Scotland on Sunday's Martin Hannan questions the double standards displayed by 'Deek the Geek' on the question of 'fit and proper' person in the appointment of Baikie. Another example of negative publicty for East Fife, I just don't know how we have survived 50years of Derricks support.

Not sure if this link will work as it's a "register" site but article below.

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/sport.cfm?id=609172006


SFA fails scrutineers' test
MY SPORTING WEEK
MARTIN HANNAN

THE plain envelope which landed on my desk was sent anonymously. Normally, I put such unsought correspondence in the bin, but this envelope contained two letters from Hearts FC to the Scottish Football Association. Their contents, which I have confirmed as genuine, are disturbing to anyone who cares about the way the SFA runs Scottish football.

The leaked material concerns the Graham Rix case. You'll recall that the former Hearts manager had been convicted and jailed for having sex with a 15-year-old girl and, being on the sex offenders' register, he was the subject of an inquiry by the SFA's general purposes committee (GPC) under Article Ten of the SFA's Articles of Association.




In brief, Article Ten allows the SFA to ban anyone they consider to be not a fit and proper person from being a club's secretary, director, office bearer, manager or assistant manager or first-team coach. Specifically stated as an example of an unfit and improper person is someone who "is the subject of an endorsed Disclosure from the Disclosure Bureau". In other words, people like Graham Rix.

It was six weeks after Rix arrived at Tynecastle that the SFA began investigating the Englishman. Only after East Fife FC chairman Derrick Brown called for Rix to be investigated did they act. Having met Rix, I can confirm he is a decent enough human being who bitterly regrets his crime. He has also tholed his assize in society's eyes. Several pundits made the same point when calling for Rix to be allowed to manage Hearts without SFA intervention, but the fact is that he was on the sex offenders' register when Vladimir Romanov surprisingly appointed him and the SFA should have investigated him as soon as he was in the Hearts' manager's office.

The letters I received strongly suggest the SFA did not do its job properly in the Rix case and, given the genuine and massive public concern on the issue of child protection, these failures call into question the way the association regulates football.

The private and confidential correspondence is from Hearts' general secretary and director of operations Campbell Ogilvie - incidentally, he is a vice-president of the SFA - to the GPC. Both Hearts and the SFA have been in touch to deplore the leaking of the letters, I should say.

In his first letter, dated December 20, 2005, following press reports of the initial hearing about Rix, Ogilvie alleged that information about the private meeting was leaked and they assume this was done by a committee member. Ogilvie said this represents "a serious breach of the natural rules of justice" and "prejudices the ability of Mr Rix and Heart of Midlothian plc" to receive a fair hearing.

"Trailing confidential information in the press and allowing the press to reach their own conclusions, which are accompanied by the usual hyperbole, does nothing to alleviate the situation regarding Mr Rix's appointment," added Ogilvie.

Later, Hearts argued that "moral opprobrium" regarding Rix's past conduct should not be "a relevant factor" in the GPC's deliberations. Hearts also said they were being "as co-operative as possible" and had supplied "a great deal of information which would have allowed the GPC, acting reasonably, to come to a view on whether Mr Rix is a fit and proper person to be appointed as coach".

Part of that information was evidence from Hampshire Police that Rix was not a risk in a professional football context, and that Hearts had a child protection policy which had been approved by the SFA after Rix's appointment.

The GPC had asked for "Dr Sue Hamilton or a suitably qualified person approved by the association" to report on Rix. Hamilton is the SFA's consultant on such issues as child protection, but declined to get involved in the Rix case, as did another expert, Anne Black.

In the second letter, Hearts duly claimed that these two experts recommended by the SFA were "unavailable or unwilling to become involved". Indeed, Black suggested two more experts and they, too, declined to take the case citing "adverse publicity" as the reason, as did Black herself.

The failure to get an expert to report on Rix delayed the inquiry for at least another month, but Hearts themselves found a top specialist, Professor Don Grubin of Newcastle University - a psychiatrist with vast experience of sex offence cases - who offered his services. But, before anyone could report to the committee, Romanov sacked Rix.

Now it has been argued Hearts tried to wriggle out of their obligations, but the evidence is to the contrary. The correspondence proves Hearts supplied the committee with police evidence about Rix; raised legitimate concerns about "leaking"; that it was the SFA's own recommended experts who declined the case; and, with their employee to protect, Hearts quite rightly queried at length what the SFA actually wanted in terms of reports and interviews with club personnel, as detailed queries and instructions were apparently not forthcoming from Hampden. Furthermore, Hearts wanted Rix's case dealt with more quickly than the SFA was doing - it says so in one of the letters - and the club voluntarily banned him from working with under-16s as a means of moving things along.

The letters show the SFA leaked private matters; did not state properly what questions they wanted answered; their "advice" on experts was flawed; failed to deal with the matter timeously; and did not properly investigate Rix - why did the association effectively rely on Hearts' own reports when a competent investigator could have resolved the issues in 48 hours?

The SFA and Hearts both say they won't comment on the specifics of the correspondence. The SFA also say they deplore the leaking of confidential information and will act if they catch the culprit. Their spokesman added: "The [Rix] case will be formally concluded next week by the GPC, although we have to point out that we have still not received the report which the GPC requested from Hearts on December 20." That may be the case, but can you blame Hearts for prevarication when the SFA could not even adequately state the remit of the inquiry?

The case may close on Thursday - it will be noted or dismissed because Rix is gone - but the questions will not go away, not just about Rix but the whole Article Ten issue. As Giovanni di Stefano showed at Dundee, anyone can waltz into Scottish football and their past will be ignored until someone - in his case, me - points out that there could be a wee problem with Article Ten's "fit and proper person" rule. Incidentally, one wonders if they have an Article Ten in Ireland, where Giovanni is reportedly trying to buy Shelbourne.

The recent re-emergence of Dave Baikie, the new manager at East Fife, is a case in point. Baikie was appointed by Derrick Brown - the same Brown who called for the Rix inquiry - despite a conviction last year for assaulting the father of one of his former players. Baikie resigned from Cowdenbeath over his conviction, but is now back in football. Presumably he will now be investigated under Article Ten, though no doubt his chairman thinks the cackhanded way the SFA dealt with Rix means Baikie will be allowed to carry on managing at Bayview for many months yet.

Baikie may well be found "fit and proper", but how many unfit and improper people are out there across Scottish football?

Either the SFA has rules or it does not. If it is right for the association to ban people from Scottish football who are not "fit and proper", then it is totally wrong for the SFA to fail to properly enforce Article Ten. Compliance with the rules should not be voluntary - new directors and managers should be compelled to disclose past convictions and, where there are even the slightest doubts about such people, inquiries into their background should be immediate and carried out by a properly trained independent expert.

Football across the world is full of unsavoury characters, and the SFA could do the sport a favour by properly enforcing Article Ten. But, as the leaked letters show, the people who run Scottish football are not quite up to that job. And it makes you wonder what else they may have cocked up...

the journalist has not realised that brown was part of the general purposes committee that investigated rix, so brown is unlikely to think the SFA dealt with the Rix case in a cack-handed way. it would have been a better article if the journalist had realised that brown was actually part of the problem. again

Fair's fair. This is rank bad journalism on every count. Graham Rix is on the sex offenders register. Full stop. Couldn't even work with their youth team!

It pains me to say it but Broon was absolutely right to raise the matter and we should support him for that. There were serious double standards at work within the SFA, when you think of the fuss made by people in football about the Danskin situation. You have to ask why Campbell Ogilvie, a Vice President of the SFA, was handling the matter for Hearts. Prejudicial, or what?

You've got a point onlooker BUT Danskin was at it with young boys.Rix had it with a 14-15? yearold girl.I'm not defending him BUT how many times have you gone out and seen girls you know, dressed to the nines,looking in there early 20s and YOU knowing that there lucky if there 14-15.This sort ov thing prob happens in every part ov Britain every weekend.SAD BUT TRUE.

You're quite right, of course - but it doesn't change the principle that there was one rule for the rich (Hearts) and another for the poor (us!). The SFA shouldn't even have needed to consult an expert. The guy is on the sex offenders register. He won't have "tholed his assize", to use the reporters term, until he comes off the register. It is complete hypocrisy for the press to play him up as a nice guy who regrets what he did. I bet he does.

Oh, and by the way, I don't think that we should have appointed Dave Baikie - for much the same reason. DB's unique ability to shoot himself in the foot, hand,and mouth is shown again.

I take your point Enfifer but I believe that in Rix case he knew the girl, knew her age and in fact she was a friend of his family.

I also think that they both knew exactly what they were doing.

I think you could also add to the last post.

Rix was a convicted sex offender when he got the job at Hearts. Danskin held the post of chairman with East Fife well before he was convicted of his offences

but how long was danskin doing his dirty deeds before he was caught

All good points,

But what is the message that broon is sending to the world by appointing a man with an assault conviction ?

surely this brings broon himself into this article 10 rule. is he a ....... no am no even gonna type that..