Forum List | Football Forum
| Topic: Falkirk punished for pyro at Stenhousemuir |
|---|
| 1. Author: veteraneastender Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 10:15 https://falkirkfc.co.uk/sfa-disciplinary-sanction-imposed-on-the-club-following-rejection-of-appeal Reply |
| 2. Author: twin par Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 10:38 To be fair,seems a bit harsh,considering what happens at old firm games. Reply |
| 3. Author: veteraneastender Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 10:57 Indeed - also, how does visiting club control this ? Reply |
| 4. Author: AdamAntsParsStripe Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 12:35 It’s just a potential ban at the moment. Slap on the wrist basically but I agree. How the old firm get away with worse things is not surprising however Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte  Reply |
| 5. Author: GG Riva Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 12:47 veteraneastender, Sat 30 May 10:15 I can`t see the logic in a partial closure of a stadium. Using EEP as an example, if we were hit with a 25% closure, the club could opt to close either the North or East Stand. The numpties that let off the pyros could simply move to another stand for the former, or visiting fans could be housed in the NE for the latter, depending on the size of the away support. A one match stadium closure is very harsh but it would ensure there was no repeat.  Not your average Sunday League player. Reply |
| 6. Author: BouncyPar Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 13:25 How many times have the OF been hit with a 25% stadium closure as a result of fan disorder, home or away? Post Edited (Sat 30 May 13:41) Reply |
| 7. Author: Dave_1885 Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 13:34 BouncyPar, Sat 30 May 13:25 Celtuc will have to hold flag day behind closed doors surely? Given thats 3 pitch invasions in a row? wont hold my breath mind you 🙄 Reply |
| 8. Author: NMCmassive Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 14:09 C’mon Dave… you don’t expect the SFA to apply rules and standard equally now do you? Maybe the little bit of spot light we got on our league last season only highlighted how lop sided the set up is. They 2 get all the decisions, their fans are the worst behaved and they demand everything goes their way or it’s a conspiracy… COYP Reply |
| 9. Author: saltonsgonagetu Date: Sat 30th May 2026. 23:30 Its not what Scottish football didnt expect Rangers and Celtic should have been relegated to the Championship, after the Ibrox mess, Celtic should be relegated to the 2nd division after the incursion at Motherwell, and Celtic relegated to the 3rd division after the Hearts mess .  Reply |
| 10. Author: veteraneastender Date: Sun 31st May 2026. 12:00 saltonsgonagetu, Sat 30 May 23:30 Just daft. For a start the nonsense at Ibrox was a Scottish Cup fixture, the SPFL have no jurisdiction. Crowd trouble can be punished by ground closures if required. Reply |
| 11. Author: Playup_Pompey Date: Tue 21st Jul 2026. 15:08 for those that were getting worked up about "what about the old firm" the independent review completed an notice of complaint issued as per below. Alleged Party in Breach: Rangers FC Match: Rangers FC v Celtic FC on Sunday, 8 March 2026 Competition: The Scottish Cup Offence: Disciplinary Rule 37 - A club playing a match at its own ground, or allowing its ground to be used for a match in which it is not participating, or a club using a third party’s ground for the playing of a match in which it is participating must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, (i) good order and security. (ii) that policies and procedures have been adopted and are implemented to prevent instances of Unacceptable Conduct. and (iii) that any instance of Unacceptable Conduct is effectively dealt with on the occasion of a match. Each club participating in a match must also ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that its players, officials, supporters and any person exercising a function for or in connection with the club do not engage in Unacceptable Conduct at any ground on the occasion of a match. Each club must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that it identifies any of its supporters who engage in Unacceptable Conduct at a match take proportionate disciplinary measures in respect of such supporters. Hearing Date: Thursday, 13 August 2026 4.1.2 Failure Summary • Lack of multi-agency meetings. first multi-agency meeting - consider the significant operational changes (1) ingress for 8,000 (2) largest away fan allocation since 2017 - 5 March, three days before the match. No tabletop exercise was ever conducted. • Risk Assessment near-identical to the 1 March league fixture despite 5,600 additional away supporters and penalty jeopardy. Pitch incursion rated ‘Unlikely’. A number of interviewees independently used the word: complacency. • Five search lanes deployed for 8,042 supporters. seven were used for 5,600 fewer supporters at the 10 May league fixture at Celtic Park between both clubs. No fan-flow calculations carried out by Rangers FC or Police Scotland. • From Police Scotland interview no plan for ticketless fans left on the stadium footprint allowing for repeated attempts to enter by doubling-up, forgery or forcing gates. • Celtic FC Safety Officer was not consulted on planning the away ingress plan, but raised concerns to the Rangers FC Safety Officer, prior to and at the pre match Ops meeting 3 days before the fixture. • Neither the Rangers FC Safety Officer nor the Police Scotland EPL had conversation in regard to which end to use for penalties, a safety issue, not a football preference – allowed under IFAB Laws of the Game Law 10.3 ‘Unless there are other considerations (e.g. ground conditions, safety etc.), the referee tosses a coin to decide the goal at which the kicks will be taken, which may only be changed for safety reasons or if the goal or playing surface becomes unusable† Reply |
Your Message:
By using your account you have implicitly accepted the DAFC.net Forum Rules and agree to be bound by them. You also agree that you will take sole responsibility for your post and indemnify dafc.net on all matters and costs. Refrain from making any potentially libelous comments about anyone
- - -