Graeme McGarry: SFA must drop vow of silence and spell out how they are arriving at decisions

The games governing body and specifically, their match officials, are embattled once more, coming under fire from all directions after a start to the season which has generated enough controversy to dwarf lesser leagues for an entire campaign.

The general perception is that not only are referees and their assistants consistently making huge errors on the field of play in real time, but these are being exacerbated by a disciplinary review process that the Gestapo might criticise for its secrecy.

I am generally reluctant to criticise match officials publicly, because heaven knows I wouldn’t be stepping into their shoes if they were to decide that the abuse and vitriol they encounter on a weekly basis just wasn’t worth the hassle.

But on the other hand, they are picking up a rather hefty wedge for their efforts, so they should be held to professional standards.

What the multiple incidents which have come up for debate since the start of the season have proved is that either punters and the media don’t understand the rules properly (quite possible, in the case of the latter) or the rules are not being applied properly by those charged with doing so.

And herein lies the issue. Because of the SFA’s vow of silence over the way they arrive at decisions, we will never know for sure which of those is correct.

Why doesn’t the SFA come out after making these calls and explain in simple terms the rule that was applied to make the decision, and therefore how they arrived at it? I am not asking them to unmask the three grade one officials they use to review these decisions, but simply how and why the decisions are made. What do they have to lose by doing that?

What they would gain is credibility, because right now they have very little in the eyes of what I would consider to be a large majority of the Scottish football-going public.

Do the clubs, at least, not deserve some sort of communication from the governing body when they feel so let down? I don’t get what the SFA are so afraid of.

No one is asking them to explain every single decision that goes against a team on any given Saturday, but for the love of God, Partick Thistle weren’t given a goal last weekend that hit the actual back of the net. And yet, not once in the past seven days has anyone from Mount Florida deigned to pick up the phone or even saunter across to Maryhill just to explain what happened.

I mean, we all know that the assistant referee simply had a brain-fart, but a little common courtesy from the SFA would go a long way to creating a lot of goodwill.

That incident isn’t one that could be overturned (with apologies to Kris Doolan), but some of the high-profile dismissals and missed offences easily could have been. So far, the only one that has been was Alfredo Morelos’s kick out at Scott McKenna, an offence that in any previous season would seem to merit the red card it received on the day.

A lot has been made of the introduction of the terms ‘excessive force or brutality’ into the ruling, but it seems to me by ignoring incidents such as Allan McGregor’s boot out at Kristoffer Ajer or Stevie Naismith’s against Celtic, that the game is moving into a dangerous area.

And when they refuse to overturn red cards like the ones dished out to Gary Dicker of Kilmarnock against Hearts and Mikey Devlin’s for Aberdeen against Killie last week, then it just looks to the average fan that the SFA are simply protecting their referees. The partisanship of supporters means that accusations of bias inevitably follow, but if the SFA are unwilling to fill the vacuum, then what do they expect?

Right now, the perception from outside is that the SFA and their officials are out of touch and aloof when it comes to these matters, not bothering to explain their decisions to a footballing public who seemingly in their view, simply don’t understand the rules and procedures.

If that is indeed so, then why not explain them to us?