taking its famous uncompromising stand.

My question is: uncompromising in what way?

They can oppose the verdict. They can tell friendly journalists how furious they are. They can issue statements about protecting the reputation of their supporters and insist that mitigating factors have not been given sufficient weight. Current reporting already suggests that this is broadly the case they intend to make.

But none of that means they get to choose the outcome.

They can be as uncompromising as they like about refusing to accept responsibility. They can scream that the rules are unfair or that the ticket allocation created the problem. They can stamp their feet and behave as though Scottish football has committed some outrageous offence simply by subjecting them to the same disciplinary processes as everybody else.

None of it should change the eventual decision.

The same applies to McInnes. His appeal is officially scheduled for Monday, 31 August. His original punishment was a four-match suspension, three immediate and one suspended, after he was found guilty of breaching Rule 72 over his criticism of match officials.

He does not like the punishment. His club does not like the punishment. That is why they appealed it. Okay, but disliking a decision does not invalidate it. If the appellate tribunal agrees with them, then the outcome will change. If it does not, McInnes serves the punishment. That is how disciplinary systems work whether they like it or not.

The Scottish Cup issue is no different. Celtic were entitled under the competition rules to claim a much larger allocation than would normally apply in the league, and the eventual figure was actually below the theoretical 20 per cent maximum. Nothing Ibrox says now can rewrite that rule retrospectively.

They are also being asked to answer for failures connected to the behaviour of their supporters and the management of the occasion. They can contest individual findings, offer mitigation and argue over responsibility. That is their right.

But what exactly does an uncompromising stand look like once the tribunal has ruled?

Are they going to refuse to obey the sanction? Ignore it? Declare independence from the SFA? Build their own association in the car park?

Of course not. They will accept the decision while complaining bitterly about it. And, in case nobody has explained this to them, that is not an uncompromising stand.

That is taking your punishment, going back to your seat and grumbling about the teacher.

They can make all the noise they like, but the noise has no teeth. They can stamp their feet until the floorboards come loose, but Scottish football has ignored these performances before and will ignore them again.

They can express their unhappiness as loudly as a spoiled child expresses his unhappiness. That does not mean the spoiled child gets another biscuit.

That is how Ibrox behaves at times like this. Like a spoiled brat which believes it possesses some inherent right not to be offended, some right not to be held accountable and some right to be judged according to a different set of rules.

It has no such rights. It keeps being reminded of that.

Yet you go onto their forums after these decisions and you will inevitably find people convincing themselves that some enormous retaliation is coming. There will be dossiers. There will be demands for resignations. There will be calls for investigations into the investigators. Somebody will insist the club should “take this all the way”, although nobody is ever particularly clear where “all the way” actually is.

Eventually the process ends. A judgement is rendered. There is no secret final boss waiting behind another door.

The club is not going to assemble a team of investigators, uncover the vast conspiracy and march triumphantly into Hampden carrying a folder which brings the whole Scottish football establishment crashing down.

It is going to take whatever punishment it is given and continue playing football.

Just like everyone else.

That is why the constant language about “uncompromising stands” ends up making the club look ridiculous. There is no point in presenting every disagreement as an existential battle if, at the conclusion of the process, you do exactly what every other club does.

You comply. They may not like hearing it, and plenty of their supporters plainly struggle to wrap their brains around it, but ultimately Ibrox is just another football club. They have one voice around the table. They have one vote where one vote applies.

Their anger is not inherently more important than anybody else’s anger. Their statement does not carry additional constitutional force because it contains more furious adjectives. They can shout louder than everyone else. That does not mean everyone else has to listen.

And that is the thing all these uncompromising stands eventually reveal.

For all the noise, all the fury, all the briefing and all the outrage, when the governing bodies finally make their decision, Ibrox has exactly the same single option every other club has; to live with it and get on with playing football.

Choose The CelticBlog as a ‘Preferred Source’ on Google News for quick access to the news you value.