SFA charges: Celtic and Rangers face reckoning over Ibrox chaos

The Scottish Football Association has drawn a line in the sand. On Tuesday, the governing body issued identical disciplinary charges against Rangers and Celtic following the disorder that erupted after their Scottish Cup quarter-final at Ibrox in March. The charges, based on Rule 37 of the SFA’s disciplinary code, allege breaches of “good order and security” and “unacceptable conduct,” focusing on whether both clubs failed to implement adequate policies to identify and deter supporters involved in the violence. With hearings scheduled for August 13, the Old Firm now faces a reckoning that could reshape the toxic culture that has long defined this rivalry.

Charges, evidence, and the weight of Rule 37

The SFA’s charges centre on the events of March 8, when Celtic edged past Rangers on penalties at Ibrox. The trouble began when visiting fans spilled onto the pitch to celebrate the winning spot-kick, only for more than 100 Rangers supporters to charge towards them, hurling fireworks in both directions. At least 37 people were arrested, and both police and stewards sustained injuries. The independent review, published alongside the charges, underscores the systemic failure of crowd management at one of British football’s most volatile stadiums.

Rule 37 is not a cosmetic measure. It demands clubs demonstrate “appropriate measures” to prevent unacceptable conduct, including the identification of troublemakers and the enforcement of stadium bans. The SFA’s decision to issue identical complaints to both clubs suggests a shared responsibility in the breakdown of control. Rangers, as the home side, will argue that the sheer scale of the violence overwhelmed stewards, while Celtic may point to the actions of their travelling support. Yet the SFA’s focus on policies—not just incidents—implies that neither club can credibly claim to have done enough to prevent the chaos.

Sanctions: fines, bans, or something more drastic?

The hearings on August 13 will determine the severity of the sanctions. Financial penalties are the most likely outcome, but the SFA retains the power to impose stadium bans, order partial closures, or even deduct points. The latter would be unprecedented in Scottish football, but the SFA has shown a willingness to act decisively in recent years, as seen in the touchline ban facing Rangers manager Steven McInnes over a separate incident. A points deduction would send a seismic signal to the Old Firm, but even a heavy fine—potentially running into six figures—would underscore the financial cost of failing to address the rivalry’s endemic issues.

The SFA’s options are constrained by the need to balance deterrence with proportionality. A blanket stadium ban for either club would punish innocent fans and risk legal challenges, while a partial closure might prove ineffective if troublemakers simply relocate to another section. The governing body may instead opt for a combination of measures: fines, mandatory stewarding improvements, and stricter monitoring of known offenders. The key question is whether such sanctions will be enough to force change, or if they will merely paper over the cracks.

The long shadow of the Old Firm’s toxicity

This is not the first time the SFA has intervened in Old Firm disorder, but the timing of these charges—amid growing scrutiny of the clubs’ governance—adds weight to the moment. Celtic, already grappling with boardroom instability and transfer uncertainty, must confront allegations that its supporters contributed to the violence. Rangers, meanwhile, face renewed criticism over their ability to police Ibrox, a stadium that has become synonymous with football’s most combustible atmosphere. The charges arrive at a juncture where both clubs are under pressure to modernise, yet their histories are inextricably tied to the very culture the SFA now seeks to dismantle.

The broader implications extend beyond Glasgow. Scottish football’s reputation has suffered for years under the Old Firm’s shadow, with sponsors and broadcasters increasingly wary of associating with a league blighted by recurring incidents. The SFA’s willingness to publish an independent review and issue charges to both clubs suggests a recognition that half-measures will no longer suffice. Yet the challenge is Herculean: the Old Firm’s financial power means they can absorb fines that would cripple smaller clubs, while their global fanbases insulate them from the reputational damage that might deter others.

The August hearings will test whether the SFA is prepared to wield its authority without fear or favour. If the sanctions are too lenient, the message to the Old Firm will be clear: pay the price and carry on. If they are severe, the clubs may finally be forced to confront the rot within their own institutions. Either way, the reckoning has arrived—and Scottish football can no longer look away.