the "H" word

the rise and fall of honesty

Dismayed at the banning of the H word from Celtic's official website, the E-Tims hit back.

A few years ago a small man in a bunnet decided that something should be done to bring the hidden shame of Scotland out into the open. It was there, festering away like an untreated wound, and while some occasionally remarked about the pungent whiff, no one thought it prudent to offer or demand treatment.

Fergus McCann did. When Celtic opened Pandora's Box with the launch of the Bhoys against Bigotry campaign the nation looked on in amazement. The cause of this amazement wasn't just the fact that a major institution, Celtic Football Club, was openly discussing the subject, but that the club had refused to take the easy route and instead declined to exclude itself from this very public scrutiny.

Of course it was no surprise that the offer to work jointly with Rangers was rejected, since what can really be expected from a club that was adamantly denying there was any real problem. They even reacted with outrage when a BBC sports magazine suggested that Catholics may feel rather intimidated if they entered the dank confines of Ibrox - can't imagine why.

The outrage and scepticism wasn't confined to the supporters and officials of Rangers; if anything this pales into insignificance when compared to that shown by a significant section of the Celtic support. If McCann had launched BAB with its sole focus on the sectarian bigotry inflicted upon Celtic Supporters, and Catholics in general, then he would have been lauded as a noble warrior, pure of heart and mighty in defiance of the sectarian beast. However he didn't and broke the great taboo when it was suggested that the bile and hatred wasn't the sole preserve of the other side.

This was tantamount to heresy in the eyes of some. In this climate there is going to be a lot of misunderstanding, some mistakes, confusion and elements sowing disinformation for their own ends: whatever your opinion of BAB however its aims were honest. Divisive certainly - it couldn't be anything other - but there was an honest desire to see the poison removed from the relationship between the Old Firm.

I firmly believe that McCann was genuinely disgusted by the incredible bitterness that existed and tarnished the reputations of both clubs. There were those who claimed this was nothing more than a ploy to sanitise the club for Big Business but this is hard to square with the facts. If it was, then you can be sure the present board would be pushing the agenda forward come hell or high water, but BAB has vanished without trace. David Murray knows, for example, that such a high profile campaign focusing on aspects of the club itself is hardly likely to appeal to the city investor. What will appeal, though, are the kind of actions instigated by Murray - meaningless gimmicks aimed at getting the subject on the agenda without doing anything about the underlying causes.

Celtic appears now to be embracing this concept wholeheartedly. At first it was just a simple silent pillow placed over the face of BAB during the MacDonald regime; one minute it was there, the next there was a fresh pile of soil at the bottom of the garden. MacDonald, the great populist, viewed anything likely to tarnish his Man of The People image as a particularly timid rabbit views an approaching psychopathic weasel. So BAB was no more and that was that.

For those who use the ability to sing whatever songs they wish as a measuring stick of their support for the club, the rejoicing was mighty to behold. Some couldn't care less, while others wondered just what direction the club was heading now. I don't think anyone could have predicted the answer, but then again few of us realised that the noises coming from the directors about moving to the English Premiership were anything more than the old codgers on the board mainlining the Ovaltine.

That perception appears to have been mistaken. Going by the evidence stacking up, assuming Quinn and Co. aren't having a huge laugh at everyone else's expense, there is something actually in progress with this EPL move. In fact, it looks as if this is the overriding concern of the board; everything else may vary in importance but lags way behind.

The fact that the Old Firm have been attempting to ingratiate themselves with the English movers and shakers could explain the recent New Labour type control freakery that's erupted in Kerrydale Street. The club are no doubt paranoid about projecting the right kind of image to those they are trying to impress and anything that sends out the wrong signals is about as welcome as Paul Gascoigne at a poetry reading night. Thus, we have the hysterically over the top reaction by the PR Office minions to the "Keep the Faith" book, and the ludicrous statements concerning the use of the "Hun" word.

Let's get one thing straight before we look at this any further; the present policy may be presented by the club as some kind of evolution of BAB but it is nothing of the sort. If anything it's nothing more than the Ibrox policy dressed in some new clothes. BAB was something substantial with a definite aim; the present policy of the club is designed to do nothing more than to place a handy sheet over the budgie cage. The club are doing nothing to actually combat sectarian bigotry. What they are doing is feverishly trying to ensure that the real issues are kept in the background away from the glare of media attention. It will still be there, nothing will have changed, it's just that the club can pretend they're doing something while in reality they're just indulging in a PR con - ironically one of the charges laid against BAB by its detractors.

The club have followed the modern trend and replaced substance with image. The banning of the word "Hun" from the club's matchday chat forum is a typical example of this new policy in action.

Now the club have every right to remove any terminology from an official forum that could reflect badly on the club. You won't see the word mentioned in Pravda or the official site (Pravda-online) so it's no great shock to see it banned from the chat forum. What was a shock, however, were the reasons given for this action. Not content with this routine administrative decision, some shining intellect down Kerrydale Street thought it would be a simply super idea to make this into some positive PR spin. So we progressed from what should have been a decision that barely raised an eyebrow to one that has snowballed into high farce.

The comments by Celtic employees on this issue have been nothing less than staggering, truly awesome in their abysmal ineptness and deceit. Coming as it has on the back of the equally ludicrous claims by the mysterious Kate Cunningham of the PR office (frequently referred to in press reports as "Celtic spokeswoman") regarding the "Keep the Faith" book, the declaration that the word "Hun" is a base example of the worst kind of sectarian bigotry is indicative of a policy of outright duplicity. I very much doubt if one single person at Celtic Park truly believes this phrase has any sectarian connotations at all, and why should they? However in the absence of anything concrete, it creates the impression that the club is still committed to positive action, and hey, let's face it, it looks good in the press.

The consequences of this act of stupidity appear to be lost on those responsible for these decisions. The combination of control freakery and substanceless media spin doctoring has resulted in the club declaring that terminology spawned by unadulterated football rivalry bears the same stigma as the lowest form of gutter bigotry. When it comes to proscribing words and phrases for no better reason that they may "exclude" someone somewhere at sometime then surely Celtic must be the first club in the history of the sport to ban - well... rivalry.

This mess began when Kate Cunningham, rather than give the real reasons for banning Keep The Faith (it showed some Celtic employees in what the club considered to be a bad light, i.e. human) they instead made a great play of frowning upon some of the terminology contained in the book. Such phrases as "Castle Greyskull" suddenly became part of the sectarian lexicon - which was news to just about everyone on the face of the planet. Just why a humorous reference to a child's cartoon should be deemed so is a mystery only those Celtic employees can explain.

Thus a lunatic display of outright paranoia became instead part of the club's no tolerance policy with one deft flick of the tongue. Perhaps this bright idea inspired some imitators in the office who were a bit miffed that the Employee of the Month award was nestling on Kate's mantelpiece, since the public spouting over the "Hun" word has been even more mind-bogglingly bizarre.

The club seem outwardly incapable of discriminating between derogatory references to Rangers and outright sectarianism. They interchange both words with seeming indifference, yet the two have very different meanings and connotations.

The charge of sectarianism, especially when it comes to the Old Firm, is just not one that should be used lightly yet the club seem determined to scatter it around like confetti. You would be forgiven for thinking that employees of a club like Celtic should know better but the evidence indicates otherwise. The word "Hun" for example has been used in a footballing sense for decades. Yes it's derogatory, yes it may be offensive to some Rangers supporters (mind you anything is), but sectarian? It can only be labelled thus if every single display of rivalry (waving rattles aside) is also to be categorised the same.

Aren't displays like singing, colours and flags exclusionist by their nature since they are symbols of Celtic supporters and no one else? Should these be banned just in case anyone is offended or feels excluded? The club would argue that these are an intrinsic part of football but I would argue, and so would many others, that rivalry is the same. Do Liverpool and Manchester United supporters, for example, have nothing but inoffensive blandishments to describe each other? Do Barca and Real supporters refer to each other as "the other chaps"?

There are some aspects of the Old Firm rivalry that are unacceptable, but to pin the label of sectarian bigotry onto every single facet of our rivalry is absolute madness. The club, though, think they're on a winner it judging by the line they've been punting to the media: "Celtic have warned staff that they can be sacked for calling Rangers fans 'huns'". The ban on the use of the word has also resulted in fans being thrown off the club's website. The club has revealed that any member of staff saying 'hun' can face disciplinary action or be sacked and fans may be asked to leave the ground if they use the word."

The last part reveals the sheer deceit involved in this whole business. If those responsible for that information truly believed that then Celtic Park would have only the directors box and the away end occupied during Old Firm games. It's not a million miles away from the tired line punted by Ibrox that fans spouting sectarian bile (and you can imagine how bad it must be to get chucked out of there) will be shown the door. Everyone knows just how hollow that claim is, and so do those coming out with this nonsense about supporters saying 'huns' being ejected from Celtic Park. Still, it looks good in the press.

This kind of drivel is guaranteed to elicit positive responses from those who really have no understanding of football, especially football rivalry, and that invariably includes the appallingly naive Nil by Mouth. There are those with good intentions who really should just stay at home tutting at the television. Like some mentioned previously they appear incapable of differentiating between rivalry and bigotry only this time they are genuinely out of touch rather than indulging in a PR gimmick.

Their response to the 'Hun' word controversy is par for the course: "This is good news. But we would also ask both clubs to clarify for their fans what language, phrases, songs and words are acceptable and what are not." Perhaps we should all undergo psychometric tests as well before we're allowed tickets. While clubs should make a stand on bigotry, Henderson's vision would make George Orwell throw the manuscript of 1984 on the fire since it was too upbeat.

Church representatives are always good for a positive quote as well. A Kirk spokesman said: "Anything that helps to combat bigotry is more than welcome and Celtic should be praised for it." Absolutely, however Celtic have done no such thing. They have merely placed a sectarian tag where none existed before. Quite where bigotry has been combated there is a bit of a puzzler. I'll declare my garden to be Afghanistan and run out there to plant my standard but it doesn't mean I've actually struck a blow against the Taliban.

The Catholic Church spokesman Peter Cairney was even worse: "Celtic should be applauded for this move as it helps to remove barriers which cause offence." Right.. so it's not bigotry now then is it, it's offence? In that case I suggest Celtic refrain from scoring goals against Rangers in case we offend any of their supporters, players or officials.

So where does this leave us? Well Celtic's once proud stance against bigotry has descended into a preposterous series of media stunts focusing on issues it alone has created. The club appear to neither know or care about the quite considerable consequences of its actions, nor the fact that today's positive headlines can become tomorrow's egg on the face. After all, what's to stop journalists now complaining of the sectarian bigotry at Celtic Park when the Tims are singing about Huns? It would never have occurred to them before but the club has given them a rope and placed its neck within the noose.

It goes deeper than that however. Whether it is sheer incompetence, impressive deceit or a combination of the two, the actions by the club raise serious questions about the way those making these decisions are operating. When a pretty harmless book, and a footballing phrase that has been used for decades without comment can suddenly find themselves classified as inciting sectarian hatred, then it's difficult not to conclude that the lunatics are running the asylum even if the lunatics do have some half-baked purpose to their madness.

If the club was genuinely concerned about sectarian bigotry then it could do a hell of a lot more, but it isn't and it doesn't. All it is concerned about is ensuring its corporate image stays whiter than white, and that certain employees can get their names in the paper and their egos massaged. It's a pitiful, depressing state of affairs but one all too symptomatic of the way the club operates these days.

I think it fitting to end this article with a quote from that aforementioned mysterious Celtic spokeswoman: "All we ask is that people observe certain rules and ways of behaviour when associating themselves with Celtic." Rather difficult is it not when the rules change from week to week. Perhaps they should follow Miss Henderson's advice and issue weekly updates, we may find out that we've always been at war with Oceania after all.

One more thing Miss Cunningham, Celtic supporters are not 'associating' themselves with Celtic. We are part of Celtic, if you knew the first thing about the club and its history then you would be aware of this simple fact.

 

article by kind permission of:

back to top