RANGERS yesterday accused the SFA of using ''Draconian'' sanctions

against their manager, Graeme Souness, who has been fined a record #5000

and banned for a further two years from the dug-out as a consequence of

being spotted on television breaching the existing ban during the

premier-division game against Hearts in February.

The club's secretary/director, Campbell Ogilvie, also said that

Rangers were ''deeply concerned'' about the way the matter was handled,

a direct reference to their view that TV evidence was used.

Souness had been seen during the Scottish Television coverage of the

game shouting instructions from the tunnel at Ibrox and it was that

which was brought to the notice of the disciplinary committee. Said

Ogilvie: ''It is our opinion that it is the responsibility of the

committee to deal with reports as outlined in their Standing Orders and

not on evidence from outside agencies.''

The Ibrox club added that the only report officially referring to the

incident came from the SFA security adviser two months after the game,

despite the fact that his original report, 10 days after the match, did

not mention the incident.

''One month after the match the SFA admitted that 'the situation . . .

had been drawn to their attention from about every conceivable quarter

other than, so far at least, an official report.' They said that 'an

official report' would be available should they wish to go down that

road.''

The SFA's reply is that in normal circumstances they do not ask for

security adviser David McLaren's report, but if something untoward has

happened and a member of the SFA staff claims he has witnessed it, he is

asked to submit a report.

Although Rangers refused to answer ''yes'' or ''no'' when asked by the

SFA if the manager had been in the tunnel (''we felt it was not our

place to comment on TV evidence'') Ogilvie accepted its veracity

yesterday, however, by saying that Souness should not have been there.

But the club is convinced that, as Souness was merely giving

instructions to his coach, it was a ''trivial'' offence and did not

warrant the ''draconian'' sanctions imposed. ''It was not a crime,''

said Ogilvie. ''He merely popped his head in the tunnel. We believe it

did not warrant such severity of punishment and it alarms us that there

is no scope for appeal for officials. We can oppose the council minutes

at the next meeting, but that is the only channel open to us.''

Rangers did submit a proposal for non-players to have a right of

appeal -- as do players -- last February and that is to be voted upon at

the annual meeting on Monday. ''The SFA have written to all 78 member

clubs asking them to oppose the proposal.''

Ogilvie said that the club felt that the original ban, which was

imposed for speaking out of turn, was a different matter from extending

it for what they consider a ''trivial'' breach.

They also find the failure to report it in the security adviser's

first report puzzling. ''If it is as serious to the game as it appears,

with a two-year ban and #5000 fine, why was it not mentioned?''

He also gave it as his view that Rangers, as a high-profile club,

would naturally be under greater pressure with the presence of TV

cameras and security advisers. ''I am sure others have done this without

cameras present and I am also sure there has been a lot worse to see in

football this season than a manager giving instructions to the

physiotherapist.''

Rangers clearly feel incensed about the tough treatment from the SFA

but, apart from their argument about the admissibility of TV evidence

(in this instance it stretches credibility to imagine that the Scottish

Television revelation had no part in the scenario), they cannot say they

were not well warned about the likely punishment if the manager stepped

out of line.

Souness had been fined #2500 and banned for a year after having been

seen to breach a previous touchline ban during a Scottish Cup semi-final

against St Johnstone at Parkhead. It was stated by SFA secretary Ernie

Walker soon afterwards that succeeding breaches by any manager or

official would be treated with a doubling of fines and bans. That

general warning has been carried through, in Souness's case, to the

letter.

Meanwhile, Rangers will try to get through their motion for an appeals

procedure at the SFA and no doubt the Managers' and Coaches' Association

will want to see that innovation introduced. In that instance they are

right, of course, because every man should have the right to protest his

innocence or apply for a reduction in sentence.