Today, Neil Lennon received an extension on his initial two match touchline ban for 'excessive misconduct' at Tynecastle in the 2-0 defeat to Hearts earlier this season. I don't think it's right to defend Lennon's actions that night too much other than to say these heat of the moment confrontations happen at football matches regularly, in Scotland and around the world. In my opinion he did go a bit over the top, regardless of the poor refereeing that saw us lose a man and a penalty oppurtunity. However, what is unacceptable is not only the SFA's structure in place to discipline the people involved in these incidents but also the heavy handed nature of the ban Neil Lennon has had imposed on him. Celtic are one hundred percent correct to say the ban is unprecedented in Scottish football.
Lennon's six match ban is made up of an automatic 2 match ban for being dismissed at Tynecastle (appealed against today and lost) and an additional 4 match ban for 'excessive misconduct' (metered out for the first time today). It's accurate that two managers have previously had four match bans for 'excessive misconduct', being Rangers manager Walter Smith & and then Ross County boss Derek Adams, but the nature of both bans are quite different. Smith received his after a 0-0 game versus Kilmarnock, arguing with the officials after incorrectly believing Kilmarnock players were trying to get Rangers players sent off. However this was only because he had a previous touchline ban suspended from the previous year when he lost his fabled dignity and went rather ballistic at both Mixu Paatelainen and the SFA officials in a Rangers vs. Hibs match at Ibrox. Likewise, Adams, receiving a 4 match ban after an altercation with a referee in a Ross County reserve game also had previous, receiving a 2 match ban in a match against St. Johnstone the season before. The question that has to be asked is why Neil Lennon is receiving a disproportionate ban compared to previous punishments dished out by the SFA?
In fact, the Adams case is a good example why these multiple match bans highlight the pettiness and regressive nature of the SFA. He eventually got his ban extended to 18 games following other minor misdemeanours, effectively ruling him out for almost half a season of games. Instead of sitting down with Adams and discussing the approach he had with the officials, why he had it and how to move forward for the good of Scottish football they chose to repeatedly treat him like a child stealing sweeties from a shop. It's in my opinion that in the Lennon situation, the SFA are similarly sending out a message to Celtic and Lennon about other issues you may have heard about in Scottish football recently, in a ridiculously childish and bitter manner. It drags Scottish football further into the mire, to save face while also protecting a cabal of reactionary and incompetent officials.
Thankfully Celtic FC appear to be proactive with the issue, releasing a strongly worded statement today in defence of Lennon. In it they announce an intention to appeal the ban. Luckily the appeal process for these matters is slightly more favourable and doesn't solely consist of Highland League officials and chairmen of other SPL clubs sticking the knife in. Celtic's solicitors will be present and one can only imagine a robust and incisive argument will be made on behalf of Neil Lennon. No-one is excusing Neil Lennon's behaviour at Tynecastle but punishment must be fair and logical. My gut feeling is that the recent verbal sparring between Celtic and the SFA is about to reach new levels and that the fight has only just begun, time will tell.
