To the collected delight of all Celtic fans around the world, the Sottish champions are back in the Champions League despite having been roundly and deservedly beaten 6-1 by Legia Warswaw. The fact that the Poles played an ineligible player for the last few minutes of that double-leg victory was apparently deemed enough of an issue for UEFA that they kicked Legia out of the competition all together and reinstated the Scots. The long and short of that reinstatement is that Celtic's season has now been given a major injection in the arm, mere hours after the manager was talking about ripping his team up and starting again and facing the loss of the team's three most saleable assets. Now, Virgil Van Dijk, Fraser Forster and Adam Matthews might not have to be sold, and potential new recruits - who have been too few and far between so far - can be brought in on the back of a promise of Champions League football. And that's a big deal for a club like Celtic, even if they are favourites in their own league by default. But why were Celtic reinstated? In 2010, Uefa decided only to fine Debrecen for fielding an ineligible player and not kick them out, because Peter Mate only played the final three minutes when the game was already 4-1 on aggregate. Yes, Debrecen said it was an accident, but surely Legia's case is exactly the same? After all, what sort of lunacy would be behind consciously fielding an ineligible player when the tie was already over? And UEFA shouldn't be in the business of punishing idiocy. And that takes us to the Sunderland case last year: how did Sunderland get away with fielding an ineligible player? The case was very much sold on the fact that the Wearsiders had come clean as soon as they had discovered the error, and thus weren't deemed as guilty as a team who sought to hide the ineligibility. But isn't that assuming that Legia would never have come forward on their own? And how long should you wait to see if they realise what they've done before you decide they deserve the full punishment? What happened with Sunderland last season is a regrettable affair, and one that should have been handled differently. The club should have had a punishment equal to the punishment handed to Legia, or Legia should have only been fined. That the two issues are deemed different sets a dangerous precedent: after all, if a criminal walks in and confesses to a major crime, are they allowed to walk off with a stinging slap on the back of their hand and a fine? This is not, of course, intended to be read as a criticism of Celtic, or indeed of UEFA. In that case, the right punishment was handed out - regardless of how much impact the player had on the game, he was ineligible. Just as you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't be a little bit ineligible, and UEFA have just shown exactly why the Premier League were wrong with the punishment they handed out to Sunderland last season. Do you agree? Share your thoughts below in the comments thread.
