Rangers deny rule breach over Brown's 'corrupt' comment
Rangers say they "firmly deny any breach of Scottish FA rules" after the club's former defender, John Brown, called a refereeing decision "corrupt" on Rangers TV.The SFA has confirmed to BBC Scotland that a notice of complaint has been issued to the Scottish Premiership runners-up regarding the incident on 17 May.In the final match of Rangers' league season, they felt they should have been awarded a goal when Nicolas Raskin appeared to bundle the ball over the line.Referee Nick Walsh and his on-field officials thought the ball had been kept out by Hibernian defender Rocky Bushiri and VAR Andrew Dallas ruled that there was no camera angle that proved Raskin's effort had gone in.Hibs equalised through Kieron Bowie moments later, with the match finishing 2-2.Brown said on the club's in-house TV channel: "I would say it is corrupt."Commentator Tom Miller replied: "Well, I'm not sure we can actually say that." However, Brown added: "Well, I am saying it."Rangers subsequently demanded the introduction of goal-line technology.
The Glasgow club say they are "surprised" by the charge over Brown's comments and they will "continue to challenge any action we consider to be unfair or disproportionate".The SFA rule states: "A club or recognised football body which publishes, distributes, issues, sells or authorises a third party to publish, distribute, issue or sell a match programme or any other publication or audio/visual material of any description in any media now existing or hereinafter invented, including but not limited to the Internet, social networking or micro-blogging sites, shall ensure that any such publications or audio/visual material does not contain any criticism of any match official calculated to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official or to impinge upon his character."Rangers note that four out of five members of the SFA's Key Match Incident Panel deemed the decision to be incorrect, adding that they have "serious concerns about the Scottish FA's selective enforcement and inconsistency"."That finding helps explain the nature of a spontaneous emotional comment, delivered during a highly charged moment and immediately challenged live on air," Rangers add."We have highlighted multiple examples of similar or stronger remarks made elsewhere in Scottish football that have led to no charges or sanctions."While we remain committed to maintaining high standards, we will continue to challenge any action we consider to be unfair or disproportionate."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
31 minutes ago
- The National
Maxwell details Scottish FA decision over Rangers takeover
The Ibrox club had to submit paperwork to Hampden bosses before the takeover could be given the green light due to dual interest legislation. Andrew Cavenagh and 49ers Enterprises had to go through the legal process due to the investment wing holding shares in English Premier League club Leeds. The Scottish FA has granted permission for the takeover deal to go ahead without any issue, subject to written undertakings signed by club officials and the investing party. The agreement means the investing party's interest in any other club does not preclude Rangers from participating in any UEFA competition they qualify for, among other commitments. Chief executive Maxwell said: 'No, they've not been particularly complicated. To be honest, we've definitely been more open. Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football. 'When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that, why would you limit that investment? 'When you think about it was actually interesting when you start to think through the process and we had dual interest regulations, which meant that, when you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. 'But someone like Tony Bloom, for example, is getting involved in Hearts and he has a track record at Brighton, understands football and already has Union SG and those other clubs. 'We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. So when you actually get into it, you go that probably doesn't make a lot of sense. 'So our board are looking at it from two perspectives. Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? Does it give us an integrity issue? 'The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not. 'The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests. 'All the multi-club investment models that we've done, we've been very clear that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can't be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. Read more: Rangers follow Hibernian, with Black Knights investment, and Hearts, with Tony Bloom's prospective backing, as the latest club featuring in a multi-club ownership model. For Maxwell, it's an overwhelming positive that new investors have experience across a number of clubs. He added: 'The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that and when you speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems. 'So I think it's here, we can't ignore it and why would you want to step away from it? Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? 'The trick is that the club need to then go and spend that money as wisely as possible. 'We don't get involved in that bit, but from a board perspective there's definitely a willingness to look at anything that generates more investment into Scotland.'
Scotsman
31 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Rangers, Hearts and Hibs watch Crystal Palace situation with interest as SFA has say on Euro exclusion
Uefa set to rule on multi-club ownership Sign up to our Football newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The situation with Crystal Palace potentially being denied from competing in Europe next season will not have gone unnoticed by supporters of Rangers, Hearts and Hibs. Oliver Glasner's team clinched a Europa League spot after they stunned Manchester City to win the FA Cup at Wembley last month – the first major trophy in the club's history. However, there is a complication. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Crystal Palace's Marc Guehi (centre left) and Joel Ward (centre right) lift the FA Cup after the Emirates FA Cup final at Wembley Stadium, London. Picture date: Saturday May 17, 2025. | PA Palace are facing an anxious wait to discover their fate after being required to meet with Uefa's club financial control body (CFCB) to show they do not fall foul of its multi-club ownership rules. John Textor holds a 43 per cent stake in Palace through his company Eagle Football, while he is also the owner of French club Lyon, who qualified for the Europa League with a sixth-placed Ligue 1 finish. No individual is allowed to have a significant say in the running of two clubs competing in the same Uefa competition and the CFCB will make a ruling on the case this month. Irish club Drogheda United have already been expelled from the Conference League due to multi-club ownership rules. They are currently owned by the Trivela Group - an organisation which also has a majority share in Danish side Silkeborg IF, who have also qualified for the Conference League, meaning Drogheda are unable to compete due to Uefa regulations, although club officials plan to appeal the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad While Palace are confident they can settle their case - either by proving that Textor's influence at Selhurst Park is limited or by the American agreeing to sell his stake - the outcome could have implications for the Scottish clubs who have opened their doors to investors from other clubs. Rangers were recently taken over by an American consortium involving 49ers Enterprises - who own Leeds United - while Brighton owner Tony Bloom, who is also a minority shareholder in Union Saint-Gilloise, is set to acquire a 29 per cent stake in Hearts, with non-voting rights, in return for a near £10million investment. Hibs have also linked up with Bill Foley's Black Knights Group - who run Bournemouth and have involvement with French club Lorient and Auckland FC in New Zealand. All three deals required SFA approval and the chief executive of the governing body, Ian Maxwell, has welcomed the influx of multi-club investors into the Scottish game. Brighton owner Tony Bloom is set to purchase a 29 per cent stake in Hearts. (Photo by) | Getty Images "Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football," he stated. "When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that or why would you limit that investment? It was actually interesting when you start to think through the process. We had dual interest regulations which meant that if you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad "But someone like a Tony Bloom, for example, that's getting involved in Hearts, has a track record at Brighton, understands football, has Union Saint-Gilloise, knows other clubs. We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. When you actually get into it, that probably doesn't make a lot of sense." Maxwell also attempted to allay fears that Scottish clubs could find themselves in the same boat as Palace if say, for example, both Rangers and Leeds qualified to compete in the same European competition with the chairman of the newly-promoted English Premier League side, Paraag Marathe, also now the vice-chairman at Ibrox. "Our board, we're looking at it from two perspectives," Maxwell added. "Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? Does it give us an integrity issue? "The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not. The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests, all the multi-club investment models that we've done, that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment, where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can't be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Leeds United chairman Paraag Marathe is also the vice-chairman of Rangers following the recent takeover by 49ers Enterprises. | PA "Now, I don't really understand why Crystal Palace and [Lyon], but they've not been able to sort that out because UEFA have shown in the past that they can find a way. "There's both of the Red Bull teams so they've found a way to make it work, whether it's just a timing issue or whether it's not. The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that. "You speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal and they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems. "So I think it's here, we can't ignore it. Why would you want to step away from it? Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad
Daily Mail
32 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Dual-ownership model is here to stay in Scotland, admits SFA chief executive Ian Maxwell
SFA chief executive Ian Maxwell has claimed it would make no sense for Scottish football to now discourage dual-ownership models. Previously reluctant to allow parties with stakes in teams playing in other countries to buy into clubs here, the governing body have recently approved a number of such deals. Last year, Bournemouth owner Bill Foley bought up 25 per cent of Hibs for £6million. In May, Hearts shareholders agreed for Brighton owner Tony Bloom to take 29 per cent of their club in return for £10m. Earlier this month, 49ers Enterprises, who own Leeds United, formed part of an American consortium which took control of Rangers. The deals were only able to happen after the SFA gave them a seal of approval, with the trend set to continue. While Maxwell says the SFA will reserve the right to judge each case on its merits in future, he believes the right owners in the right circumstances should now be welcomed with open arms. 'They've not been particularly complicated,' he said of the deals. 'To be honest, we've definitely been more open. Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football. 'When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that. Why would you limit that investment? 'It was actually interesting when you start to think through the process. We had dual-interest regulations which meant that, if you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. 'But someone like a Tony Bloom, for example, that's getting involved in Hearts, he has a track record at Brighton, understands football, has Union Saint-Gilloise, knows other clubs. 'We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10m that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. 'When you actually get into it, you go: 'That probably doesn't make a lot of sense'.' While no Scottish club yet falls into the multi-club model seen at the likes of the City Group, allowing individuals with stakes in other sides to own percentages of clubs here does raise questions over dual ownership. However, with wealthy individuals now buying up shares in teams in different leagues throughout the world, Maxwell believes it's something that must be embraced. 'The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs (and their shareholders) that have come into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to it,' he said. 'You speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal and they're very aware of what UEFA need, what they want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems. 'So, I think it's here. We can't ignore it. Why would you want to step away from it? 'Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? 'The trick is the club need to then go and spend that money as wisely as possible. 'We don't get involved in that bit. But, from a broad perspective, there's definitely a willingness to look at anything that generates more investment into Scotland.' The issue of dual and multi-club ownership has been given greater prominence in the past week due to Crystal Palace's situation. The FA Cup winners are battling to satisfy UEFA that there's no impediment to them playing in the Europa League. The club are owner by businessman John Textor - who also has a stake in French side Lyon - and apparently didn't clear any potential European involvement before the March deadline. But Maxwell is adamant that any Scottish side's participation in European competition would have to be set in stone before a change of ownership is waved through. 'Our board, we're looking at it from two perspectives,' he said. 'Does it grow and develop the game? 'Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? Does it give us an integrity issue? 'The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not. 'The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests, all the multi-club investment models that we've done. 'If, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment, there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can't be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition.'
