Rangers fans should neither be shocked nor surprised that U.E.F.A. have opened yet another disciplinary case against Celtic F.C. following their Champions League tie against A.C. Milan last night.
The incident in question is their fans' unfurling of a huge flag display depicting convicted I.R.A. terrorist Bobby Sands, in an attempt to relate his despicable acts with the up-and-coming referendum on Scotland's future as part of the United Kingdom.
The only shock or surprise would be if U.E.F.A. took any meaningful action against a club who have been at the centre of controversy more times than my window cleaner goes up his ladder.
Vanguard Bears still feel that U.E.F.A. has been lenient as there was at least one more incident last night that was worthy of review.
As of today, no action has been taken by U.E.F.A. for the laser pen that was dangerously shone in the eyes of the A.C. Milan goalkeeper Christian Abbiati, which is surprising as police have questioned a 25-year old over the incident with charges surely pending. The incident, which was clearly caught on TV, was mentioned in the commentary and is a prime example of Celtic fans trying to influence matters on the pitch illegally. What kind of backlash would U.E.F.A. feel if the player's eyesight is damaged? What kind of message does this ignorance send to the players?
What should also be called into question is the judgement of a player being allowed to lead a child onto the pitch only hours after being released from custody having been charged with indecent exposure and sexual assault. Given Celtic fans' disgusting history of celebrating terrorism and the murder of innocent people including many children, along with the club itself covering up sexual abuse and indecency towards children, one cannot be accused of misinterpretting the club officials' judgement in this area - quite clearly the revenue that can be generated by remaining in European competition has been preferred over any basic human principles or morality.
Celtic F.C. have quite simply been getting away with too much for too long and shamefully they have been aided and abetted by a compliant governing body and a bigoted and biased media here in Scotland.
The silence from the newsrooms in relation to last night's events was almost as shameful as their apologetic reporting on the recent riots in Amsterdam. Despite endless video footage showing Celtic fans instigating attacks and assaulting police officers, Scotland's media lead with stories of police brutality, and quotes from manager Neil Lennon, himself no stranger to controversy, on how the supporters "have been, and will be a credit to the club with a fantastic reputation in Europe".
These same fans have been subject to half a dozen fines from U.E.F.A. in recent years, costing their club well over £100,000.
Only now that the case has been opened by U.E.F.A., references to these events, along with another IRA banner display from last weekend's Aberdeen vs. Celtic match are emerging, but don’t hold your breath for any hard hitting condemnation by the columnists. As has been shown time and time again, the Scottish media reserve the right to exercise this level if reporting only when it involves Scotland's most successful club, Rangers.
Another question arises, why did the newly-restructured yet still shambolic S.P.F.L. only recognise these incidents after U.E.F.A. announced an investigation would take place? Is it any wonder this poor quality league doesn't have a sponsor? Some have argued that this is due to the lack of Rangers vs. Celtic derby matches, but perhaps businesses don't want to align their brand with an organisation that is shown irrefutably that it is corrupt to the core.
It would appear that Celtic's Chief Executive Peter Lawwell has no control over the large terrorist-supporting, hooligan element of the club's support, nor has he the stomach to take them on. Remember when he decided to relocate the trouble-making Green Brigade? Upon realising the need to keep attendance figures up, and requiring a boost to get a result at home in a Champions League qualifier, he had a crisis of conscience and backed down. We find this very disturbing.
Perhaps Lawwell will publically welcome the S.P.F.L. investigation, but more than likely he will just threaten the fans with action until things die down again. Therefore “clarification” is needed on the S.P.F.L.’s decision-making process in this instance? Or, could the case be that Lawwell actually gave his approval for the S.P.F.L. to take this course of action, giving him the excuse to bin, ban or disband the group? We wait with bated breath.
Recently Vanguard Bears demanded that Peter Liewell should be removed from his position on the Scottish Football Association's Professional Board, after his unnaceptable conduct at the recent Celtic A.G.M. It now appears that the Celtic supporters take their lead from their master and have no idea what is appropriate behaviour. So, should the question be that Peter Liewell is better off standing down from the S.F.A. as well as his Chief Executive position at the club as he is quite clearly a man out of control, running a club that is out control, harbouring a support that is out of control.
So the question we are asking is: "Is Peter Lawwell a fit and proper person for Scottish Football?"