STEVE CLARKE and Kilmarnock have been charged after criticising the Scottish Football Association's handling of their appeal against Gary Dicker's controversial red card.
Hampden disciplinary chiefs rejected the Rugby Park outfit's challenge after Irishman Dicker was dismissed against Hearts last month.
That promoted a furious response from Clarke, with the former West Brom boss even reading out a prepared statement as he criticised both referee Willie Collum for his initial call to send-off his player and the appeals process which failed to clear him.
Now that angry outburst has landed both Clarke and Killie in fresh bother.
Clarke has been issued with two charges, the first for criticising a match official and the second for "bringing the game into disrepute".
Kilmarnock have been accused of breaching a rule which includes a line stipulating all member clubs must "behave towards the Scottish FA ... with the utmost good faith" and also face a charge of bringing the game into disrepute.
Both parties now have until next Tuesday to respond to the SFA's notice of complaint - which has been raised by new compliance officer Clare Whyte - with a principal hearing set for Thursday, October 25.
Clarke was left incensed when Collum chose to flash red at Dicker after he slid in on Jambos forward Callumn Morrison, insisting after the match that it was the referee's decision which handed Hearts' the 1-0 win.
When Killie's appeal against the two-game ban handed to Dicker was rejected, he went further by issuing his statement which suggested Collum's appointment as the referee for this month's Old Firm showdown ruled out any chance of the sending-off being wiped.
He said: "I have to say that I'm disappointed but not surprised by the decision of the confidential panel, who chose to ignore our appeal and back the referee's original decision.
"An appeal process that excludes the people involved, namely the player, the referee and officials of the appealing club from putting forward their case face to face with the adjudicating panel will sometimes be open to strange and inconsistent outcomes.
"My belief [was] that Gary Dicker's tackle was a genuine effort to win the ball without malice or recklessness and with minimal contact on an opponent who proceeded to roll around as if seriously hurt only to get straight back to his feet on the issue of the red card.
"The period of time between the tackle and red-card decision was ridiculously short and lacked a calm and rational approach from such an experienced official.
"I don't want, or need to, go through recent instances where red cards have been rescinded or downgraded on appeal or where violent conduct on the field of play has been overlooked by officials because they are there for everyone to see.
"Maybe smaller clubs like ourselves are fair game.
"However, I'm in no way surprised at the outcome of our appeal. As soon as I heard the news that the referee in question had been appointed to take charge of the first Old Firm match of the season before our hearing had taken place I knew that the decision would go against Kilmarnock. There's no doubt that the perception of most and certainly of our club is that the hearing was pre-judged by this early appointment."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel