Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Neil Lennon’s citation doesn’t add up

Post Thumbnail

WE all know Neil Lennon is no angel, but for me, the Celtic manager’s latest SFA citation is a bit of a joke.

Admittedly, the language he used against Jim Goodwin at St Mirren Park last Sunday was sturdy, even industrial.

But that’s fairly standard on football pitches. In fact, I’ve heard much worse.

For him to be pulled up on those grounds, in my opinion, isn’t as simple as it seems.

Think about it. It was a game in which referee Bobby Madden made numerous shocking decisions.

Lenny, being the guy that he is, pointed those errors out to the media after the game.

Ordinarily, the SFA wouldn’t stand for that. But in this case, the referee’s performance was so bad, they had little choice.

By citing St Mirren striker Esmael Goncalves for diving to win the penalty that levelled the scores, the SFA effectively admitted the referee got key decisions wrong.

Having done so, it would have been completely hypocritical of them to haul Neil Lennon before their Disciplinary Committee for saying so.

But I think they felt he couldn’t go unpunished. They just needed a reason.

Conveniently, the TV microphones picked up Neil’s outburst at Goodwin, and that was that.

The actual rule the SFA say was breached is number 203, which penalises for, “Failing to behave in a responsible manner as an occupant of the technical area by repeated use of offensive, insulting and abusive language.”

But given that the extent of the evidence against Lenny is a single sentence picked up by a TV microphone I’d say he’s got a decent chance of defending himself.

Repeated use? That’s easily arguable. Insulting? Perhaps not so much.

Abusive? Under the circumstances, that’s contestable. Why? Because football has a unique code of honour.

If you stopped someone in the street and called them what Neil Lennon called Jim Goodwin, it would be abusive.

If it happens on a football pitch, it’s easily construed as banter and the fact that Goodwin took it in good spirits shows that to be true.

To the St Mirren man’s credit, he was even honest enough to respond by admitting he was glad the TV microphones didn’t pick up his reply for fear that he too would fall foul of the SFA!

For me, if the man on the receiving end was able to respond in good humour, I don’t see why the SFA couldn’t have done the same.