Hearts vow to stand up to Old Firm 'bullies'

STUART BATHGATE AND GLENN GIBBONS

HEARTS are ready to wage a sustained campaign against the Old Firm’s domination of Scottish football, despite it emerging yesterday that the last-minute penalty awarded to Rangers in last week’s SPL match is not even mentioned in the referee’s report.

Far from being cowed by hostile reaction to Hearts’ request for an inquiry into the controversial penalty, club chairman George Foulkes described as "laughable" suggestions that his fellow-directors might be charged with bringing the game into disrepute. He also invited other clubs to join him in attempting to break Rangers and Celtic’s stranglehold on the game, but made it clear that Hearts would go it alone if necessary.

"We are prepared to stand up to the Old Firm," Foulkes said last night. "I would hope other clubs would join us. It is not to the benefit of Scottish football to have a duopoly supported by the Glasgow-based football establishment.

"Basically, we will not be pushed around any more. We also showed that when we refused to accept £200,000 from Celtic for Paul Hartley. It’s like someone being bullied in the playground standing up against the bullies."

Foulkes’ bold approach was slightly undermined last night when it became clear that the issue of the penalty award has not registered on the report of match official Hugh Dallas.

Foulkes admitted he had expected a backlash to Hearts’ demands for an SFA inquiry, which were made public last Friday by the interim chief executive, Sergejus Fedotovas, and his predecessor, Chris Robinson. The MP admitted, however, that he had been unprepared for one suggestion mooted in the media.

"We were ready for the reaction, although maybe I’m not used to the vehemence of it," he said. "The thing I found astonishing, though, was the suggestion that the SFA might charge Sergejus and Chris with bringing the game into disrepute. The SFA would be the laughing stock of the country if they decided to throw the book at us.

"People talk about the SFA as not being open and sensible, and all we’ve done is go to them with a request for an inquiry. To even suggest they would come back with a charge of bringing the game into disrepute is laughable.

"We should be unafraid to say that principles which apply in other walks of life should be applied to football as well. We all hold doctors in great esteem, for example, but they still come under the scrutiny of the General Medical Council.

about an MP you can go to the Parliamentary Ombudsman. If you want to inquire about the conduct of a lawyer you can go to the Law Society. So why can’t questions be asked of the decisions made by referees and their officials, and the individuals be allowed to respond?

"Football should be as transparent as those other walks of life. Football has changed over the years and it can change in the future."

Hearts’ request for an inquiry is certain to be turned down by the SFA, but Foulkes’ remarks make it plain their attack on the hegemony of the Glasgow giants will not end there. Just as, when at Aberdeen, Alex Ferguson did not restrict his challenge on the Old Firm to on-field tactics, so Hearts are willing to fight the big two on a number of fronts.

The appointment as chief executive of Phil Anderton, for example, was hailed by Foulkes as "showing we are serious about becoming a big player." That appointment was made last Thursday, but Anderton does not take office until 21 March, by which time the furore over the inquiry request may well have died.



Taken from the Scotsman