'Trial by TV' is for the best

The SFA's new penchant for 'trial by TV' as the Scottish rags are calling it, underwent a backlash last week.

Unsurprisingly, it came from parties who had been punished; Motherwell, after forward Michael Higdon was given a one match ban for what appeared to be a GIRUY gesture as part of a goal celebration at Tannadice (directed at his own fans), and Hibernian, after BBC Alba cameras picked up Leigh Griffiths giving a middle-finger salute.

Griffiths is a bizarre case. The former Dundee striker, on loan from Wolves, has now picked up three bans for similar actions in the space of only six weeks. First there was a one match ban for giving the GIRUY to Rangers fans at Easter Road who mocked him for losing his footing. The two subsequent offences, which occurred in a cup game at Cowdenbeath (after he scored a goal) and in a home league game against St. Johnstone, were, incredibly, aimed at his own supporters.



Whilst I can easily believe that Hibs fans might turn on their team quite quickly at the moment, considering that they are the biggest under-achievers since Charlie Chaplin entered and failed to win a Charlie Chaplin lookalike contest, I can't help feeling this is a rather sad indictment of Griffiths. It will surely have been noted by his parent club that, if he can't cope with the pressure cooker that is Central Park (Cowdenbeath's ground is better known for it's stock car racing track than it's atmosphere), then he doesn't really stand a chance playing at Molineux or other English Premier League grounds.

I also wonder how far Griffiths has to go before Hibernian and their new manager Pat Fenlon tire of him as well. So far the repeat offending has led to a total of five matches without an important first team player. It would have been quite easy to get shot of him - the decision to extend his loan spell beyond January actually came after the Cowdenbeath incident. Considering the club's problems in recent times with on- and off-field discipline, it would have been an opportunity for the new boss to stamp his authority. Fenlon has so far accumulated only 4 points from 8 league games in the Easter Road hotseat; he badly needs Griffiths to prove that his trust is not misplaced.

As for Higdon, the case was a bit less clear-cut - it has been argued, not without justification, that he often celebrates goals in this manner. What was more disturbing were the comments coming out of Motherwell, whose manager Stuart McCall appeared to imply that whether players were caught or not depended on the affiliations of whoever was editing the match highlights for Sportscene, and whose spokesperson released a statement after the ban was upheld containing lines such as 'We have material concerns about the approach, the informal communication around it and the obvious disproportionate nature of the suspension' and 'We do not believe this process as executed is doing anything other than setting all of us back. The focus is supposed to be on football, more needs to be done to keep the administration of the game on that track'.

You'd think Higdon was being sent to prison by a kangaroo court, not banned slightly harshly for the grand total of one game.

I previously questioned how long Compliance Officer Vincent Lunny's patience would last as the inevitable criticism rained down on him; prior to this he has been slagged off by Rangers (after banning Sone Aluko for diving) while Hearts' Ryan McGowan was suspended retrospectively after a headbutt. On the other hand, it has been used successfully to clear players who have wrongly been sent off - Caley Thistle's Greg Tansey is a case in point. Aberdeen midfielder Peter Pawlett, of course, got both ends of the stick - an unfair red card for a sliding challenge was rescinded...but he got a two match ban for a dive ten minutes earlier that won a penalty.

I'm all for this retrospective stuff. Officials are bound to make mistakes even if they are top drawer (not a description that can be applied to many north of the border). While obviously there has to be a limit - there aren't enough hours in the day to go through every single iffy decision - I'd rather there was some action than none at all. Only time will tell if this becomes a deterrent or not, but certainly I'd like to think that, for example, forwards will think twice about 'simulation' if they know that they will get a subsequent ban, as well as having their reputation damaged.

So, the longer that Mr. Lunny puts up with this - it must seem like a picnic compared to his previous job, which was trying war criminals in The Hague (no, really) - the better. And hopefully clubs will concentrate less on bemoaning the system and more on encouraging their players to show some integrity and to behave like adults.

L.