Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


MSPs hit back at Smith in 2012 row

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 06 March 2009
By Joe Quinn
MSPs have hit out at Scottish Football Association chief Gordon Smith after he warned them to stay out of a debate over a British Olympic team.
Smith said he was "extremely concerned" at a move by Holyrood's Public Petitions Committee. But the committee's convener, Labour MSP Frank McAveety, accused Smith of misunderstanding the function of the committee. And SNP MSP Christine Grahame, who s
poke on the issue at a meeting of the committee, said she had asked to meet Smith several times but had been refused.

The row broke out after the committee agreed on Tuesday to write to Fifa and other governing bodies to seek clarification on their position on the prospect of a unified UK team taking part in 2012. Fifa claims the independence of the four home nations would not be jeopardised by participation in the London Games. However, the SFA has consistently countered they are in no position to give such assurances as Fifa members are free to reject such promises in future years.

Smith said later he was "extremely concerned" at the committee's decision to get involved, saying: "If there is one thing that Fifa dislikes, it is political involvement in football issues."

He also said: "I would have thought that politicians would understand politics better than anyone. As we have made clear again and again it is not the view of the current Fifa members that matters – it is the views of members in the future that will count."

But McAveety said he was "disappointed" by Smith's comments, and that the football chief had failed to understand the purpose of the committee.

He said: "I am sure Gordon Smith and the SFA would welcome the action taken by the Public Petitions committee on Tuesday in writing to Fifa, Uefa and the football associations for Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland to gain a clear public statement from those organisations on how a GB team would impact on the future status of Scotland's international team now and in the future."

Grahame, SNP MSP for South of Scotland region, added: "Keeping quiet on such an important issue, may suit Gordon Browns and Lord Seb Coe, the men behind this GB proposal, but we would be failing in our own duty as elected representatives of the people of Scotland if we did not speak out against it."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 March 2009 2:12 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: London Olympics 2012
 
1

RufusT-Firefly,

05/03/2009 23:25:14
"And SNP MSP Christine Grahame, who spoke on the issue at a meeting of the committee, said she had asked to meet Smith several times but had been refused."
=======================================================

Thats one thing you can say about Gordon Smith, he is a good judge of character.

Why did she want to speak to him anyway? Probably to discuss the AC/DC World Tour.
2

Tris,

06/03/2009 00:15:54
"If there is one thing that Fifa dislikes, it is political involvement in football issues."

Well, it's the North British idiot that's making it political.
3

redcliffe62,

06/03/2009 03:07:44
blatter advised the home countries as a whole in a meeting recently not to do it.
4 of the 8 votes in decision making are england, scotland wales and norn ireland. that monopoly is not liked in the rest of europe where it is perceived they normally vote as a bloc. having that bloc is england's best chance to gett he world cup. lose 3 votes and they join the also rans. blatter went out of his way and gave them a heads up, so that should have got home to the english FA. who heard it staright from his mouth. the english FA appear to know FA it would seem.
4

,

06/03/2009 06:03:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 06/03/2009 08:20:38
The London Olympics is still 3 years away.

In 2012, Sebb Blatter, will be 78, IF he is still FIFA President.

The average age of the 8 FIFA Vice-Presidents, and 15 man Executive Committee is 62.

Like all the interfering politicians, they are here today but in all likelihood many of them will be gone tomorrow.

Verbal assurances from these transient mouthpieces are not enough!
6

morris,

edinburgh 06/03/2009 08:48:24
The simple fact is that the four national FAs could be refused on any future date and whilst a UK team (It cannot be called Great Britain since Northern Ireland are excluded)may be given every assurance today, it means nothing tomorrow. This is something that Broon and Dumpling would see as another unifying brainwash. We all sing Rule Britannia and vote LIAR PARTY.It would also be as near to England repeating 1966 as they are ever likely to see for many years.
(They had home advantage but were in fact illegal winners because they played all the England games at Wembley which was not allowed apparently in the Jules Rimet rules


The team would contain a token pool presence and would in fact be ENGLAND and we all know it.
They might include one from Scotland Wales and I'm not sure how Northern Ireland can be included unless the team is called United Kingdom.
I think they day when we remove Gordon Smith is not far away.If he pursues this again he must go.
This is something which Scotland dare not do!
7

,

06/03/2009 09:12:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

Penicuik Laddie,

06/03/2009 09:51:38
Gordon Smith needs to get a grip. He was in support of a GB football team before he became Chief of the SFA.
If, as FIFA have made clear on many other occasions and verified by George Peat and others, in future Scotland is kicked out of international football then the impact will go well beyong the realms of former football pundits. On FIFA's own website Blatter is quoted as saying that if the GB team goes ahead that will not only kill of the Scotland side, but will be an end to the Scottish leagues... You dont need the brains of an archbishop to work out the knock on impact that would have on jobs and the Scottish economy. It is that aspect that makes this more than just a footballing issue.
Not for the first time Gordon Smith appears to have missed a sitter at a crucial part in the game. He should have had a word with his close Labour friends to make sure this idea was killed off at conception... but once again shot wide of the target.
As for Rufus' comments... that insect really needs to start taking his medication a little earlier in the evening. Fireflies are normally distinguished by the way their backside lights up when they move around... Demented Rufus relies instead on the old addage of liar, liar your pants on fire, in these columns to make his maximus light up. Its not quite the same spectacle mind you.
9

,

06/03/2009 10:22:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Mikey,

06/03/2009 10:41:46
No to a Brit team and no to the London Olympics!

Yes to the funds being spent on something useful!!!
11

john z,

edinburgh 06/03/2009 11:29:16
A british football team at the Olympics is not such a big gain, but there is one helluva BIG RISK. To pursue this makes no sense, unless you are a 'north britisher' of the Labour party.

Quite Frankly, the SFA, english FA and others need to tell politicians to b*gger off.

Nothing will be gained from a british football team, and an awful lot of harm can be done.

As others have rightly said, verbal 'assurances' from those in charge of FIFA right now, will be meaningless in just a few years time. The Scottish FA are quite right in their views on this.

You do of course realise this is all being driven by Brown, in a desperate attempt to increase his 'britishness' credentials. It has NOTHING to do with improving football in Scotland, and the SFA quite rightly see through it.
12

john z,

edinburgh 06/03/2009 11:33:36
And please tell me why is Scottish tax payers money being spent on rebuilding the east end of London, when in Scotland the London treasury is flatly refusing to fund the ESSENTIAL new Forth road bridge??

And now the anti democratic Labour party want to prevent the people of Scotland having a say on Scottish independence. Mind you, it's not so surprising, since with Labour, we have an unelected Prime Minister, and the unelected and fully unaccountable Peter Lord Mandelson making the strategy for most government policies.
13

Luke Skywalker,

Edinburgh 06/03/2009 12:12:17
John 13. Not fully correct. In this country we elect our MP's but we do not elect any Prime Minister so Gordon Brown is no different from anybody else such as Thatcher or Blair. However, as a previous labour voter I am extremely unhappy about Mandelson and the fact that he has been brought into Government will make me think long and hard about where to cast my vote at the next election whenever that may be.
14

,

06/03/2009 13:10:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

Rosscobhoy,

06/03/2009 17:50:08
I've said it before and i'll say it again. I know plenty of people with no interest in politics and little thought on the union/independence, but everyone of them has an interest in football and all except a couple have said they would vote SNP as opposed to not voting at all if a British team was forced together. I still can't believe Brown is pushing for this when it would have the opposite effect of what he is trying to acheive. I hope he manages it and pays the price.
16

Iainbroch,

27/05/2009 23:34:07
Smith has already shown himself to be inept in relation to his job. His judgement in this is therefor questionable on this issue on grounds of competence alone!

In otherwords I thought he should have been sacked months ago!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.