Martin O’Neill was entirely right to describe Police Scotland’s visit to Celtic as a “timely reminder”. Of course players should behave responsibly. Of course nobody wants punch-ups, intimidation or celebrations that deliberately inflame an already poisonous atmosphere.
But the episode still leaves an unpleasant taste.
Why did Celtic receive a visit? Why was the emphasis placed on what their players might do after a victory, rather than on the supporters whose actions created the crisis in the first place?
Police Scotland apparently spent 15 minutes reminding Celtic’s players and management about their “general behaviour” before Sunday’s Premier Sports Cup quarter-final at Ibrox. O’Neill said officers referred to conduct on the field, possible “punch-ups” and “excessive celebrations”. The Celtic manager accepted the intervention with characteristic good humour, even joking that he would be delighted to have something to celebrate.
Yet the subtext was unmistakable - win, but do not celebrate too loudly; succeed, but do not goad the crowd; be responsible for how others might react.
That is an extraordinary burden to place on a football team, pinning the blame of others on players.
The last Scottish Cup meeting at Ibrox ended with Celtic winning on penalties. It was followed by a mass pitch invasion, as Rangers fans invaded the pitch to attack Celtic fans who had jumped the hoardings to celebrate, injuries to police and stewards, missiles being thrown and assaults involving players and members of coaching staff. Police Scotland described the scenes as “despicable” and “shameful”.
There is no defence for Celtic supporters who entered the pitch illegally. Their behaviour was wrong. The same standard must apply to everyone though.
But the public conversation has too often blurred the distinction between an unlawful celebration and the violence that followed. Hundreds of Celtic supporters entered the pitch after the final whistle, an action rightly condemned by the independent review. But Rangers supporters also invaded the playing surface, and many then raced towards Celtic supporters, players and officials. The review warned that the disorder came within a “very small margin” of becoming a violent mass confrontation.
This was not simply a story about Celtic fans celebrating. It was a failure of stadium planning, stewarding, policing and crowd control. It was a failure that occurred at Ibrox, in a match for which the risks were obvious to everyone involved.
The independent review reportedly made more than 30 recommendations, including tougher sanctions, greater accountability for clubs and action against ultra groups. It described the behaviour associated with the Union Bears as “reactionary, confrontational, and overtly threatening”.
That should have been the starting point for the conversation with Celtic. Instead, the club’s players are warned not to celebrate excessively in case the Ibrox crowd reacts badly.
The issue is not whether Celtic players should show restraint. It’s a derby why should they? The issue is whether restraint is being demanded disproportionately from one side while the other side’s most intimidating elements are treated as an unavoidable part of the occasion.
Rangers supporters have repeatedly been involved in disorder directed at Celtic officials and players over the years. The incidents are not isolated, and they are not confined to one notorious afternoon. Yet where is the same relentless public pressure on Rangers to identify, ban and hold accountable the individuals responsible?
Where is the equivalent focus on supporters who conceal their identities, wear face coverings, equip themselves with knuckleduster gloves or other items intended to cause harm, and bring weapons or missiles into football grounds?
These are not allegations that should be made casually. Every individual case must be established through evidence, due process and the courts where appropriate. But that principle cannot be used selectively. If Police Scotland can organise highly publicised arrest operations targeting people allegedly involved in disorder after Celtic’s title celebrations, it should be equally determined to identify those involved in the violence at Ibrox.
Police Scotland has said that 43 arrests have now been made in connection with the March disorder, including three further arrests in August. That is welcome, but it does not settle the question. The public deserves to know whether those responsible for attacking officers, stewards, Celtic personnel and other supporters are being pursued with the same urgency and visibility as those arrested after the title celebrations in Glasgow.
After the May disorder in the Trongate, Police Scotland provided regular updates as the investigation expanded. The number of arrests eventually reached 47, with two officers seriously injured and members of the public requiring hospital treatment.
Again, anyone responsible should face justice. But the contrast in presentation is striking. Arrests connected with Celtic celebrations have been framed as a major organised crackdown, complete with coordinated raids and tv crews in attendance. The Ibrox violence, meanwhile, risks becoming another unpleasant football story that the authorities hope will gradually disappear.
Rangers must also answer difficult questions. A club cannot condemn disorder in general terms while refusing to confront the specific groups and individuals repeatedly associated with it. It cannot claim that the problem is a handful of nameless troublemakers if it is unwilling to use its own powers to identify them, ban them and restrict the platforms through which they operate.
The Union Bears are not an invisible force of nature. They are a known group within the Rangers support. Their displays, location, organisation and presence are familiar to the club and the authorities. If the recommendations of a Safety Advisory Board have been rejected or diluted by the club and Police Scotland alike, the reasons should be explained publicly.
The independent review’s wider conclusion was that football authorities have been too slow, too inconsistent and too modest in their sanctions. It called for immediate restrictions such as section closures to become a standard response to unacceptable conduct.
That is not an attack on ordinary Rangers supporters. It is a demand for accountability from a club and a governing structure that have tolerated too much for too long.
The most damaging aspect of this week’s warning is not the words themselves. It is what those words symbolise.
Police Scotland should be preventing violence, not merely managing the reactions of those most likely to be targeted by it. Celtic’s players should not have to calculate whether a goal celebration might trigger a pitch invasion by supporters in the opposing stadium resulting in them being attacked. The responsibility for disorder belongs to those who commit it, not to the players who happen to win.
Nor should anyone entertain conspiracy theories without evidence. Questions about alleged institutional loyalties, former affiliations or internal directives require proof, not insinuation. But Police Scotland’s conduct must be transparent enough that such suspicions do not flourish.
The force should publish a clear account of its March investigation, how many suspects have been identified, what offences are being pursued, whether stadium footage has been fully examined and what action has been taken against those who attacked police, stewards and football personnel.
Until then, the sight of officers visiting Celtic’s training ground to discuss “general behaviour” looks less like balanced policing and more like misplaced responsibility.
If Celtic win on Sunday, the players have every right to celebrate. If Rangers supporters respond with violence, that is not a failure of Celtic’s conduct. It is a failure by the individuals who choose violence and by Rangers, authorities and police who have failed to stop them.
Police Scotland should be looking in the mirror over what happened in March, rather than turning up at Celtic’s door to warn players not to upset the rabid horde once again.
Only one club has supporters who consistently invade the field to violently attack another teams supporters for going on to the field to celebrate.
It seems bit rum for Police Scotland to lecture Celtic FC and turn a blind eye to the shenanigans of the Union Bears of Ibrox.
Is this what we could call heavy handed policing of the one side of the equation ?.