Steven Craven - I Lied

[ian1964 10,720]

STEVEN CRAVEN today reveals the truth behind the lies of a controversial Tannadice cover-up.

 

In an explosive MailSport exclusive that will rock the SFA to its core, Craven lifts the lid on the spot-kick storm from Celtic's clash with Dundee United.

 

The linesman opens up about the lies and bullying that led to his resignation and reveals how: Ref Dougie McDonald lied to Hoops boss Neil Lennon about his sensational penalty U-turn.

 

Both he and McDonald came clean to refs chief Hugh Dallas.

 

Dallas tried TWICE to get him to repeat what he knew to be a lie.

 

Bullying, harassment and victimisation in the corridors of power will lead to refs quitting.

 

Craven told MailSport: "Dougie ran towards me and said: 'I think I've f***** up.' After the game Dougie said we should tell the referee supervisor (Jim McBurnie) that I called him over to question the penalty award.

 

"I went along with it because I wanted to be supportive of Dougie.

 

"But then Neil Lennon came in after the game and asked Dougie why he hadn't given the penalty kick.

 

"We told Neil the version that was a lie.

 

"It was wrong to lie. And I'm not proud that I went along with Dougie's suggestion.

 

"I decided to quit a few days later. I'd had enough of Hugh Dallas and John Fleming (the SFA referee development officer).

 

"For a while I felt I had been a victim of harassment and bullying from them.

 

"A lot of guys are not happy with it and are ready to walk away."

 

SFA chief executive Stewart Regan said: "Dougie hasn't accepted responsibility for Steven's resignation.

 

"His resignation covers other matters and we are looking at those."

 

Dallas tried TWICE to make me repeat what he knew was just a LIE

 

STEVEN CRAVEN knew he was wrong to go along with Dougie McDonald's lies after the Dundee United v Celtic game.

 

But he was stunned and shocked when refs supremo Hugh Dallas wouldn't listen to the TRUTH after the officials decided to come clean.

 

Craven says in his resignation letter that Dallas twice tried to make him repeat a version of events he knew to be untrue.

 

That was when the linesman realised he was going to be hung out to dry for McDonald's decision to overturn the penalty he had awarded the Hoops.

 

Inaccurate stories started to appear on a daily basis in an attempt to cover up the real version of events - and that's why Craven has decided to speak out.

 

Now the match official - who quit the SFA last week as exclusively revealed in the Daily Record - can tell us the full story.

 

He told MailSport: "I can remember it all clearly. Dougie blew for the penalty but I could see the United keeper Dusan Pernis did touch the ball.

 

"However, Dougie was no more than seven yards away from the spot-kick incident while I was 25 yards away.

 

"I was with Dougie in a game between Aberdeen and Kilmarnock two years ago.

 

"Craig Bryson fell inside the Aberdeen box and I screamed to Dougie to give Killie a penalty.

 

"But he ignored my call and cautioned Bryson for simulation.

 

"We spoke about it at half-time and Dougie was adamant he called it right. Television evidence proved he was right.

 

"So that incident was going through my mind immediately after he gave Celtic the penalty at Tannadice.

 

"I thought he had the perfect position. There was no way I could question him.

 

"He then ran towards me and said: 'I think I've f***** up. Did the keeper get a hand to the ball?' I told him I believed the goalie played the ball and that it wasn't a penalty. So he decided it should be a drop ball.

 

"To make it clear, Dougie approached me. I did not call for him to come over.

 

"After the game, in front of the other assistant referee and the fourth official, we spoke about it. Dougie said we should tell the referee supervisor (Jim McBurney) that I called him over to question the penalty award. He claimed it would give the decision to overturn the spot-kick more credibility.

 

"I went along with it because I wanted to be supportive of Dougie and back him up.

 

"That's the first time I've lied after a game. It was the wrong thing to do. With hindsight, I regret it. I'd never lie again.

 

"The supervisors have earpieces and can hear all communication between officials during games.

 

"Jim said he didn't hear me calling over Dougie but that the stadium was noisy."

 

Supervisor McBurney wasn't the only person the officials tried to deceive. They even lied to Hoops boss Neil Lennon when he asked for an explanation.

 

Craven revealed: "Lennon came into the room after the game and asked Dougie why he hadn't given the penalty.

 

"We told him the version that was a lie. He seemed fine with the explanation. But, then, I suppose his side had still managed to win thanks to a late goal.

 

"I told Neil it was better to win with a legitimate goal rather than a dodgy penalty. He agreed."

 

McDonald's controversial U-turn led to a media storm and the worried ref decided to come clean to Dallas.

 

But Craven claims the refs supremo wasn't interested in the truth and wanted the linesman to keep taking the flak. That then kicked off a series of events that led to Craven handing in his resignation and the SFA starting an investigation.

 

The first part of that probe led to McDonald receiving an official warning but the investigation is still ongoing.

 

Craven said: "On the Monday morning there was quite a reaction in the papers.

 

"I sent Dougie a text to ask what he thought of the fall-out.

 

"He called immediately and told me he had talked with Hugh the night before and decided to come clean.

 

"Dougie told Hugh lies were told to the supervisor. He then told Hugh the truth - that I had not shouted for him to come over.

 

"I was then urged to tell Hugh the truth when he called me. I was happy to do so and felt quite relieved.

 

"When Hugh phoned he asked me to talk over the penalty. He said: 'So what happened after you called out for Dougie to come over? You called out Dougie, Dougie, Dougie?'

 

"My wife was in the room and I told him that was not the case. I told Hugh he now knew the truth.

 

"The truth was the version Dougie had told him over the phone.

 

"But Hugh repeated: 'What are you talking about, you said Dougie, Dougie, Dougie and called him over' but I told Dallas I did no such thing.

 

"Dougie came clean and so did I. But Hugh didn't seem to accept that.

 

"I phoned Dougie back and told him Hugh tried to make out this wasn't true and denied having the conversation with Dougie on the Sunday night.

 

"Dougie's response was he thought Hugh was just trying to test me, that he wanted to see if I would tell the truth or stick to the previous story.

 

"My reading of the situation was Hugh wanted to protect Dougie and leave me to take the flak.

 

"It was wrong to lie and I'm not proud that I went along with Dougie's suggestion. Rewind the clock and I wouldn't do it.

 

"But it was worse to continue the lie.

 

"I was really upset after that conversation with Hugh."

 

Craven then got even angrier when he checked his email and received the official match report.

 

He was criticised for his performance at Tannadice and that convinced him it was time to get out of the game.

 

Craven said: "When I got my match report from the game emailed to me that proved to be the final straw.

 

"I was down-marked for getting an offside decision wrong.

 

"When I got the match report I phoned Drew Herbertson at the SFA and told him I'd had enough.

 

"I was going to quit at Christmas - but not because of my ankles, as has been reported elsewhere. It was because of all the nonsense with Hugh.

 

"I got my letter from the SFA on Friday morning to say my resignation had been formally accepted."

[stewarty 2,002]

My reading of this story is that Craven may be a 'tad' sensitive. He's assumed that the SFA were going to try and make him take the rap for proceedings at Tannadice when he was in fact complicit in McDonald's attempt to lie to the refereeing supervisor.

 

The two things he mentions which made up his mind to quit early were the phone call from Dallas and the referee's report received via e-mail. Now, Dallas (a lawyer if i recall correctly) attempts to clarify the previously stated version of events by asking him to repeat/expand/clarify. As McDonald said when Craven called him afterwards, he thought Dallas was testing him to see if he would stick to the previous version of events.

 

Dallas' tactic would seem to be perfectly reasonable - its a method I have employed myself when investigating a series of events. The whole business of the blame being switched from McDonald to Craven was the fault of the 4 officials on the day and Craven should accept responsibilty for his part in it. If, after investigating in more detail, the SFA did attempt to lay the blame on Craven to save McDonald then this article would hold much more sway.

 

As it stands, Craven has shown himself to have no back-bone. He refused to flag up to McDonald that he thought it was a penalty (until McDonald asked his opinion), on the basis that he has been wrong before. I find that attitute particularly poor. Referee's, and their assistants, should call incidents as they see it. If he believed a mistake had been made, he should have been shouting in McDonald's ear straight away.

 

I feel sorry for the guy for the morons who have threatened him and his family. Society has no place for those idiots. Unfortunately, Scottish football has no place for officials that attempt to massage the truth because they fear a backlash from the unwashed. The loss of Craven would appear, given the evidence now at hand, to be no great shame. In fact, I think his rush to sell his story to the Sunday Mail might indicate where his motives actually lie. I expect to see him popping up in some pundit role in the near future with the remit to "tell it how it really is" (sic).

Edited October 31, 2010 by stewarty

[Gazza_8 233]

I've just saw the penalty incident for the 1st time earlier today. Stonewaller!

 

Why wasn't it given? We'd have been screaming blue murder if we weren't awarded a penalty for that.

[Super_Ally 0]

For the keeper clearly playing the ball?

[Gazza_8 233]

For the keeper clearly playing the ball?

 

After catching the Celtic player.

[Super_Ally 0]

After catching the Celtic player.

 

Not seen it for a while now, but not all contact is a foul and my opinion at the time was no pen. A decision upheld by the panel who reviewed the whole issue. They agreed Craven's advice not to give it was correct. The only problem, aside from the fact that it was a farce in eventually making the correct call, is that it was a correct call given against Celtic.

[juffery 0]

Gav, were you watching it in reverse. He takes yhe ball first.

[Gazza_8 233]

Gav, were you watching it in reverse. He takes yhe ball first.

 

I'll need to have another look at it. Just seen it the once so I'll go and have another wee butchers at it.