Rangers will seek talks with Scottish FA bosses after being hit with a fine for comments made by former player John Brown during a live club broadcast.
Brown branded a controversial refereeing decision “corrupt” while performing punditry duties for Rangers TV during the 2-2 draw against Hibs at Easter Road on May 17.
Rangers thought they had taken a two-goal lead in the match when Nicolas Raskin appeared to have bundled the ball over the goalline before Hibs defender Rocky Bushiri was able to complete his clearance.
Referee Nick Walsh allowed play to continue with Hibs going straight up the park to equalise through Kieron Bowie. VAR also failed to intervene despite video replays appearing to show the ball had crossed the line.
Rangers criticised the decision and called for the introduction of goal-line technology but it was the comments made by Brown which have led to the club receiving a £3,000 fine after being served with an SFA notice of complaint.
“I would say it is corrupt,” the former defender stated, before commentator Tom Miller interjected, “Well, I’m not sure we can actually say that.” Brown then doubled down, replying: “Well, I am saying it”.
The charge has angered the Ibrox hierarchy who feel that Brown has been victimised while similar comments on other club channels have gone unpunished. Rangers plan to air their concerns to SFA chief executive Ian Maxwell and president Mike Mulraney and have warned the governing body that they will be “watched closely” as to how future trangressions are handled.
A club statement read: “We feel it is necessary to highlight the broader concerns this outcome raises and the wider implications this has for clarity and confidence in their regulatory processes.
“John Brown spoke emotionally and spontaneously as someone who cares deeply about the club. His words were not scripted, and they were not an official club comment. The ruling however sets a precedent where even spontaneous, corrected remarks made during live coverage of a clear refereeing error are enough to trigger a formal sanction. That is neither proportionate nor consistent, especially when other clubs have made stronger comments on official platforms without consequence.
“As part of our defence today, we flagged numerous examples of similar incidents on club channels. These incidents raise legitimate questions about Scottish FA rules and how consistently they are enforced. To our knowledge, none of these cases appear to have resulted in charges against the respective clubs
“The lack of consistency with the Scottish FA’s policing of similar incidents leaves more questions than answers. That is why we will be contacting the Scottish FA Chief Executive and President to seek clarity on what policies and processes the Compliance Officer has in place, if any, to ensure a consistent and proportionate approach to enforcement and the equal treatment of member clubs. We shall also be asking the Scottish FA whether they accept that a rule that cannot be applied consistently across all clubs and all platforms risks losing credibility as a fair and enforceable regulation.
“Our aim here is to understand the rationale behind the differing outcomes. A lack of consistency, or the perception of it, undermines confidence in the disciplinary process and exposes all member clubs to uncertainty about what is and is not allowed.
“There remains no clear guidance on how clubs are expected to manage live broadcast content, though we note the panel acknowledged that the club’s internal editorial guidelines may serve as a constructive step for others going forward.
“To be clear, we referenced these other examples not to suggest they should have resulted in sanctions, but to highlight the clear inconsistency in how similar incidents have been handled. Club media channels are, by nature, passionate and partisan. Informal, tongue-in-cheek and emotional commentary comes with the territory, especially in live settings.
“But, in choosing to pursue this case, the Scottish FA has opened the door to closer scrutiny of how similar situations are handled going forward. If this is now the standard, they will be watched closely to ensure it is applied across the board, consistently, without exception and without favour.”
