We shouldn’t point fingers, says Hartley

ROB ROBERTSON and MARK WILSON March 07 2005

PAUL HARTLEY, the Hearts midfielder, last night indicated that the first-team squad had not been consulted and did not back their board's decision to call for an SFA inquiry after the Rangers game at Tynecastle last week.

His comments on the controversy are the first to come out of the Hearts dressing room and indicate a degree of embarrassment that the matter continues to drag on.

Hearts called on Friday for an inquiry into the "integrity of the decision" to award Rangers a penalty in the last minute of the match. Fernando Ricksen scored from the spot to give Rangers a 2-1 victory.

Hartley, one of the senior players in the squad, said the players just wanted to forget about the defeat and concentrate on the rest of their season.

Hartley, when asked directly if the players had been consulted, said: "I don't think the players are really interested. It is over now and there is not much we can do about it. They got a penalty and won the game and that's just the way it goes. They might have not got the penalty on the night but they did.

"I'm not quite sure about the whole inquiry idea. I have never seen that happen before in football, replaying a game over a penalty. I know it was controversial but can't see it [a replay] happening."

Hartley, a signing target for Celtic in the January transfer window, added: "I think the players have accepted the decision. We were disappointed after the game but we have more important games coming up. We forgot about it after the game on Wednesday night and concentrated on the Dunfermline match straight away. We have to behave like that until the end of the season.

"There is no point in keeping bringing it up. We want to get on with playing football and trying to win games."

John Robertson, the Hearts head coach, refused to comment on the club's stance over the inquiry. That seemed out of character for a man who has always worn his heart on his sleeve and has criticised referees when he felt it was due. However, his silence plus the comments of Hartley indicate that there may be a schism between the dressing room and the club board.

Many Hearts supporters seemed bemused at the club's stance as they left East End park after Saturday's game against Dunfermline.

The fans were unanimous in their view that the award of the penalty by Hugh Dallas, on the advice of assistant Andy Davis, was incorrect.

But many questioned the board's timing of their side's fight with the SFA. Early in the season Robertson called into question the performances of official John Rowbotham. There was no official support from the board then of his stance. Robertson paid an SFA fine for his outbursts.

This time, the board have centred on one match and many supporters feel it has been a misguided move.

They were also bemused at the appearance of Chris Robinson, the former chief executive, at the news conference to call for the inquiry. Robinson will remain a Hearts director until the end of the season when he will sever ties with the club.

However, he has had more than a decade within the corridors of power at the SFA and clearly Vladimir Romanov would have turned to him for advice on whether to take on the governing body.

As one fan leaving East End park on Saturday said: "Many of us feel it certainly wasn't a penalty but may have been just an honest mistake by the linesman. Chris Robinson made many mistakes with our club and took it to the brink of administration to the extent we nearly had to sell Tynecastle. So who's to say he's in a position to give good advice to our club and criticise the performance of others?"

At such a turbulent period for Hearts, taking on the SFA does not look like a wise move. There is still slight uncertainty over the fact the club is now in Lithuanian hands with many supporters believing there are bigger issues to deal with.

These include securing club captain Steven Pressley on a long-term contract. They also hope that Romanov's big plans, which include bringing in new players and staying at Tynecastle, come to fruition.

Many cannot understand how Robinson, a man on the way out at Tynecastle, could still be allowed to be a major player in such important decisions.

George Foulkes, the club chairman, was at the Labour party conference when the news conference was held. He supported the club's stance but many Hearts supporters would have been happier if he, rather than Robinson, had been at the news conference.

More predictable criticism of the move by the Hearts board came from Marvin Andrews, the Rangers defender. Speaking after Saturday's draw with Inverness Caledonian Thistle, the defender said he believed the demand for an inquiry into last week's controversy would increase pressure on referees throughout the country.

Andrews confessed he would never wish to fill the role of match official and believes their situation is become ever more intolerable.

"Yeah, [what Hearts are doing] probably puts referees under more pressure," said Andrews. "It's not an easy job at all because everything you do is done in a split second. It's very hard to change those decisions. That's the pressure they have to deal with."

Andrews also feels the latest developments are perhaps symptomatic of a wider problem. "Referees are under pressure worldwide from the way football has changed from a sport into a business," Andrews added.

"Any referee taking charge of any match between now and the end of the season will be under big pressure because it's either to win a championship or to save a team from relegation."

Andrews refused to be drawn into what response the SFA should make to Hearts' request. "The SFA are the people who have to deal with it," he said. "If the SFA make a decision then we have to go with it because they are the controllers of the game."

The matter will be discussed by the SFA's disciplinary committee on March 15. However, there was a hint of a warning for Hearts in the words of Andy Mitchell, spokesman for the SFA, at the weekend.

He said: "There is obvious concern within the SFA that match officials are being criticised.

"If this is being done in a way that indicates incompetence or bias, we have very clear regulations to cover that.

"Those articles are within the remit of the general purposes committee and the kind of thing they would follow up."

Taken from the Herald