by Auldheid for the Scottish Football Monitor
On these pages at least there is a mounting lack of trust that the Scottish Football Association can or will govern our game in a fair and honest manner that recognises the principle of sporting integrity as paramount.
This mistrust is equalled only by the frustration at being unable to do anything to change the attitude and action of those at the SFA (and Leagues) responsible for that governance, a frustration compounded by the reluctance of the mainstream media to focus on the very issues of trust and integrity that concern us.
Back in early 2010 Celtic supporters represented by the Celtic Trust, various Association groups and individuals felt the same frustration and found a way to make their voices heard at the SFA – by using their club as a channel of communication to articulate their concerns.
A resolution was agreed and passed to Celtic to convey to the SFA and it was heeded by the club. There is no reason in why a similar conduit cannot be used by supporters groups of all clubs.
The enormity of the task, to get the majority of trusts and associations of all clubs to support this approach and give it sufficient weight, should not be underestimated, but in the interests of amplifying our voice, it is worth the effort.
Based on that 2010 experience, and on the discussion that has taken place on TSFM we have arrived at a (now amended) resolution below under the auspices of TSFM and which has been sent to all representative club supporters groups.
We believe one of the reasons the SFA and SPL were able to mislead (or simply fail to provide leadership) was because of the lack of clarity surrounding who should take provide that leadership and what principles should have been paramount.
The SFA were as tied to the commercial impact of Rangers demise as the SPL and indeed had to be reminded by the supporters of the importance of that sporting integrity. In the aftermath of the Rangers implosion, both the SFA and Leagues on the face of it appear still too commercially oriented to act in a way that balances commercialism and sporting principles.
We have attempted to address this in the resolution below. It also contains additional points raised already on TSFM and elsewhere. It is designed to assist in the widening of accountability in the sport.
We are not wed to the draft or the language. It is there to be revised but we hope it contains enough food for thought to be acceptable to the supporters groups and the clubs.
As recently as today, the SFA has published a Fans Charter. We welcome this development, and although it does not address our specific concerns with respect to governance it is a step in the right direction (http://www.fanscharter.com/).
Some of the principles published are;
- Challenge is to make a National Fans Charter known, accepted and influential
- Getting fan involvement in drafting charter important to acceptance, influence and growing awareness.
We think our resolution is an even bigger step in the direction of those principles.
DRAFT Proposal for Representative Supporter Groups e.g. Trusts or Associations to send to their club to convey to the SFA/SPL/SFL Boards.
We [Insert Association/Trust name here] and in association with fans’ groups of other clubs, ask [Insert Club name here] to convey the following to the Scottish Football Association, SPL and SFL on our behalf.
1 We believe that the commercial viability of Scottish football at the professional level depends absolutely on the belief by supporters that sporting integrity is at the heart of all competition, and that those governing them and the rules by which they exercise governance, must hold sporting integrity as paramount above ALL other concerns. This belief can be summed up in the one word “trust” Without trust in those responsible for governing Scottish Football, commercial viability will suffer, to eventual ruin of our game.
2 There is a perception (accompanied by some dismay and anger) among football supporters throughout Scotland that those who were charged with upholding the rules of the SFA and SPL/SFL, only did so partially – and even then only because of the threat of supporter action if they did not.
3 There appears to be no distinction or order of hierarchy between those governing the game (the SFA) for whom we believe preservation of sporting integrity should be the prime purpose, and the leagues (SPL/SFL) for whom commercial aspects are (understandably) uppermost. As a result sporting integrity lost its primacy and it was left to supporters to insist on it.
4 Consequently many Scottish football supporters have lost confidence that the Scottish Football Association will fulfil their purpose of safeguarding the sport. Indeed their silence following the revelation of a 5 way agreement last summer on the future of the liquidated Glasgow Rangers has exacerbated this loss of confidence in the SFA’s ability to administer professional football in Scotland in a manner that reflects their duty of care to all aspects of the game and everyone who takes part in it.
5 Decisions and deals have been taken by the SFA, SPL, and SFL without any public scrutiny. The operations and decisions of those bodies lack transparency and they are not accountable in any recognisable form to the football supporters throughout the land, without whom there is no professional association.
6 In our view this loss of trust can only begin to be restored by the SFA publically committing itself to:
(i) The production of an unequivocal “mission” statement of purpose/intent which will state (in whatever form they may exist) that maintaining sporting integrity is and will always be their prime goal. The statement will also describe how they intend to ensure this principle is followed in their interactions with Leagues and Clubs, particularly when commercial decisions that might undermine sporting integrity are implemented by the Leagues. (e.g. In the case of TV contracts, sponsorship or any significant league reconstruction).
(ii) Further: in recognition of the inability of some individuals to provide leadership during the past year simply because of conflicts of interest, take steps to remove any such conflict, and in doing so enable the organisation and its office bearers to function unhindered.
(iii) In the interests of transparency, publish the “five point agreement” that allowed The Rangers entry into SFL and SFA, provide a supporting rationale for entering into the agreement, and confirm that the terms have been or are being complied with.
Along with other trust restoring measures (see attached Annex) these steps should mark the end of the continuing lack of trust in the authorities.
7. We appreciate that it may be the start of next season before there is any visible evidence of our concerns being addressed although the statement of purpose/intent by the SFA (i) and action at (ii) can be readily put in place – would be a welcome early development.
8. All club’s supporters groups will be watching closely for signs of progress before advising our members and our other supporters if we feel the necessary trust restoring steps are being taken and advise that they can purchase their season books for 2013/14 knowing that sporting integrity is once more absolutely paramount in Scottish football to the betterment of our game.
Signed __________________________ on behalf of
[Insert supporter trust/association name here]
Date ______________
Annex to resolution.
The following is a list of other measures that the SFA should take in order to satisfy supporters that they should be entrusted with the job of governing Scottish football.
- To increase transparency and accountability in a meaningful way – possibly via creation of an active supporter’s liaison group drawn from representative supporter groups of each club. Its remit, using an agreed consultative mechanism to generate dialogue, to hear supporters’ concerns and consider them before key decisions are made. In an industry that is totally interdependent it is folly to exclude a major stakeholder from key decision making.
- A tightening of and an annual and independent audit of the process for granting UEFA Club (FFP) and National Club licensing reporting to the representative supporter liaison group as well as other SFA members to ensure all clubs are living within their means.
- Introduction of a rule requiring all Scottish football club directors to declare any financial interest/shareholding in any club other than their own and to rule that disposition of those shares/interest should be a part of a fit and proper assessment of a person’s qualification to hold office at an association club.
- A feasibility review of Scottish refereeing to assess the potential for creating a professional service that the SFA provide to the leagues by recruiting and training referees, but where the leagues monitor and reward consistently good performances to an agreed standard. Given the sums dependent on referee decisions, the current system must change for everyone’s sake including the referees.
- A full explanation about the circumstances (including dates) surrounding the award of a UEFA Club licence to Rangers in spring/summer of 2011 when there was unpaid social tax that prime facie did not meet the conditions for deeming the granting of a licence acceptable under the UEFA FFP rules on unpaid tax (the wee tax bill).
The [Insert Club Name here] Trust/Supporters Association asks [Insert Club Name here] to convey our concerns above with their provenance to the appropriate authorities as they see fit viz:
- Football Authority in Scotland (The SFA)
- Europe (UEFA)
- Scottish Government (on the issue of accountability to supporters and proper checks and balance governance.)
That may be why he is refusing to defend the position.
To do so would be re-inforcing any suggestion that his club should shoulder the punishment. Basically if it was none of your business then why did you get involved.
dentarthurdent42 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:29
That may be why he is refusing to defend the position.
To do so would be re-inforcing any suggestion that his club should shoulder the punishment. Basically if it was none of your business then why did you get involved.
================================
I believe that was the sticking point with the 5 way agreement. The “authorities” insisted on Green accepting that any punishment dished out by LNS would fall on TRFC. However Green refused, and in the end, that point was left unresolved, which shows us how desperate the SFA/SPL/SFL were to have TRFC in at any price. Abject doesn’t even begin to describe it.
I note that TRFC fans are attempting to organise a boycott of the Daily Record via social media. They do like their boycotts, don’t they? Bless.
Anyway – why exactly do they wish to boycott that paper, which has been widely known, and with good reason, as the “Daily Ranger” for decades?
ON LNS penalties. In an ideal world there would be points deduction and penalties (back to Brenda’s burglar climbing out the window – yes I know it wasn’t you B, but it still sticks in my mind for some reason. Are you sure you’ve never climbed out of a window with a tele?). If sufficient points are talled that would mean voiding the titles, then the penalties sit more easily in so far as it is easier to say right, so you won the league, therefore got to CL etc etc. The justification is there, but the actual figure is more difficult to calculate. If the total points (none of this just the 5 cr*p by the way) only meant dropping a place from 2nd to 3rd, for instance, in some ways this makes the penalty smaller as you’re only talking about prize monies voided, yet the criminal act is just the same. Interesting.
On RFC/RIFC. I hope that the penalties (if they are justified of course) are of a punitive sum that does force CG’s hand in the club debate. Put it this way, if I was CG and the fine was say £50,000 I’d be paying it just to continue the myth.
At what point does the figure become punitive though?
smugas says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:14
I think the point the Clyde statement was making was why should we have to put up with things that the bigger clubs aren’t happy with? Clubs at our level have a hard enough time attracting punters without the season becoming meaningless half way through, which is what could happen if you vastly increase the number of teams. You could argue that it’s upto us to be competitive, but not every team will manage that. Losing 100 fans from every game in the 2nd half of a season would be unforutunate for the bigger sides – for us, it could be a killer.
If it was the same for every team in every league (i.e. we had 2 leagues of 18/20 or whatever), then I wouldn’t have so much of a problem with it, but the fact that we would get lumped with the consequences of the big teams desire for more cash is what rankles.
Cheers Mr Mendacity!
Seriously, we’re on the same page and I wasn’t having a go at Clyde or any diddy club just like my own for that matter. I think this is the crux of the point though. I am certainly not saying its up to you to be competitive – you are what you are, a part time social club (you know what I mean!) You are saying because of mid season mediocrity (what we at our club call safety!) that our level can’t cope with an 18 team league. Its exactly the same arguement as the SPL are using for theirs, just ratcheted up a notch because of their full time status and complicated by the European angle.
I genuinely don’t know the answer other than its not something that should be rushed in. Doh!
neepheid says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:39
0 0 Rate This
dentarthurdent42 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:29
That may be why he is refusing to defend the position.
To do so would be re-inforcing any suggestion that his club should shoulder the punishment. Basically if it was none of your business then why did you get involved.
================================
I believe that was the sticking point with the 5 way agreement. The “authorities” insisted on Green accepting that any punishment dished out by LNS would fall on TRFC. However Green refused, and in the end, that point was left unresolved, which shows us how desperate the SFA/SPL/SFL were to have TRFC in at any price. Abject doesn’t even begin to describe it.
===================================
Whatever LNS says about the transferability (of the SPL’s definition) of a “Club”, he has no legal power to enforce any financial sanction. He can issue fines or make an order that prize money is repaid; but he simply has no power to enforce payment.
Remember also, TRFC Ld have never been a member of the SPL and RFC plc are no longer operating as an association football club.
To enforce such a sanction, the SPL would need to raise a competent action against the party they consider to be liable. Frankly, an action against TRFC Ltd would simply be laughed out of court. An action against RFC plc, may (or may not) be valid; but would be completely pointless.
I am assuming, of course, that Mr Green has not made a legally binding agreement (as part of the 5-way agreement) to bear the financial consequences of the LNS Commission determination on RFC Ltd.
Would I not be right in saying that Lord Nimmo Smith is actually chairing an independent tribunal (os similar) on behalf of the SPL. If he does impose a fine it would effectively be them imposing it, and as such them enjoined to enforce it’s collection.
Presumably they would have recourse to the SFA to assist them in doing that. For example withholding payments until it is resolved.
If Lord Nimmo Smith rules against the old/new/”international” club there will be a lot of angry “peepil” down Govan (no change there then) perhaps to placate they could be given their own televsion series called Ally Mc BEEL…
Got my coat on already…..
Maybe just me but Green may be hoping for punitive sanctions against his newco.
I assume by now the assets of TRFC have been absorbed by Rangers International.Could a punishment that would force TRFC into administration see CG and his partners walk away with all the real estate and the cash raised from the IPO.
RIFC end up worth millions and TRFC go down the tubes,taking any creditors with them.
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 14:10
.. To enforce such a sanction, the SPL would need to raise a competent action against the party they consider to be liable. Frankly, an action against TRFC Ltd would simply be laughed out of court. An action against RFC plc, may (or may not) be valid; but would be completely pointless. ..
___________
Interesting point HirsutePursuit but would it really matter that much if TRFC Ltd refused to make payment. Presumably if a fine was imposed and they refused to pay, the alternative would have to be denial of membership or expulsion. In other words, “it’s our ba’, so if you don’t like it you can go and play somewhere else!”
No, I think the opposite. He’s hoping for a miniscule (relatively speaking) fine against oldco which newco will pay. What are the SFA/SPL going to do? Turn it down?
Club debate sorted (at least if you’re a bear)
Club debt sorted (don’t let trifling matters like tax and face painters get in the way)
Moral high ground reascended
Oh and here’s a nice wee Email about stadia criteria for next year.
Job done. Cardigan man fronts Paul kennedy’s fronts Dave Kings buyout and Charlie’s off to the sun before you can say “whaurs the deeds?”
Speaking of trust, the question being asked by many is, what legal technicality or abstraction might possibly be used as an out, or to minimise the payback. It looks like football people generally do not have any trust in either officialdom or the justice system where this club is concerned.
prohibby says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 14:46
1 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 14:10
.. To enforce such a sanction, the SPL would need to raise a competent action against the party they consider to be liable. Frankly, an action against TRFC Ltd would simply be laughed out of court. An action against RFC plc, may (or may not) be valid; but would be completely pointless. ..
___________
Interesting point HirsutePursuit but would it really matter that much if TRFC Ltd refused to make payment. Presumably if a fine was imposed and they refused to pay, the alternative would have to be denial of membership or expulsion. In other words, “it’s our ba’, so if you don’t like it you can go and play somewhere else!”
===========================
This is an SPL commission. TRFC Ltd are not (and never have been) members of the SPL.
The SPL have no power to expel TRFC Ltd from the SFL or the SFA. If, the league structures remain the same & TRFC Ltd win promotion to the SPL in 2015 and are denied entry, you can be 100% certain that they would go to the courts and win.
The SPL may as well fine FC Barcelona. There has simply never been any contractual relationship between the SPL and TRFC Ltd that would allow a sanction to be lawfully applied.
Again, I add the caveat that I am assuming TRFC Ltd are not legally bound (as part of the 5-way agreement) to bear the financial consequences of the LNS Commission determination on the misdeeds of RFC plc. {I mistakenly said RFC Ltd in my original post – oh for an edit facility!}
angus1983 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:41
7 0 Rate This
I note that TRFC fans are attempting to organise a boycott of the Daily Record via social media. They do like their boycotts, don’t they? Bless.
Anyway – why exactly do they wish to boycott that paper, which has been widely known, and with good reason, as the “Daily Ranger” for decades?
______________
leggett has a blog up today about how the record are anti rangers and in partnership with celtic
smugas says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 14:49(Edit)
No, I think the opposite. He’s hoping for a miniscule (relatively speaking) fine against oldco which newco will pay. What are the SFA/SPL going to do? Turn it down?
__________________________________________________________________________
Depends on what we mean by minuscule. Compared to the tens of millions owed in tax and NI conts, the SFA fines on the Whyte-era club were decidedly minuscule. As far as we know they haven’t been paid, and let’s be fair, had they been paid, the Old/New argument would have been a slam-dunk for CG.
The payment of football debts (and I am still trying to find out if DU have been paid yet) is another matter since it appears they agreed to pay these as a condition of their enrolment into the SFL.
However a unilateral move to pay those fines would have been a spectacular PR victory – so why not pay? is it because such an action would trigger more creditor actions?
The question of Old/New has not been answered properly by the authorities since they are terrified to put their heads above the parapet (perhaps understandably). The ostrich ploy may make them look stupid, but from CG’s point of view it is perfect.
I don’t think Green gives a toss about the argument except how it impacts on his bottom line. He has obviously taken the view that a new club is not as lucrative as the continuity club.
If his hand is forced, I’d be surprised if he did anything that cost him money.
andy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 15:10
Anyway – why exactly do they wish to boycott that paper, which has been widely known, and with good reason, as the “Daily Ranger” for decades?
______________
leggett has a blog up today about how the record are anti rangers and in partnership with celtic
===============
This shows what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket. Having got rid of any Celtic readers over many years of bias in favour of one club, they have bet the farm on retaining their Rangers readership. Any meaningful boycott would finish them off. I think they’d better just do as Leggett tells them. They don’t seem to have an alternative.
after a load of nonsense he ends with this
————————–
Finally, let me be clear as to what any reaction of any Rangers supporter should be to this news. It should most certainly, most emphatically, not involve any communication of any sort with either Daily Record editor Alan Rennie or Daily Record news editor Kevin Mansi. That would only play straight into the hands of the Rangers haters. Of whom there are many. The way to cause the maximum damage to Alan Rennie and Kevin Mansi is to quite simply stop buying the Daily Record and the Sunday Mail.
That is, if there are any Rangers fans left who still give their money to two newspapers which are commercial partner’s of Peter Lawwell’s Celtic.
There seems to be a perception that because Rangers are being liquidated there is no point in imposing fines upon them. Put short the attitude seems to be “there’s no money anyway”.
However that is really only part of the story, particularly if the direcotrs are guilty of wrongful trading.
I have lifted the following from another site and copied it here.
http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company-rescue/guides/wrongful-trading
The tests for wrongful trading actions include:
Not filing Annual Returns for the company at Companies House.
Not filing annual or audited accounts at Companies House.
Not operating the PAYE scheme correctly, failing to pay PAYE and NIC when due, building up arrears.
Not operating the VAT scheme correctly, building up arrears.
Taking excessive salaries when the company cannot afford them.
Taking credit from suppliers where there was no “reasonable prospect” of paying the creditor on time.
Willfully piling up debt.
When in a hole keeping digging!
—————————
At least some of that rings a bell.
I have lifted the following from the same page
—————————
“If wrongful trading is proven, then the directors can be made personally liable for the company’s debts from the time they knew the company was insolvent.”
angus1983 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 13:41
10 0 Rate This
I note that TRFC fans are attempting to organise a boycott of the Daily Record via social media. They do like their boycotts, don’t they? Bless.
Anyway – why exactly do they wish to boycott that paper, which has been widely known, and with good reason, as the “Daily Ranger” for decades?
—————————————————————————————————-
Maybe boycott now as the true Daily Ranger (JT) now on their payroll.
To provide some context on the outcome of SPL titles and effect that incorrectly registered players, might have, if proven:
2002/03 – RANGERS: Winning margin: Goal difference
2004/05 – RANGERS: Winning margin: 1 point
2008/09 – RANGERS: Winning margin: 4 points
2009/10 – RANGERS: Winning margin: 6 points
2010/11 – RANGERS: Winning margin: 1 point
What is clear is that it only takes a single, incorrectly registered, player to have played at least two matches in two of the seasons listed above to effectively demote RFC (IL) from the SPL winners’ rostrum. The information in the public domain as a result of Mark Daly’s 2nd program vis-à-vis list of players with side letters shows that, statistically at least, there is a good chance that incorrectly registered players could see RFC (IL) ending up with a negative points total (statistically is not quite the same as reality of course) in one or more of those seasons. The question then arises – had this information been in the public domain in or since 2003, as well as pre-Murray-sale to Whyte, what consequences would/should have arisen and what punishments would/should have been handed down?
Thanks for the clarification, HirsutePursuit.
torrejohnbhoy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 05:18
24 0 Rate This
Statement from Clyde FC.
Club Statement: League Talks
Tue, 29th Jan 2013 11:30pm
…. We trust that the meeting at Hampden will provide us with the necessary clarity to allow the club to make an informed decision. We are particularly interested in the detail behind the proposed voting arrangements and the arguments for larger leagues which, although dismissed as not being competitive enough for top clubs due to the prospect of meaningless games, is deemed suitable for eighteen other clubs …
———–
Nice to see that Clyde FC is run by men of independent mind who will not be talked down to or steamrollered by the coofs in suits.
Just had a crazy thought wrt LNS Inquiry.
Could you imagine if these 4 days had been televised, [or streamed online] ?
Confidentiality and procedural issues aside, if the SFA/SPL had decided – in the interests of transparency – to show the Inquiry live it could have gone some way to show the fans that the approach of the football administrations was changing – and for the better.
And if all interested Scottish fooball fans had the opportunity to view the arguments being discussed in detail, they may be less inclined to accept any ‘misinterpretation’ reported by the MSM.
It could also ‘take the wind out of the sails’ of TRFC fans – and before any consequence/punishment was decided.
We have televised Congressional hearings, and House of Commons – so why can’t the SFA & SPL do the same, and let the fans see what is going on behind the closed doors at Hampden for themselves ?
Just saw a pig flying by my window… 🙄
Some of the most disturbing aspects of the LNS enquiry are these:
1. The facts from the investigation into the registration issues were known by end of March 2012 and yet no enquiry was held at a time when its outcomes would have had a practical effect on matters.
2. The enquiry is being held by the SPL when player registrations are within the competence of the SFA – no reason given
3. Rangers played gamed under the auspices of both the SFA and SFL during this time frame yet no enquiries as to eliginility of players has been launched by either of these organisations
4. The previous punishment hanbded down to rangers was deemed ultra vires yet no repuinishment within the rules was ever given
5. The punishment eventually agreed upon for that mis demeanour was so diluted and twisted in timing as to be no punishment at all
6. The five way agreement does not insist upon The Rangers accepting the punishments and indeed from previous experience it appears that punishment of The rangers will only be done with their consent and prior agreement to the punishment issued
7. The failure of the SFA to tackle Rangers despite breaking the rules of association by taking them to the Court of session
8. The failure of the SFA or indeed the police or any other body in Scotland to complete any of the other enquiries still outstanding – too numerous to mention- in any timeous fashion.
I suspect LNS will find some excuse (reason) to duck the issue again.He cannot, it seems to me, find Rangers not guilty – and he cannot therefore avoid imposing significant penalties on the club once he has to give judgement. I am guessing, therefore, that he will cite the continuation of the UTTT to allow further postponsment.
All in positions of authority within and beyond football have sought to evade any punishment being applied to Rangers at all points -.for possibly a variety of reasons from maintaining civil order, to preserving the game in Scotland to maintenance of the values of the Ibrox club as part and parcel of the ideology of those in power. The main strategy that they are adopting is the old: “Justice delayed; Justice denied” one.
They want it all to go away and for us all to carry on as normal. The longer they can put this off the better.
We seem to be getting ahead of ourselves with regard to the LNS inquiry/commission.
Lest we forget that, a la the FTTT, when it comes to legal matters the lawyers like to get into the nitty gritty fine nuances of the law and that does not often lead to a common sense verdict but merely a finding being arrived at on purely technical matters.
As far as it looks no-one else had ever paid their players in the way Rangers did and it is highly likely that the footballing rules are written to cover this scenario.
I still fear it is touch and go as to what the outcome will be.
sorry
………….it is highly UNlikely that the footballing rules are written to cover this scenario.
iceman63 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:05
Some of the most disturbing aspects of the LNS enquiry are these:
…
7. The failure of the SFA to tackle Rangers despite breaking the rules of association by taking them to the Court of session…
====================
Amongst the many questionable in/actions of the SFA over the last year in particular, it is your point 7. above which IMHO is incontrovertible proof that the SFA is institutionally biased towards Rangers.
I may be wrong here and I am sure will be corrected in due course if I am.
It is my understanding that there is no defence to the charges before the LNS enquiry. Sevco refused to attend or even acknowledge the hearing and Oldco has no one other than BDO to fight it’s corner and I believe they have decided that there is no reason to do so.That would mean to me that the only legal represantitives at the hearing are the SPL’s lawyers who found enough evidence originally to allow the SPL to arrange the independant hearing in the first place. With no arguments to be heard should this hearing not be over rather quickly? As I said this is only my understanding of affairs and will probably be miles off the mark.
Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:28
0 0 Rate This
I may be wrong here and I am sure will be corrected in due course if I am.
With no arguments to be heard should this hearing not be over rather quickly? As I said this is only my understanding of affairs and will probably be miles off the mark.
=====================
I thought that the RFFF were paying for legal representation at the hearing? Since it isn’t a court of law, it is open to LNS to hear anyone he chooses to. If it was a court of law, RFFF probably wouldn’t be heard, as having no locus in the matter.
Even if nobody attends for the “defence”, I am sure LNS will take great care to put the defence case for them, just to be seen to be fair. He’s wasting his time, of course, because if the finding is perceived to be “anti- rangers”, then all hell will break loose no matter how scrupulously fair the conduct of the proceedings has been.
iceman63 says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:05
Can’t disagree with what you say, but have one abiding hope, and that is: that Lord Nimmo-Smith and his two QCs are far better men than those in the corridors of power at Hampden. That means that, not only will they come up with a just verdict, with suitable punishment/penalty should that verdict be guilty, but they also ensure that the SPL and SFA act upon it by wording their verdict in such a way that the football authorities have little, or no, option other than to abide by their findings and to act accordingly – or be seen, beyond any shadow of doubt, as the (at best) weak cowards we all consider them to be!
neepheid says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:38
1
0
Rate This
Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:28
========================================
Thanks Neepheid. I know that the RFFF made noises about paying for a lawyer but that was just recently and would give their chosen legal eagle no time to prepare. Heard no more about it and so presumed that it was all just the usual bluster.
Interesting
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-year-of-the-share-issue/#more-3519
A lttle off topic, but a simple answer to the common problem of unsavoury chants and the like, at least when a club decides to act:
“Eurosport Football
30/01/13 – 16.43
Den Bosch to punish fans after racist chants in cup match
Dutch second division soccer side Den Bosch will punish fans who shouted racist chants at United States international Jozy Altidore during the Dutch cup quarter-final against AZ Alkmaar on Tuesday.
Those responsible had a week to turn themselves in to the club, Den Bosch said in a statement on Wednesday.
“If they don’t then we will use the pictures from our security system to find out,” Den Bosch director Peter Bijvelds said.
“The perpetrators will receive a ban, while we will also investigate what the possibilities are for legal prosecution.”
During the game, won 5-0 by Alkmaar, referee Reinold Wiedemeijer twice warned the home fans via club officials to stop their racist chants and he was set to suspend the match five minutes before the interval.
The referee spoke briefly with Altidore and the Alkmaar striker said he wanted to play on.
“We were playing a good game and wanted to go on,” Altidore told reporters. “I decided not to react to this stupid behaviour and that is better, although it is sad that things like this still happen.”
Wiedemeijer suspended the match briefly early in the second half after his assistants were pelted with ice and snowballs.
The Dutch Football association (KNVB) have opened an investigation into the behaviour of the Den Bosch crowd.
Den Bosch still have a conditional fine hanging over them after crowd violence during a relegation match in May 2012 at Willem II Tilburg.”
nowoldandgrumpy
found it interesting also ,am I getting Phil right ,is he saying that the 17m boast from city investors will not materialise and CG will have to declare such .
Does this tie in with CG rumoured news to the hordes in a meeting last week that the share issue had only brought in 10m .If so that would be 5.5m from the fans and 4.5m from investors .
If I have it right and this indeed turns out to be the case then surely CGs honeymoon period will be well and truly over regards the fans
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:51
Interesting
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-year-of-the-share-issue/#more-3519
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RIFC reportedthat the RIFC share issue raised £22.2m
Spivs never tell the truth
So we can be certain that this statement didn`t mean that RIFC held £22.2m in cash immediately following the share issue
Maybe Phil is hinting that some of the Asian Spivs have not paid for their RIFC shares on the date promised?
goosygoosy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:22
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:51
Interesting
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-year-of-the-share-issue/#more-3519
==========================
Assuming correct, is Phil alluding to a required ‘going concern’ announcement ?
I.e. if backers have done a runner I presume any ‘mandatory announcement’ must be significant ?
Or is that just wishful thinking on my part ?
How Deep is the Rabbit Hole?
As we await the outcome of the Lord Nimmo Smith enquiry into breaches of SFA regulations on players registration by Rangers FC PLC (since renamed and placed into liquidation), I thought it worth taking time to consider the context in which this failure of governance has played out, or the ‘bigger picture’ if you will.
I don’t know about you but any childhood illusions that I may have had that ‘the authorities’ were there to ‘look after us’ has been well and truly shattered over the last two decades or more. In recent years almost all of our ‘most trusted’ institutions have been shown to wear no more than a wafer thin veneer of honesty and integrity. Break through that slim membrane of deceit and we are faced with the startling reality that self-serving corporate corruption is now absolutely endemic in our society.
The corporatisation of our civic life in particular has been imperceptibly slow and deliberate. While our little heads were filled with dreams of ‘change for the better’ with each new dawn and each new government, behind the scenes, men who care only for personal profit have been allowed to usurp our most coveted ideas of peace, justice, education, health, wealth and ultimately happiness. Almost all of the once venerated institutions that we entrusted with guardianship over our ‘public services’ have now been found to be morally bankrupt.
Successive governments have lied the people into wars of conquest, taking hundreds of thousands of innocent souls while our citizens slept on the streets and elected ministers claimed for second homes and £60 light bulbs.
The big banks gambled with our hard-earned money and lost the lot, then the government borrowed the same amount from the same banks (created out of thin air) and gave it back to them to gamble with some more.
The mainstream media continually distorts our view of the world and its people, distracts us with flashy advertising, sensationalist flannel, celebrity gossip and naked breasts, while fermenting discord and division among the citizenry and intruding on the lives of the innocent victims of crime.
The TV broadcasters have covered up the most heinous abuses against children perpetrated by their own staff, while we were busy being ‘programmed’ to become disengaged, disinterested and opinionated voyeurs of so called ‘reality shows’.
Hospitals now care more about bed space and cost benefit analyses than looking after the sick and the elderly, our nurses are overworked and undervalued while many doctors have become hopelessly corrupted by financial kickbacks from the pharmaceutical industry.
Education has again become more of a privilege than a right with the increased cost of hidden fees, accommodation, transport and the lack of any real, meaningful edification and purpose for our young people. Most of the good teachers have left what used to be a ‘vocation’, many of the rest are bored, disempowered and underpaid for the role with which we entrust them (developing the skills of our children).
The Police which used to provide the public with a ‘service’ has now become a ‘force’. No longer do we have policemen and policewomen, now we have ‘officers’. Each individual police force is now an separate corporate entity (look it up on Companies House) their officers obliged to generate income by issuing ever more fines and charges to balance their dwindling budgets.
So the question is, why should I expect football be any different?
Football is governed by a set of rules or customs, which serve to ensure fair competition, and allow consistent adjudication of the winner. These rules are encompassed by the principles of respect, fair play and sportsmanship and are agreed to by all participants….or so Sepp Blatter would have us believe.
During the last couple of years, particularly throughout the Rangers saga, I have become more and more disillusioned by the lack of morality and integrity that has been displayed by the Scottish football authorities. They have ignored their own rules when it suited them and applied them with full ferocity when it suited them. At times their obfuscation and outright hypocrisy has been breathtaking. Compare and contrast the SFA’s treatment of Spartans for accidently failing to put a date on a form twice, and the former Rangers, who deliberately withheld information from the SFA, failed to pay millions of pounds to their civic taxes nor their many creditors (football related and otherwise) and have brought the entire game into disrepute in this country on more than one occasion.
How can they possibly get away with it? I hear you ask.
That the SFA, the president of which is ‘heavily conflicted’ in the entire shenanigans, has fobbed this enquiry off to the SPL (who have no real jurisdiction over the breaking of SFA rules) who in turn fobbed it off the retired Lord Nimmo Smith’s ‘independent panel’ tell us what exactly? That they want justice to be done and to be seen to be done? Perhaps.
However, that the same SFA still fails to state categorically the status of the club called The Rangers currently plying their wares in SFL3, even though the answer to this simple question remains fundamental to the integrity of the sport and any hope of reconciliation among the now deeply divided supporters, doesn’t fill me with confidence in their governance of the game.
What do I expect to happen? Well my experience has taught me to expect the worst and to hope for the best. No doubt, whatever the outcome of this enquiry, that will not be the end of it. In my humble opinion, ‘interested parties’ will seek to make this a long drawn out affair (ain’t it always been so) with judgements and appeals, claim and counterclaim, appeals to the SPL, SFA, CoS, CAS, UEFA perhaps even finally ending up on Sepp Blatter’s Louis XIV style oak desk in Zurich. Where we can expect………………………..?
Michael Ellner noted, “Just look at us. Everything is backwards, everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, psychiatrists destroy minds, scientists destroy truth, major media destroys information, religions destroy spirituality and governments destroy freedom.”
Will we have to add ‘and the SFA destroyed Scottish football’?
I hope not but I am beginning to expect so.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
——————
Fantastic post.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
Wonderful piece of writing.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
11 0 Rate This
How Deep is the Rabbit Hole?
———————-
Savagely brutal and strikingly well written. Many thanks for delivering one of must read posts of the month.
It reminds me of a song by The Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy – “Satanic Reverses”
goosygoosy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:22
0 0 Rate This
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 16:51
Interesting
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-year-of-the-share-issue/#more-3519
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RIFC reportedthat the RIFC share issue raised £22.2m
==============================
If Phil Mac’s article is factually based, then Green may be in big trouble on two fronts.
Firstly, he needed that money to keep the ship afloat, and if he didn’t get it, or most of it, then I can see RIFC heading down the tubes PDQ.
Secondly, as PMac points out, there are rules about such matters, and as a potential investor (that’s a joke, by the way!), I’m entitled to know if the company did not in fact raise £22.2m. I might have bought shares this week thinking that I was piling into a successful flotation behind a load of smart Asian investors, and then suddenly find that I’m standing alone, waving my share certificate, with only a few thousand Bears around me. Now there’s a thought to bring the nightmares on. Anyway, even Green must know he has to come clean on this (if it’s true) very soon, or he could be in real trouble with authorities who couldn’t care less about any reaction from the WATP brigade. Now that would be a novelty.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
Humbs.., an absolutely stunningly accurate & brilliant post…
If anyone reading is involved within in the various “organisations” mentioned… TAKE NOTE. !!
..nuff sed
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
That piece deserves a far wider circulation than this forum can offer. A profound insight into the ills and evils of modern society generally, and not just our particular small corner of that great cesspit. Thank you.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:
Humble Pie,
That was one of the best summations of our modern world that I have read in a long time, putting those so called journalists in the MSM, on both sides of the border, to shame. A sad indictment of how the spivs have taken over from men of integrity! Perhaps AT could highlight it in one of his blogs!
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
Excellent writing, excellent points clearly stated.
Lovely stuff, HP.
Humble Pie
To contemplate writing a post after this brilliant piece is the equivalent of being asked to sing after Andrea Bocelli.
From KDS
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/img2440z.jpg/
When will the apology be demanded… 🙄
BBC Sportsound @bbcsportsound
Rangers refused arbitration move: Rangers newco is refused permission to continue an arbitration process establi… http://bbc.in/TbVsp2
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Gratifying that a non SFA panel is able to abide by the rules in relation to CG’s crazy attempt to suggest that TUPE legislation doesn’t apply to him or Ally. I seem to remember they claimed they tried to meet their obligations by trying to phone a few players or having a wee chat in a dressing room!
The (fairly predictable, though I’m not a lawyer), failure by Sevco to treat Oldco employees as serfs recalls a golden moment in Simon Schama’s History of Britain. Commenting on the sad loss of life in the Black Death of 1348-50, he tells us that not all the consequences were bad: indeed, agricultural wages doubled, due to supply and demand. “And if your lord and master wouldn’t pay up”, characteristic wobble of the head, “you were free to find a new one. With a firmer grip on the new economic reality”.
Who is this arbitration panel, I demand to know.
Well said Humbie.
A thought ! I tried to pose this question a day of so ago but it got lost somewhere and apparently not in moderation. The issue of insurance claims by Oldco for injured players. It was suggested that Oldco would have put in a claim for the basic salary plus EBT earnings. If that is the case then
1) Were the EBT’s not a one off annual payment rather than monthly and only issued on request?
2) Were EBT’s not a loan in the strict sense of the scheme and not salary ?
3) If a loan were they manipulating payroll figures to fleece the insurance company
4) Surely if the insurance company has paid out on what was technically a loan, should they not be seeking recompense because it is not salary?
5) If HMRC win their appeal case should Insurance companies not be looking at what they paid out and why ?
Anyone blow this out of the water ?
Humble Pie
How Deep is the Rabbit Hole?
Chapeau Sir !!! ……… Big Time !
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 20:30
BBC Sportsound @bbcsportsound
Rangers refused arbitration move: Rangers newco is refused permission to continue an arbitration process establi… http://bbc.in/TbVsp2
====================================================
Must be me.
Did CG not claim last week that RIFC had won this case?.
P.S. The Daily Record agreed with him.No wonder Leggo calls for a boycott!
Humble Pie
How Deep is the Rabbit Hole?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Not deep enough to fill the praise your post deserves
Absolutely magnificent HP
No wonder there`s a sauce named after you
torrejohnbhoy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 21:58
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 20:30
BBC Sportsound @bbcsportsound
Rangers refused arbitration move: Rangers newco is refused permission to continue an arbitration process establi… http://bbc.in/TbVsp2
====================================================
Must be me.
Did CG not claim last week that RIFC had won this case?.
P.S. The Daily Record agreed with him.No wonder Leggo calls for a boycott!
======================================================
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/rangers-well-keep-fighting-for-compensation-for-oldco-players.1359577114?_=e74f0f1f0934fe0ab10af864e8ea13c69913a897
Seems that the arbitration panel has correctly ruled that OldGers and NewGers are different clubs.
I wonder how this will go down with the LNS commission?
StevieBC says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 20:16
===========================
This probably about the only tweet that can be shown
Ulubatli Souness @sounessg
I demand an apology from Berwick Rangers over their agenda driven slight on our club.
I know it’s only rules; but:
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2012-13/SFA_HANDBOOK_53-136_Articles_of_Association.pdf
http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/sport/football/rangers-well-keep-fighting-for-compensation-for-oldco-players.1359577114?_=e74f0f1f0934fe0ab10af864e8ea13c69913a897
Anyone care to speculate how it may be possible for “a further Notice to Refer” to be in accordance with the regulations?
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 22:38
0 0 Rate This
I know it’s only rules; but:
…
Anyone care to speculate how it may be possible for “a further Notice to Refer” to be in accordance with the regulations?
================
Only messin!
Of course they have the right to give Notice to Refer. The NewGers were not involved in the arbitration case that has just been decided. It was the old club (the original Rangers FC) that started that case.
For the new club to get involved, they have to raise a case of their own.
Guys, I am honestly humbled by your kind comments but more than that I am comforted by being in the company of so many like-minded souls. This is one of the sites where I come to get a regular dose of integrity, one of my five a day.
David Longmuir gives an exclusive to TRFC TV on his thoughts on reconstruction. He lets his neutrality slip with his comments. Also why is he talking exclusively to TRFC TV. No doubt most SFL club supporters subscribe to this channel no?
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3261-longmuir-on-reconstruction#.UQlnifg22Gw.twitter Longmuir
Apparently, SFL clubs are to propose reconstruction to four leagues of 12, 12, 10, 10 thereby introducing two more ‘professional’ clubs to the league structure. This idea is even worse than the ridiculous SPL proposal. There are already too many clubs struggling to get enough fans through the gates.
Two leagues of sixteen would be plenty. We could call them Scottish League Division 1 and Scottish League Division 2.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
You have brilliantly described the loss of ethics. The word ethics is from “ethos” in Greek meaning spirit. What has been lost is the sense or awareness of the spirit that binds one human being to another and on which a civil society is based.
Ethics get lost when ego takes over. Ego thinks only of self, sees only self and others as ego fodder. It is a blind man, hoarding in the dark.
But my experience of the grand design of life tells me that it is self correcting in that the consequences of forgetting create the painful circumstances where what we have forgotten is restored (maybe only until we forget the next time from a higher awareness level than last but restored nevertheless, making a platform for a new generation to stand and grow on in their own forgetful way.
We will win this ethical battle on all the society stages you described.
Gerry Rafferty “got it right”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vGMgov_S5s
Good post humble pie. We are in an era of poor leaders whether its football, business, innovation or politics.
We had our Bankers gambling with the countries cash and when they messed up its the middle class down to the poor who have to bail them out. We gave them a new balance sheet and they kept it. Lets remember that every pound, shilling and pence still exists somewhere.
We have politicians who can find cash for war and defence but plead poverty for anything else. We had young people looting TVs from our shops and rightly punished whilst politicians purchased Tvs on expenses.
The Americans got rid of the shuttle before they had a replacement, we got rid of Concorde and we even got rid of the Harrier whilst purchasing aircraft carriers that we had no planes for.
Politicians are the new religious leaders trying to control and frighten the population with regards any major decision, for example, independence or Europe rather than put together a positive case for their views. They announce a delay in their 3p petrol price rise and tell us how much they are saving us. They are the sole reason petrol is expensive.
As for Scottish football, we have imported a cricket boss and a failed Norwich boss to run our game. These guys promised transparency but failed to deliver. In fact they have been drawing up agreements that are anything but transparent. They have been fundamental in the encouraged confusion of newco and oldco and tried to pretend that the game would cease to exist if TRFC were not in the SPL.
Yes we live in strange times, where are the good decent upstanding leaders of our communities ?
Auldheid sir, I salute your indefatigability (and your choice of tune). We need more like you prepared to stand up for what we know is right. As Gandhi said, “even if you’re in a minority of one, the truth is still the truth”
Humble Pie, you have given us quite a few clues in the past that yours is a more than capable brain. But none of us, I would bet, had any idea that ‘Rabbit Hole’ was on it’s way.
But Wow! Have you not just given us a truly outstanding piece of work.
I think it’s awesome!
Very well done! And thank you so much.
I am quite sure this piece will be for all of us, not only a source of inspiration but also a much needed boost to confidence, as well as a timely encouragement to continue the good fight till integrity is
re-established in Scottish Football.
May your words be read throughout the land.
newshedenvy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 23:54
————————
Two comments on Longmuirs interview, the 12 12 10 10 set up would allow TRFC to celebrate a league win and they could then claim to be promoted into the top 10 group, with them being guaranteed entry into the bottom 12 the following year.
Also the hint that he would like 12 12 18 delayed for a year, that would again allow TRFC to win the league and get promotion, however that would also ensure them into the second group of 12 the following season.
So not for the benefit of your favourite team then?
newshedenvy says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 23:54
0 8 Rate This
Apparently, SFL clubs are to propose reconstruction to four leagues of 12, 12, 10, 10 thereby introducing two more ‘professional’ clubs to the league structure. This idea is even worse than the ridiculous SPL proposal. There are already too many clubs struggling to get enough fans through the gates.
Two leagues of sixteen would be plenty. We could call them Scottish League Division 1 and Scottish League Division 2.
———
To me, saying that there are too many clubs is like stating there are too many small towns and local communities. Even wee towns are still afforded roads, schools and other opportunities. I don’t subscribe to the theory that their sporting aspirations should be denied merely because they are not Dundee, Aberdeen or Edinburgh. I’d say there’s probably more old-fashioned football ideals among the wee clubs than in many of the business ventures at the top end. Regardless of whether 12-12-10-10 has any merit as a structure, it’s certainly encouraging to see one organization in Scotland look out for the wee clubs and not just continually pamper to the elite.
http://i.imgur.com/uu4Yfzg.jpg
The above was courtesy of Night Of the Living Rednecks on KDS.
Humble Pie says:
Wednesday, January 30, 2013 at 17:36
“””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
Tremendous post. Worthy of censorship. Welcome aboard the good ship SS Cynic. Glad to see the post has started to do the rounds.
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, January 31, 2013 at 06:46
__________________________________
Good morning Danish!
It is very stormy in my little part of pastryland this morning, that short walk from the car helped clear out any fluff that was stuck between those 2 satellite dishes of mine that masquerade as ears and got me thinking…
I agree with you on this one, it is a subject I have thought about for a long time. Like you, I also hate this “too many teams” statement, when really it means “too many smaller teams than the one I support”. But I also see the logic behind not diluting the current fan base too much so we must do more to increase the fan base and maybe community teams is one of those avenues.
But it got me thinking about when I was younger and first playing football, as a player, you only ever thought about the team you were playing in and doing your best for that team. The dream of course, was to play for the team you supported and score the winning goal in The Scottish Cup at Hampden (the real one).
So why was that? Why did we not dream of scoring at Hamden for Harmony Row or The Ants?
Maybe for the same reason lots of kids (including my own) have a Barcelona shirt along with that of the team they go to watch every week, we all want to be the best, play with the best, watch the best and ultimately see our team compete with the best. That will never change and it should not but without a proper pyramid footballing infrastructure that supports the development of many players (and teams) at various skill levels, eventually the best teams would be pretty mediocre.
Take Gary Hooper, a good example. Discarded by Spurs he dropped to lower leagues including Sunday League and eventually worked his way up, now he is being courted by teams playing in the EPL. We need teams and leagues at all levels.
While it is true that we could have 1000 teams playing football, they should all fit into a system that matches the quality of each team, this is the principal of the league system. Unfortunately that system does not currently work effectively and never will as long as we run the clubs and system as a business, only when that mindset changes, can we honestly look at increasing the number of top level teams.
” In 1953, President Eisenhower nominated GM’s CEO Charles “Engine Charlie” Wilson to be Secretary of Defense. During the hearings, when asked if as secretary of defense he could make a decision adverse to the interests of General Motors, Wilson answered affirmatively but added that he could not conceive of such a situation “because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa.” (Wikipedia)
“What’s good for General Motors is good for America” (paraphrasing Charles Wilson)
“What’s good for Rangers is good for Scottish Football” (paraphrasing David Longmuir)
David Longmuir, on TRFC TV, explaining the latest ‘fix’ and how he totally understands Gers fans.
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3261-longmuir-on-reconstruction
“So if the time is now then we have to play our part.
I will try to – steer our clubs – to a sensible solution that’s good for the game.
Perhaps there is a way of phasing this in and we will discuss that too.
“I can understand Rangers fans being unhappy with the prospect that Rangers could win SFL 3
and not be promoted.
“I am – surrounded by Rangers fans at home – so I know their feelings.
I know where they are coming from – but if we can put something sensible together then hopefully that issue will not arise.”
I wonder how long we will have to wait before David Longmuir ( or SR or ND) says,
‘I completely understand how the vast majority of Scottish fans feel about New Rangers.’