Smith’s lack of clarity has blurred the picture

That should have been that, except it wasn't. A sham of a mockery of an international farce went into extra time yesterday and may yet require to be settled by a shootout. It is the penalty nobody wants to take responsibility for.

Yesterday, Gordon Smith, the chief executive of the SFA, adopted football parlance to explain why the SFA arrived at the decision to suspend Barry Ferguson and Allan McGregor from all future Scotland matches. "What happened at Cameron House was a yellow card and what happened with the V-signs before the Iceland game was another yellow, which meant a red for the pair," said Smith. Simple, eh? What followed was, in football parlance, a media conference of two halves.

Smith was then asked to clarify, once and for all, that neither Ferguson nor McGregor would play for the country again, amid a growing suspicion that the Rangers manager, Walter Smith, has softened his stance over the pair who had been suspended, fined and effectively told they would never play for the club again. George Burley is adamant that neither player will ever be selected by him again, the SFA issued a statement to the same effect on Friday, hours after Rangers had imposed their own sanctions, while Smith and Campbell Ogilvie, the vice-president, had intended to complete the good housekeeping midway through yesterday's board meeting.
advertisement

Having accepted, for a second time, the manager's version of events at Cameron House Hotel, when Ferguson and McGregor were last men standing after an all-day drinking session, and endorsed Burley's decision to banish the pair for subsequent images of them flicking childish V-signs from the dugout before the Iceland game at Hampden Park, there was surely no way back for the pair?

"I can't answer that," said Smith, to the thud of jaws dropping to floors. "That's something that will have to be looked at in the future. The statement that came out on Friday is quite clear: at the moment they will not be chosen."

But what about in the future?

"I can't say they wouldn't," he added, as the head of communications, Rob Shorthouse, took a mental note to implement damage limitation." What, for example, if Burley did not take Scotland to the World Cup play-offs and a new manager was appointed? Would he have to abide by SFA orders or is it purely a decision for the duration of Burley's tenure?

"There are many circumstances that can arise," said Smith. "I can't say that. The situation is that, at the moment, the ban is in place and they will not be chosen for the international team. . ."

Now? In the future? Ever? It was the kind of wooly, unconvincing announcement that would have caused the president, George Peat, to have a funny turn. The president missed the meeting after undergoing an exploratory heart operation that may eventually require bypass surgery. Proof that life at the SFA is bad for your health. It is becoming bad for Smith's reputation.

He is a likeable and thoughtful character but, since inheriting the SFA blazer, has suffered for his lack of precision. This was the chance to declare emphatic support to Burley and reinforce the integrity of the SFA, who have been far from innocent in the melodrama. Instead, by offering a less than convincing statement on the findings of the board, he served only to fudge what seems a simple issue.

If he was attempting to safeguard the autonomy of any future manager, he should have said so, even if it would have undermined the position of the current incumbent. If there was a genuine chance of Burley relenting in the event of an unreserved public apology from the pair, he should have said so. Instead, the foggy use of language perpetuated what only moments earlier, in the SFA boardroom, was declared an open and shut case.

This is why there remains a general lack of confidence in the SFA, even after Smith's appointment threatened to blow the cobwebs of the staid old custodians of the game. Smith wanted to draw a line under matters a week ago, until Peat decided otherwise. Then came the images of the Rangers pair, like errant schoolchildren, throwing the manager's decision to put them on the bench in his face with their contemptible antics.Burley, rest assured, would not have taken action to ban the pair had Rangers not beaten the SFA to it. The manager was prepared to let the matter die down in the hope that Ferguson and McGregor would probably announce their retirements before the visit to Norway on World Cup qualification duty in August. Even if they didn't, Ferguson in particular would have been left out of the squad on football grounds.

Walter Smith's decision to suspend the pair, for a lack of respect towards him, more than the embarrassment caused, presented the SFA and Burley with an opportunity they dared not miss.

After yesterday's meeting, there was still no explanation as to why it was okay to stay up drinking until 8am, as was the case for some, but not til midday.

The only reason they were not sent home was because of the threat of mutiny, a case made forcefully to the manager by Stephen McManus and Darren Fletcher, who had not even been involved.

The board were satisfied by Burley's version of events but at no stage did the manager admit failings on his part, whether in deciding to fly back from Amsterdam immediately after the match or sanctioning the buffet/booze-fest in the first place.

Equally, there was no mention of the fact the SFA travel company saw fit to charter a budget airline that did not have sufficient space for ovens, meaning the players had to make do with a soggy salad between the end of the match and arriving at their hotel. Providing a proper aircraft with proper facilities would have pre-empted the need for a late-night feast and so, too, would staying overnight, flying back in the morning and training upon return.

According to Smith, the food was laid on at the advice of the sports scientist. Presumably the gallons of alcohol provided to wash it down was not on the advice of the same nutritional expert. "The board have backed the manager's judgment and his position in this regard," said Ogilvie. "It is not unusual for players to have something to eat after a game, the difference here was that they were back so late. The manager gave us a full report and we are satisfied with this."

Smith explored the human element of the consequences. "I think Barry Ferguson will be a loss for Scotland, no doubt about it," he said. "That's why we should be respected for the decision we have taken. We have not put a player out who is not of any value to the team."

Presumably, Burley would argue that anyone selected by their country has a value to his team. "We have done it because there are certain standards of behaviour when you are playing at the highest level, playing for your country, which have not been met. It is a harsh decision but one I feel is correct."

From now on, a code of conduct will be presented to players upon arrival for international duty. It smacks of the stable door being closed after the horses have bolted, unless, of course, there are still a core of players who cannot be trusted to behave after the negative publicity caused by the debauchery on the Bonnie Banks. If that is the case, we really are in trouble.

"It was embarrassing for the nation, unacceptable for the Scotland team players acting in such a way," said Smith. "If a player sneaks out his room after going to his bed, is that the manager's fault because he didn't have the window locked? Should players be under guard? We will put in a code of conduct to ensure the players act in a certain way rather than giving the players the responsibility to act in a responsible manner."

Rangers issues aside, the Double-Digit Duo might consider themselves the lucky ones.

Taken from the Herald