A Roman God, a New Year, a Paycheque a Sports Jacket and that thing called football!

Guest Blog by Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan

Good Morning,

Can I start by wishing everyone who reads this blog a happy, peaceful and prosperous 2013.

In a few weeks’ time a couple of working class lads from Walsall and Wolverhampton will receive a reasonably sizeable cheque through the door. The money will be entirely expected and meticulously accounted for. A similar cheque will have arrived last year, and both will expect the process to repeat itself automatically this time next year.

The sum concerned will be sizeable—many thousands of pounds— and does not come from any insurance policy, institutional pension plan or other type of financially regulated investment. Further, in order to receive a similar amount next year, the two men will have to do precisely nothing! The money will simply come automatically!

Magic eh?

Well no—not really.

You see Neville and James ( for that is what they are called ) earned this money many years ago by completing a job of work, and they have been getting paid for the same job year in and year out ever since!

Except that you don’t know them as Nevile and James! No you may know them as Jim Lea ( who? you may say ) and Noddy Holder (aka Neville John Holder MBE ) the co author of that perennial Christmas classic “Merry Christmas Everybody”.

These two clever boys came up with their “pension” song by making a Christmas cracker out of tunes they had written and discarded in the past. Lea’s chords from years before provided the tune for the verses, while an earlier rejected composition of Holder’s became the chorus, and in this way it was the past work of both men that secured their future—even back in 1974!

As the song is played to death on Radio, in clubs, in pubs, in shops, on TV and everywhere else at Christmas, the New Year always brings a cheque of sizeable proportions for Messrs Lea and Holder.

However there were four members of Slade and not two, I hear you say!

Whilst that is correct, not every member of the band shares the royalties for ever more, with only the actual composers receiving the big bucks year on year — unless of course the gang of four agreed otherwise between themselves – as sometimes happens—but often doesn’t — in bands and other artistic collaborations!

And that, dear reader, neatly takes me to the current topic of the day on this here planet!!! The reconstruction, reorganisation and profit sharing in Scottish Fitba!!!

It strikes me that the SFA, SPL and SFL all want to come up with their own version of the pension song or product — Something that will make future performances interesting and lucrative for ever more without anyone having to put in too much effort in future.

Of course it is recognised that the clubs at the top of the financial tree have the greatest influence in composing this song, but there is an insistence, and so a desire, that even the minor band members should get a greater share of the royalties going forward.

All very honourable. All very interesting,— and all completely missing the point in my humble opinion.

Now, there is a clamour from the fans that the proposed structure of 12 – 12—18 is flawed and leads to daft consequences when worked through. We want 14- 14 – 14 say many fans or 16- 14 – 12 or some other composition altogether!!

Oh—and the fans want the chairmen to consult the fans before making a decision on anything, and they want Messrs Regan, Doncaster and Longmuir to stop telling fans that they need to be “educated” about what is best for the game!

All very noble! All very interesting, —and all completely missing the point once again in my humble opinion.

Jock Stein once famously proclaimed that football is nothing without fans— almost everyone knows that. Yet how many actually stop to consider those words and what he meant.

There is nothing without fans!!!!!

How many times have you heard commentators, journalists, ex players and even fans refer to the fans as “the paying customers” ? This phrase has made its way into common parlance and is rarely- if ever- challenged or qualified.

So I will ask—is that what the football fan is prepared to be called—“The paying customer”?— is that it?

Are you, dear reader, a paying customer?—and nothing more?

Or is a football fan a “member of a club”—a “ supporter of a club” or even “part” of a club?

If you are just a paying customer does that mean that anyone who turns up at a ground and pays over some money on a solitary Saturday afternoon is to be seen in exactly the same way as the guy or gal who has been a season ticket holder for years and years?

Does the person who sits behind their keyboard and blogs and comments for Britain on matters football—but who never goes to a game or who does not spend a penny following or promoting their proclaimed club – have the same strength of voice as that season ticket holder—or even the guy who stumps up the cash to view a game once a year?

Not a chance in my view!!!

Equally though, if you have a Football Club Board who do nothing whatsoever to attract people into the club apart from throw out a team on a Saturday Afternoon with mixed degrees of success – are they worthy of support from the “paying customer” or anyone else for that matter?

In my view the answer is no— a very loud —NO!!!

If we are going to reconstruct Scottish Football then I am sorry you have to start by looking at exactly what it is you are trying to reconstruct—reconstruct being the appropriate and important word.

The job is to reconstruct—and regain— viable and important interest in Scottish Football and the teams—or clubs—who play in Scotland.

League reconstruction is only part of that process, and the redistribution of television money is only part of the league reconstruction part of the process!

The month of January is named after the Roman God Janus—who had two heads— one for looking forward and one for looking back. Janus was the God of transition—The God of change— and it was always clear that you could only have change going forward by casting an eye back to the past—to see what you wanted to keep from that past, to see what you wanted to jettison, and to see what could be learned from past times.

In the past , football crowds were far larger, revenues proportionally bigger and closer together when comparing clubs, and consequently it might be said that the football product was much better on the park—with various teams outwith the two big Glasgow teams—please do remember the Jags come from Glasgow too and that in the past Clyde and Third Lanark were also natives— competing for and winning trophies.

Nowadays, football clubs have lower attendances—unless of course one of the smaller teams ( I refuse to use the derogatory and well hackneyed phrase that is banded about re smaller Scottish Clubs ) gets to a Hampden final when low and behold anything between 20,000 and 30,000 lost football fans appear as if out of nowhere!!

And hey—if you happen to be a fan of the Ibrox Club or the Parkhead club—don’t go getting too comfy in your seat— where the hell were some of you before Seville or Manchester?

The point is that football is like politics — it all means nothing without participation— real participation. That means fans buying into, spending money on and in, and promoting their club at every opportunity. It means the clubs and their boards using every trick in the book to generate income away from the football pitch. A “Club” in law is no more than a collection of people coming together for a common purpose and a football club is perfectly capable of having genuine “club activity” which does not primarily involve football.

Where are the regional and local initiatives to promote the social aspects of football clubs? Do the facilities for women need upgrading to help persuade more mothers and girlfriends to come to the ground whether that be for games or other events or functions?

In a time of never ending football memorabilia, how many people went to their club shop this Christmas and bought merchandise for family and friends – even if the same family and friends support another club? How many people invite visitors or non football supporting friends to a game on a Saturday—even if it is only every now and then?

In short what do you do to support your club—and what can that club do to get more and more people involved in the club itself or its functions? And what functions could that club become involved in using existing facilities and resources?

Is there a kids club? A weekday crèche? Are there facilities that are not used six days a week which could be used for community groups who have nothing to do with football—or even sport? Should the club hold daft things like race nights, bingo nights— functions that may well attract people who would no more likely go to a football ground on a Saturday than suddenly develop Noddy Holder style sideburns?

How many people take an old shirt or T shirt or towel bearing the club colours on holiday to give to a waiter or a stranger or someone who has no connection with the club—with a view to creating a fan or someone with a bit of interest who might just one day become a season ticket holder or even an occasional “paying customer” at the door?

Further, are there folk out there who could actually go along and volunteer services for their club for nothing and so save the club from spending hard earned cash out of necessity? Could you be a gateman? Could you perform a task for your club on a voluntary basis?

You may think that a daft or utopian ideology but sports clubs traditionally always had a social purpose as well as a sporting one. Clubs were a focus for a locality, or a workforce, or a congregation or just about any group of people who want to come together for sporting or social purposes. Further those who volunteered their services for the common good often got great local recognition for their dedication and spirit.

Ask any Dons fan about Teddy Scott—who although a paid employee was Aberdeen FC through and through—pay or no pay!

The clamour for change in football should not be blinded by the words of the three official bodies and the more vocal chairmen of the clubs that want to play in the league – or not as the case may be. Change should come from the fans of the game up—but to be honest until the fans—or should I say the mysteriously disappearing armchair fans—actually come out and support their clubs a lot more often, then we are not going to see valuable and worthwhile change no matter what the league set up or composition.

On Saturday, I listened to Off The Ball on Radio Scotland where the contributors waxed lyrical about journalists of yesteryear who made the game and broadcasting interesting. Jimmy Sanderson, Bob Crampsey et al – they all got a mention.

The discussion sparked a memory for me when they came to discuss the legend that is Arthur Montford—famously referred to by Jock Stein as “ The Sportsjacket” with reference to his never ending collection of blazers.

Arthur was a journalist—both print and broadcast— with the BBC and then STV since 1957 in terms of television—and with the Evening Times and other papers in terms of the written press.

A lifelong follower of Morton and a keen Golfer and golf commentator, Arthur has been retired this many a year although he can still be seen walking up and down Byres Road occasionally. At one time he became Chairman of Morton and he used to write in the club programme on a regular basis—possibly still does! He is by all accounts a nice man—a good man— sufficiently good and of sufficient standing to have been elected as the Rector of Glasgow University in 1975—beating George Brown and Janey Buchan ( if you don’t know who they were then look them up! )— in the process.

He was the first sports journalist to hold that post.

In his Rectorial address Arthur went to great lengths to highlight what can be achieved if volunteers— individuals— club members if you like— put their shoulders to the wheel and strive for change, for a common purpose, and for society in general. He stressed that such communal effort brought about change—brought about improvement— brought about advancement in numerous situations. This was only three years after Jimmy Reid had used the same platform to denounce the “Rat Race” declaring “ I am not a rat!”.

For football to change in this country we need action—action by the fans—action by the clubs—action by the journalists and commentators to highlight initiatives and opportunities for our football clubs to play a greater part in our communities— from kids to pensioners, from toddlers to mums and dads, local residents to occasional visitors.

That is the way to make your voice heard and to make that voice count. That is the way to bring about the change that you want for the future.

There were four members of Slade—but only two wrote the words and music to Merry Christmas Everybody and it is they who earned the right to the pension royalties for ever more. The other two bit part players did not!

Janus was meant to oversee transition to the future by casting an eye on the past and learning from what went before—as should we when considering Scottish Football—and in that spirit you will find a link to the whole of Arthur Montford’s address below— there are things worth learning there.

Here’s to the future—-NOW—– its only just begun!

http://www.universitystory.gla.ac.uk/documents/UGSD00029.pdf

522 Comments so far

bluPosted on9:44 am - Jan 18, 2013

Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia) says:
Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 16:45
blu says:
Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 15:52

Why bother with hypothetical remote possibilities when we can talk about Rangers having 3 players sent off at Celtic Park for misdemeanors including manhandling the referee and their manager involved in an unsavoury spat with his Celtic counterpart and the only individual the SFA chose to punish was the Celtic manager
================================================================
Living up to your self-mocking name I’m afraid. No doubt the player who pulled the ref’s arm should have been severely dealt with but Neil Lennon shouldn’t have been suckered by cheeky chappie Ally. What was whispered in his ear may have been of Materazzi/Zidane proportions but his response was very aggressive and had to be dealt with. I don’t think that Celtic or Neil Lennon made any complaint to the SFA/SPL about what McCoist said? The sending offs were dealt with in the standard way I assume.

Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.

View Comment

bluPosted on9:48 am - Jan 18, 2013

Kilgore Trout says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:38
1 0 i
Rate This

TSFM
I agree that Mr Grossman was in both shows but the ‘deliberated, cogitated and digested’ catchphrase was from his Masterchef incarnation.
Perhaps it’s best if we move on from this before someone claims that they are both, in fact, the same programme!

=======================================================
An interest in Kurt Vonnegut and TV cookery shows – intriguing!

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on9:52 am - Jan 18, 2013

blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44

———————————————–

history suggests you are wrong

bawsmanPosted on9:52 am - Jan 18, 2013

“blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

We (Celtic) have NEVER been treated the same as the old (or new) Rangers.

When the bank was for closing Celtic down my abiding memories were of the MSM baying for blood, countdown to closure, hearses at the stadium etc. it was a great laugh.

It is refreshing to see outside bodies involved, HMRC, BDO, Lord Nimmo Smith, let’s hope justice will be seen to be done.

Interesting times ahead.

shield2012Posted on9:55 am - Jan 18, 2013

wottpi says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:41

Can’t argue with that wottpi. That is indeed a more suitable response.

Smiths true character should come out soon with him being on the board. My fingers are crossed that he has the power and urge to reign in CG at times.

CG an “opportunistic businessman who woul sell his granny”???…………..agreed. I can’t help but think there are a few passed away Rangers ‘Legends’ who are turning in their grave just now.

goosyPosted on10:01 am - Jan 18, 2013

Following the fund raising the true blue Directors were shunted from the TRFC Board to the RIFC Board leaving 3 Spivs in charge of a football club
Why?
Why move the only guys with a genuine interest in the fortunes of TRFC away from Director level football decisions?
In a normal business organisation we have a group holding co (RIFC) holding the purse strings and firmly calling the shots on all major financial decisions by the subsidiary co
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I found this a bit odd at first
Then the penny dropped
This is a Spiv business created by Spivs to be milked for money.
It has no other purpose.
The TRFC Board has 3 Spivs and nobody else. This means it can do what it likes providing RIFC sets it up with the authority to do so. This authority was probably given at the first RIFC Board Meeting i.e. control over ST income and expenditure

The Gullible can look forward to all sorts of wheezes ostensibly aimed at benefitting TRFC but in reality designed to siphon money to other Spiv cos

TRFC are doomed to years of poverty irrespective of how many STs they sell
They are in the hands of Spivs for the foreseeable future

shield2012Posted on10:02 am - Jan 18, 2013

bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:52
0 0 i
Rate This
“blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.”

Thats funny, my memories of last year are “the MSM baying for blood, countdown to closure, hearses at the stadium etc”………….well along they lines anyway.

As for it being “a great laugh”…………yes, I’d say most of my friends (outwith Rangers) had a great laugh!

Very little difference in my opinion apart from circumstances and a natural difference due to 20 years having past!

bawsmanPosted on10:26 am - Jan 18, 2013

shield2012 says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:02
0 0 i
Rate This
bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:52
0 0 i
Rate This
“blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

HUGE difference

There was no collusion between the governing bodies to rescue Celtic by any means necessary,

No talks of armageddon, re-structuring etc.

We would have been going the way of Airdrie, Gretna etc……………As would have been right and proper.

bluPosted on10:29 am - Jan 18, 2013

bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:52
0 0 i
Rate This

=======================================================
Bawsman, From my viewing of scottish football over many years Celtic and Rangers have been treated in exactly the same way. Of course the recent re-writing of rules and moving of heaven and earth to accommodate and sustain football at Ibrox is unique.

However, on the matter of financial meltdown there there are similarities – despite all evidence pointing clearly to the fact that all Rangers woes are down to mismanagement on the grand scale a great number of their fans believe (see shields/theglen) that there has been a conspiracy against them by all and sundry. Completely misunderstanding the BBC Madmen montage of McCoist always landing on his feet, they’d have that as their equivalent of (The Record’s?) hearse for Celtic. Was it not the bank that ultimately did for David Murray’s involvement in Rangers? IIRC Celtic were poorly managed by the old families and there were protests from some Celtic fans (I don’t think this was unanimous, fans tend to follow, not lead) who found allies in a few businessmen (Brian Dempsey?) that luckily (from your point of view) led to Fergus McCann.

Your final points take us on from the speculation and like you and theglen I hope that those bodies will do their jobs and whatever the consequences arise from their findings are applied without fear or favour.

bawsmanPosted on10:30 am - Jan 18, 2013

I have made a cheeky bid for Lance Armstrong’s history, I look good in yellow 🙂

Always fancied a Tour de France title or 7

You lot can call me ‘The Lance’ from this point. 🙂

SeniorPosted on10:33 am - Jan 18, 2013

the glen

I appreciate your detailed and calm response.
A couple of things and I promise,like yourself, that I will call a halt at that.
Already we know that there were six players in receipt of EBTs and for over a period a ten years This is a fact. These EBTs were paid under the table and were not declared to SFA, in other words it’s called cheating. You do not have to wait on LNS to know that titles were won by cheating over those ten years..

”I bet a fiver you never once went on RM or any of the other poisonous sites emanating from Ibrox and chastise them the way you have come on here and done so – if you have I await the evidence.”

With regard to the above, you say your are a ‘The Rangers’ supporter All I say here is that your argument would carry a little more credence, if you, at any stage, took issue with any of the poisonous stuff that emanates from those sites – whether they listen to you or not is not the point – a bit like chastising other peoples children while allowing your own do what they like.

“.I have no intention of signing up to RM (are you signed up there?)”

In general your post is a pretty good response to my take on your post, but the above snide remark among a few others undoes IMO any of the well thought out points you bring to the argument.

shield2012Posted on10:37 am - Jan 18, 2013

bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:26
0 0 i
Rate This
shield2012 says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:02
0 0 i
Rate This
bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:52
0 0 i
Rate This
“blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.”

I’m saying that the difference, if any, would be down to circumstance and a change in the times. I believe if it happened to celtic in 2012 then they would be treated the exact same.

I guess we’ll never know for sure.

AuldheidPosted on10:38 am - Jan 18, 2013

.blu says:

Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44

When I was on a Disciplinary Panel for an amatuer league the protection of referees was paramount.

I was therefore astounded when after delaying the hearing Calum Murray spoke out in defense of Diouf/Bougherra. I wondered what other referees thought of him being asked to do so and that he did. The handling of that whole episode stinks.

My conclusion was that protecting Rangers was of the highest prioriy at the SFA. No surprise that this policy continued after they were liquidated.

Its all about the money, always was.

bluPosted on10:44 am - Jan 18, 2013

Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:38
1 0 i
Rate This

====================================
Auldheid, agree that the ref manhandlers should have been subject to severe disciplinary sanctions and that it’s all about the money.

mercdocPosted on10:46 am - Jan 18, 2013

from the BBC website

Former Celtic player and coach Sean Fallon has died at the age of 90.

Fallon made more than 250 appearances for Celtic during the 1950s and was assistant manager to Jock Stein between 1962 and 1975, helping the club to win the 1967 European Cup.

shield2012Posted on10:48 am - Jan 18, 2013

Auldheid (@Auldheid) says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:38
1 0 i
Rate This
.blu says:

Its all about the money, always was

———————————————-

If it’s all about the money, does that mean you agree that Celtic would have been treated the same?

torrejohnbhoyPosted on10:49 am - Jan 18, 2013

Maybe off topic
Sadly,Sean Fallon has passed away.

RIP..

AuldheidPosted on11:14 am - Jan 18, 2013

jonnyod says:

Friday, January 18, 2013 at 07:17

The way that human beings do wrong, sometimes on a massive scale, is to persuade themselves that what they are doing is right. Often the law is used to justify such wrongdoing,particularly the written words used to define the law whilst the spirit behind those words is ignored.

There is a mindset that is scrupulous in how it addresses issues and one that looks beyond the word to the spirit or ethics at play. The former argues that if the words do not describe the wrongdoing in certain terms, then no wrong took place. The latter says wrong is wrong if it breaches the morality the words were intended to uphold, but failed under scrupulous scrutiny.

An interesting aspect of this whole business has been the battle between both mindsets with ethics and morality as the prize.

It goes much wider than football and influences the kind of society we all have to live in.

Danish PastryPosted on11:26 am - Jan 18, 2013

MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2013
Guest Blog by Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan

“You may think that a daft or utopian ideology but sports clubs traditionally always had a social purpose as well as a sporting one. Clubs were a focus for a locality, or a workforce, or a congregation or just about any group of people who want to come together for sporting or social purposes. Further those who volunteered their services for the common good often got great local recognition for their dedication and spirit.”
———

Neither daft nor utopian.

Moving slightly away from football, this volunteer spirit has particularly impressed me here in Scandinavia over the years. I’ve had more experience of this in tennis than football, since it’s been the sport I’ve been active in, but the principle is the same. When the Swedes were dominating world tennis special thanks was always paid to the army of volunteers who helped construct that success. Putting on tournaments, even small ones is a huge effort. There was a massive grassroots foundation, and that only increasd in the years following Borg. Everyone in the chain of volunteers felt connected to Borg, Edberg, Wilander, and the many others they produced.

Even in my tiny town there is a strong volunteer engagement element in the local sports community. Now, fact is, people do congregate in clubs for social reasons here. Perhaps it’s a safe and easy way to be sociable if your culture is more reserved by nature. But sports clubs are big social centres here and are hugely important to local life. That may be why there is such an effort put into building public facilities. Even the smallest towns here have decent red clay tennis courts, decent football facilities and many have big multi-purpose indoor facilities. Anyway, I digress.

The social purpose of football in Glasgow seemed lost to me during the period beginning with the mass import of players. The sudden transformation in Glasgow from producing (or poaching!) the best Scottish talent to importing players from outwith the country seemed not only short-termist but also a betrayal of its own support base and community. It’s a bit of a soapbox subject for me, but in a city with serious social issues I used to wonder how many training camps for kids, how many youth teams, or even scouts could be sponsored by the big clubs for the huge wages paid to a few stars. And now we know that one of the big clubs was spending money on players as though there was no tomorrow it seems to add insult to injury.

I read on another blog that Cally Thistle once put out a team of 11 non-Scots. Not sure if that’s apocryphal, but it surprised me. I understand their support is dwindling in spite of their league success though. Has some traditional community identity been lost? Some kind of social disconnect? Makes you wonder. I also watched a Celtic match recently, Brown was the only Scot on the pitch. Now I know Celtic can afford all this, and they are working to a sensible modern template, but still. Some of these continental lads don’t do dreich weather, and it shows. Last time I saw Glasgow Rangers live was at the national stadium here for a European match. I got one of those invites to posh food and great seats via a friend. To be honest, I had very little interest in the team or the match. I looked at the programme and wondered how the club that my brother used to take me along to see in the ’60s had transformed into a rag-bag collection of rather mediocre mercenaries. It was a drab match lacking the traditional qualities I associated with Scottish football.

Oh well, sorry to ramble.

Thanks BRTH for an inspirational piece, not least the AM link. How many times I sat up late to see grainy black&white highlights on Scotsport. It wisnae Sky 3D but it was the real thing. Arthur is one of the true greats.

AuldheidPosted on11:33 am - Jan 18, 2013

shield2012 says:

Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:48

In terms of attempting to keeping them alive yes, in terms of condemnation the guilty parties would have been named and shamed and there would have been no parachute attempt because of the degree of condemnation.

It might have been SFL3 if we were lucky enough to survive the condemnation.

I remember calling R Clyde in Oct 2011 asking why no one had raised the moral issue behind what Rangers were accused of because it had been swerved in previous shows and in the press. I was lectured by Mr Keevins on making prejudicial statements. It took another couple of months before the moral aspect got any media attention and it was not sustained.

No degree of strong condemnation has happened here, the roles of SDM and Walter Smith in 2008 and the decisions they made then has never been the subject of condemnation. The reason for that is simple, had what supporters eventually expressed came out earlier a parachute would never have been considered, so the morality was downplayed.

The media, consisting of the same Rangers men who stoutly avoided the moral aspect would not have been able to stop themselves having a go had the positions been reversed. they are supporters with typewriters after all (see Jim Traynor as leader) and would have strongly influenced the outcome.

In short the SFA would have wanted to preserve the industry but the context in which they were attempting to do so would have been very different.

youtawknabootPosted on11:45 am - Jan 18, 2013

Kilgore Trout says:
Perhaps it’s best if we move on from this before someone claims that they are both, in fact, the same programme!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

indeed KT..a potential recipe for disaster 🙂

al get me spice rack…

thornlyboyPosted on12:11 pm - Jan 18, 2013

With all due respect to some venerable posters, it’s not ‘all about the money’. The disciplinary fiasco after the match at CP and the ‘gentlemen’ who exonerated McCoist (clearly the guilty party) exemplify a deeper loyalty. In Scotland, it’s not so much a case of ‘Cherchez la femme!’ but ‘Cherchez la loge!’ Do that and it makes sense.

PS It’s not a ‘conspiracy’, rather a mindset and apparently can be traced back to one Sir John Ure Primrose (I think he’s the one). Those better qualified than me can confirm.

willmacufreePosted on12:22 pm - Jan 18, 2013

neepheid says: Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 15:41
“By club I mean a football team owned and run by a limited company.”

Neepheid, Sorry for the delay in replying

I think you’re talking holding co s and subsidiaries here, a la MIHoldings and RFC (IL). I’m talking about just any football club which becomes a Ltd Co./ PLC, in which case the club which becomes a company is the company in its entirety which is the club in its entirety. Others have been through all this, as have we, I think. The legal opinions I’ve seen on the subject vary.

I know from previous posts that you believe that the LNS interpretation of the rules will open up possibilities for debt recovery from oldclub. Great, if that were true. My worry is that if we start to apply clever semantics in the matter of the undisclosed contracts, we might just finish up once again with justice undone, and seen to be undone.

bogsdolloxPosted on12:28 pm - Jan 18, 2013

TSFM says:
Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 22:08
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rate This: 11 out of 10.

My thoughts exactly.

willmacufreePosted on12:42 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Hirsute,

That is quality. Just my luck to put up a post immediately after, and in some ways connected.

bluPosted on12:42 pm - Jan 18, 2013

thornlyboy says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:11
1 0 i
Rate This

====================================================================
thornlyboy, for the other clubs and SFA/SPL/SFL paid staff it’s the money. I’ve no doubt that Rangers were given an easy ride by the media and Scotland’s footballing bodies, at least in part due to historic allegiances, but that wasn’t what allowed them to stay in business. I can’t guarantee this because I’ve no familiarity with the goings on of freemasonry but I guess that the Chief Execs and Chairmen of the SPL clubs who wanted Rangers fast-tracked back from SFL asap are not all members of their local ludges. The thirty teams in the SFL also followed the money to get them into SFL3. They were weak and their judgment stank but it wasn’t a masonic plot to limit the advantage to those from the East End.

scottcPosted on12:46 pm - Jan 18, 2013

shield2012 says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:37
0 8 Rate This
bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:26
0 0 i
Rate This
shield2012 says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 10:02
0 0 i
Rate This
bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:52
0 0 i
Rate This
“blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
Anyway, that’s all deflection as we were talking about whether Scottish football would bend the rules as far as they could to keep the two Glasgow clubs in business at any price. My view is that it would. Celtic, like Rangers, wouldn’t be treated in the same way Gretna were.”

…

Thats funny, my memories of last year are “the MSM baying for blood, countdown to closure, hearses at the stadium etc”…………
…

…ion apart from circumstances and a natural difference due to 20 years having past!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To me, that is the crux of this. We will never know what would actually have happened with Celtic back in the day because things never quite got to that point. Equally we will never know how Rangers would have been treated had they been in that position back then.

And fast forward twenty years exactly the same is true. Rangers were supported by the ‘authorities’, Celtic were not in a position to test their own support. My own belief is that Celtic would have been fully supported today and Rangers would have been treated as Celtic were back then.

Nobody from either side of the Celtic/RFC/TRFC divide can know for sure the answer to the Whatiffery.

angus1983Posted on12:48 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Re: MSM and hearses at Parkheid.

I have a scan of a Sun front page here with a picture of a coffin being lowered into a grave with an RFC badge on it. June 13, 2012 – “Day that the taxman finally buried Rangers”. The Daily Record simply had a full-page “RFC RIP” IIRC.

valentinesclownPosted on12:51 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Thank you HP

This issue matters at every level.

Scottish football can not move on until someone state’s the facts on the status of Sevco from the SFA.

The MSM at all levels do not seem to want to state the facts, make no mistake they are well aware of the truth and the facts.

I will never have any faith or trust in the future of Scottish football until this is resolved.

IMO the status of this new club is the MOST important issue ever in the game in Scotland.

FIFAPosted on12:52 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Can someone please update me ,I seemed to have missed any comments from the SFA with regards to the way Sevco are treating their cup competition,surely a media blackout is a must to prevent any intimidation whether it be before ,during or after this match to any fans that have a right to follow their team ,if there is no comment forth comming of any type and there are repurcussions can we expect mass resignations from all associated at the SFA.

BrendaPosted on12:54 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bawsman @ 12:49

Well said I agree with every word you say and I’m sure you will have many TU……… If your post is not withdrawn for mentioning you know who!!! A toast to honesty and FairPlay 🙂

tomtomPosted on12:56 pm - Jan 18, 2013

blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:42

————————————————-

You make a very good point here. The lure of having circa 2/3000 fans twice a year was what made the SFL grab Rangers with open arms.

Interestingly enough, when the representatives of the teams from the Conference were polled about letting RFC enter their leagues it came across quite clearly, to me anyway, that they all thought the revenue that it would bring to their clubs was the over-riding factor. It’s a pity no-one asked them what they thought would happen to their league once RFC had gained promotion into the EPL. For them it was all about a short term cash injection rather than any sporting concern.

The SFA/SPL/SFL all had the same blinkered view. What they couldn’t factor in was the fact that the fans of RFC could not accept that they should be punished at all. Hence the permarage and constant stream of vitriol coming out of Ibrox on an almost daily basis.

bogsdolloxPosted on12:58 pm - Jan 18, 2013

HirsutePursuit says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:16
=========================================================================

I’m in the Option 2 camp i.e “they are a new club” but the LNS Doctrine enables the sins of Oldco to be visited on Newco and obviously I am outraged at the conduct of the SFA/SPL.

I think many on here (and I may be wrong) want Rangers to be dead because of what they stand for and see it as merely a point scoring exercise that enables them to say “We’re the same club with 125 years of history and your not”.

thornlyboyPosted on1:18 pm - Jan 18, 2013

blu: thanks for your comment; as I said, it’s not a conspiracy and in thruth there is bound to be a combination of factors. However, unless you understand some allegiances that have nothing to do with football or money, the extent of the cover-up, misinformation and deviation from the rules will never begin to make sense.

ordinaryfanPosted on1:26 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bogsdollox says:

Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:58

Rate This

……………..

I don’t believe that. Yes that would be a welcome consequence for Celtic fans, but the argument doesn’t stand up, because it is not just Celtic fans outraged and disgusted, it is fans across the board who are outraged and demanding equality. This was a MSM argument at the beginning, that the reaction was simply Celtic fans trying to get one over on their “Old Firm” rivals, that a section of Celtic fans were so bitter and so full of hate that they were forcing an agenda against RFC, this has been proven to be another media lie, easily put to bed by the outspoken supporters of all Clubs throughout the Leagues.
Supporters are sick of paying into a corrupt and uneven League system, they are sick of seeing one Club lord it over everyone else, and this was a watershed moment for Scottish Football. Fans became adament, that RFC should take responsibility for their actions. For the first time in their history, there was a strong determination that this Club that has had free reign should FOR ONCE in their existence be responsible for their actions and face the consequences. Fans were just sick to death of watching this Club do as they please unchallenged and unpunished, RFC simply went too far. They disregarded and disrespected Scottish Football once too often.

briggsbhoyPosted on1:30 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia) says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 13:04

For a majority of Rangers fans it’s business as usual and back where we left off albeit in a different league. You only need to listen to SSB to understand no amount of factual information to establish otherwide matters, it the Rangers now Rangers forever, frustrating I know but that’s they way it is. Once the LNS enquiry is done and we move into next season the SPL/SFA/SFL and Rangers issue new kit we need to see the rebranding, under no circumstances should they be allowed to use the badge of deid club. Rangers don’t do Humble.

With regards to the appointment of McGhee do we think that he would have been chosen if he had been working? Is it giving an old pal a job or is it a positive appointment ? There’s a debate

shield2012Posted on1:32 pm - Jan 18, 2013

HirsutePursuit says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:16

I don’t think TSFM, or anyone for that matter, are saying it’s not an issue. It’s a major issue. I think the point of TSFM’s response was to suggest that the same thing doesn’t have to be repeated so many times.

Move on until there’s further information that can be added and discussed.

spanishceltPosted on1:38 pm - Jan 18, 2013

wottpi says:
Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 23:50

No, the problem at Ibrox then, now and possibly forever has been the management of the club.

While David Murray is to be applauded for signing Mo Johnston and ending that vile policy, he never had the bottle to do what really needed to be done.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
While I totally agree the problem is the management I would argue that Murray should in any way be given credit for ending of their signing policies.
World football bodies were on Rangers case regarding that policy and the threat of expulsion from European football was the major driving force.
Even then there were literally thousands of Catholic players worldwide who could have been signed but the decision was made by Rangers/Murry that even with this history changing decision that it was more important to do it in a triumphal superior manner by signing a player who was by all accounts already heading for their biggest rivals.
Now, I dont care about Mo Johnston, don’t have any feelings towards him and dont see him as a traitor or any of that nonsense that’s been said about him but I do believe 100% the only reason he was chosen to break their policy was to maintain their WATP attitude and strengthen their belief they were bigger and “better than anyone else”
All the news (with the help of his bought and paid for MSM ) was turned from Rangers sign their first Catholic in ? years to Rangers shock Celtic by stealing Mo Johnston, who just happened to be catholic, from under their noses.

SmugasPosted on1:38 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I feel I must however highlight one factual inaccuracy in HP’s otherwise excellent piece. At no point did anyone suggest a fly-kick to the Ibrox rear end. Instead I believe it was a fly wee kick which is a different thing altogether! Much like the club debate readers can decide on the suitability of either option.

Just on the club thing though. Did anyone ever find out if, as regards records, a legally brand new shiny club is allowed to be recorded (not referred to on the radio or passing conversation, not bothered there) but actually officially recorded as the same name as an old liquidated club? I’m genuinely not wanting to continue the debate, hell no!, its just that this is where the continuing brand with its 49,000 fortnightly followers and the authorities inevitably have to clash at some point. (to be fair to the various anti same-club writers, I interpret their protests as saying that the clash should have immediately occurred when they entered the league, not when they went on to win the thing). At present if “Rangers” is to be engraved on the 2013 SFL trophy I want it clarified if it is simply because no-one asked the SFA to do otherwise (which I think is TSFM’s point – and I know was certainly RTC’s point before him/her).

SquigglePosted on1:48 pm - Jan 18, 2013

HirsutePursuit – very good summing up of the way I – and probably most – see the debate.

Slight caution on your closing line. Fact is usually established in a laboratory or in a court of law, and whilst some have speculated about the level of organic content in some of Sevco’s utterances, we should not look to a lab for the solution here. Had a judge been required to place this coin right way up – then we would have the fact.Some may still have disagreed and appealed, but until such times as a different judgement comes from the court, the fact is the fact. But this has not happened – excepting the perfunctory CoS acts to wind them up, Rangers and their status is not an important enough issue. Nothing in the day to day running of football is important enough, UNLESS of course some corruption lies within.

The SFA/SPL/SFL have behaved entirely consitently with other trade and professional associations. Until such times as the fact is established in a court they will always skite about the issue, finding ways to hammer the offender but not to extinguish them.It is not in their interest as things stand – UNLESS some serious malpractice or corruption would lead to them having to protect the other members of the association from the effect on their trade, they will never act to expel or extinguish a toe-rag.

We fans are expecting too much for too little. We want the courts, SFA/SPL/SFL to pronounce on this debate. They will not. UNLESS someone can find a way to force the corruption and trust issues,to force a court or the associations to act, we will need to accept things that have become what they have become.

Shame really.

Celtic Paranoia (@CelticParanoia)Posted on1:55 pm - Jan 18, 2013

blu says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 09:44
5 41 i
Rate This

——————————————————-

Yes the sending offs certainly were dealt with in the standard way. Rangers appealed them and the SFA upheld the appeal.

Celtic made no representation about McCoist’s comments and I can’t see that this would be an effective defence for his violent reaction – about as violent as Bougherra’s handling of the referee – in any case.

Lennon did not appeal his punishment. Some would call this dignified silence and stoicism, particularly those associated with a club which regularly claims these traits as a hallmark, whilst at the same time blowing on the dogwhistle every second day to whip its followers into hysteria in the face of the latest perceived persecution.

The reason the punishment was not appealed was mainly because at that time, as you may recall, there was a circus of media hyperbole around the “abrasive”, “controversial”, “outspoken”, “confrontational” Celtic Manager – a certain James Traynor being one of his most “outspoken”, forthright critics – not to mention the death threats and “viable devices” (bombs?) sent to him in the post.

Any appeal would have been met with a meltdown of epic proportions in the media and labelled as the “stubborn”, “confrontational”,”controversial” Celtic manager refusing to accept natural justice.

As for deflection – it was you who was originally asked to provide examples where Celtic had been favoured in such a way by the SFA but chose to go down the deflection route with a straw man ‘we could never have known how Celtic fans would react to the liquidation’ rubbish. The point is they would – and did – prevent it.

neepheidPosted on1:58 pm - Jan 18, 2013

willmacufree says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 12:22
0 0 Rate This
neepheid says: Thursday, January 17, 2013 at 15:41
“By club I mean a football team owned and run by a limited company.”

I think you’re talking holding co s and subsidiaries here, a la MIHoldings and RFC (IL).
======
No, I’m not talking about holding companies/subsidiaries at all. I’m talking about a company, which is a legal entity, which can own property, which can enter into contracts, which can employ people, which has to pay tax, etc, etc. A “club” is not a legal entity and can do none of those things. That is my opinion, at any rate, one with which others clearly disagree very strongly.

However TSFM feels that we have been round the houses on this one, and the “debate” is going nowhere. I entirely agree, so this post is absolutely my last word on the subject of oldclub/newclub, club/company. There comes a point where people decide to believe what they want to believe. That’s fine. I have tried not to get involved in this debate, but not hard enough, obviously. I would love to believe that RFC died in 2012, never to be seen again. Unfortunately facts and my personal understanding of the relevant law get in the way of me believing that.

As regards debt recovery from the club in liquidation, I do not believe that there is any prospect of that all. There are no assets, no money, no chance of recovery. BDO might get something back from Green or even SDM and his fellow directors, but I’ll be amazed if they do. As for LNS, he is concerned only with football disciplinary matters. I imagine the contents of the five way agreement have left him in a completely impossible position.

bogsdolloxPosted on2:08 pm - Jan 18, 2013

HirsutePursuit says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 13:49

If LNS recommends repayment of SPL prize-money, CG may just see this as a price worth paying to artificially “fuse” the two clubs together.

If however, there was to be a suspension of the old Club’s SPL membership – which applied to the new club in a merged league body – you can be sure that CG will go to the courts to prove that his newly formed club has never been a Club and the SPL have no jurisdiction in imposing a punishment on his club for the sins of that (now deceased) Club.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I take your point re LNS being out on a limb – I think he is too. But should he rule on his principle and punishes Oldco & Newco and CG takes action that is the point where the Oldco/Newco debate will be resolved as CG will be arguing against everything he has said so far.

bogsdolloxPosted on2:17 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Brenda says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:07

Missed HP post what was so wrong with it?
========================================================================

I’m assuming it was OT as it discussed the thorny issue of oldco/newco. TSFM has said we’ve not to talk about that anymore unless there is a development or a new angle.

You can’t say HP wasn’t warned. Acts of deliberate disobedience are punishable by censorship. Marvellous.

Danish PastryPosted on2:30 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bogsdollox says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:17
0 2 Rate This
Brenda says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:07

You can’t say HP wasn’t warned. Acts of deliberate disobedience are punishable by censorship. Marvellous.
———-

That subject possibly needs a thread of its own. I feel I’ve read the arguments for and against ad nauseum. I know my own opinion. It’s not a complicated issue in my mind, and as bogs says, there’s been no new angle of late. Why is it so difficult to just change the subject for a bit?

chancer67Posted on2:34 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Jimlarkin says @14;05

What do you expect from the pieman Jim, looks like he’s been on RM for inspiration.
I remember when he came out with his classic that Rangers winning the ECWC in 1972 was a bigger achievement than the Lisbon Lions in 1967.

bogsdolloxPosted on2:37 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Danish Pastry says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:30

briggsbhoyPosted on2:44 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I’m in agreement I’ve heard the arguments on oldco newco (posted many myself) until I’m blue in the face and never want to be blue in the face, hate the colour.

Danish PastryPosted on3:07 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bogsdollox says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:37
0 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:30

I’m not too sure I would generalize like that bogs. I sense a strong desire across this forum for fairness throughout the leagues, whether it’s wee clubs or big clubs involved in any wrongdoing.

youtawknabootPosted on3:08 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bawsman says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:49
The moderators should take a long, hard look at themselves if they think they dealt with the situation in a reasonable manner.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
LNS to rule soon on club status & future scale of punishments,
Perhaps this particular subject matter is too emotionally delicate & has created a conflict of interest situation with the individual mod or mods..?

angus1983Posted on3:13 pm - Jan 18, 2013

jimlarkin says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:05

. . . and to think i stopped buying the daily retard. . . .and it wasn’t as bad as this !!!!!!!!!!!!
——

To be fair, Jim, that article has Derek Johnstone’s byline on it – so would you expect any better?

As for HP getting a post deleted … if it concerned a subject that TSFM had already said would be dealt with in such a way then fair enough. It’s TSFM’s ba’, and his rules. And those rules should be applied without fear or favour.

The oldco/newco thing … yes, it’s a tired subject but, as recognised early on here, the plan has always been to repeat the mantra until it’s accepted that TRFC are RFC. If everyone just shuts up about it, then that will be as good as accepting it. The subject will die a slow death and fade, and TRFC will be RFC. That in itself doesn’t bother me much – but the sleekit way in which they’ve gone about it does.

Bogs at 14:37 … Thumbs up from me. 🙂

manandboyPosted on3:19 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Hirsute Pursuit
_________________________________________________________________________________
TSFM,

I think a straight red was too severe for a player with his record and standing in the game.

Please consider this an appeal against that decision – and please don’t tell me there’s no appeal.

borussiabeefburgPosted on3:59 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I’ve written before on here: it’s up to those who set up the blog, and those who moderate same, what they allow to stay and what they delete. The other day I had what I considered an innocent, but flippant/jokey post removed and was taken aback. But it ain’t my site!

Having written that, nothing was offensive in HirsutePursuit’s post, imo, and the mods should be wary of driving decent posters away.

Re the Evening Times article complaining about fans losing out on a promotion after buying season tickets: supporters of the other 9 clubs in Division 3 probably bought tickets hoping for a promotion as well: then the authorities dumped a ‘debt free’ new club on them, and this season was in vain.

Danish PastryPosted on4:00 pm - Jan 18, 2013

manandboy says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 15:19
4 0 Rate This
Hirsute Pursuit
_________________________________________________________________________________
TSFM,

Please consider this an appeal against that decision – and please don’t tell me there’s no appeal.
———

Yes, one thing we’ve learned is that you can bend the rules to suit the club .. uh … poster … no, club 😀

ordinaryfanPosted on4:02 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bogsdollox says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:37The answer is: It doesn’t fit the agenda of many of the Celtic minded posters. It’s a my clubs older than yours mentality and a revelling in the demise of their bitter rivals. Meanwhile Babylon burns

………………..

That just doesn’t add up for several reasons. Firstly, the reaction to RFC and its reincarnation has invoked, has came from all quarters, not just Celtic supporters, to suggest otherwise is unfair to supporters across Scottish Football.
Secondly, as a Celtic fan, the length of RFC’s existence means little to me, except that the length of its existence shows just how long we have been hindered and put up with disgraceful corruption in our game.
Thirdly, and what posters such as yourself seem reluctant to accept, is that Celtic FC and its fans have been at the forefront of this fight against corruption and collusion long before any other Club had the courage or even the inclination to speak out, never mind the courage to confront the issue.
What some people fail to grasp, is that this hasn’t just came “out of the blue”*, this has been going on for decades. The fall of RFC has simply exposed the depth of bias within the governing bodies and the MSM, something Celtic fans have been challenging for decades, much to the amusement of other supporters who held the belief that the “Old Firm” were one and the same and that Celtic fans epitomised “paranoia”.

NawlitePosted on4:10 pm - Jan 18, 2013

My last post before I too leave. I know I won’t be missed as much as HP.

I’ve said before I’m not a CFC fan, so the generalisation that the desire to maintain the stance of ‘It’s a new club’ is a CFC fan agenda is, frankly, nonsense. It’s about fairness, for me anyway.

The MSM and authorities (and RFC*, I guess) are hoping that reiteration of the facts becomes so boring for everyone that we stop correcting their statements.

It’s interesting that that was the reason given by TSFM for stopping/deleting such posts – maybe their plan is working.

I do think it wrong that we are not allowed to mention that topic when it would appear that a sizeable proportion of posters do still see it as very important. To then delete such an excellent post trying to explain why it is important does a reall disservice to HP’s views.

I wrote before that I love this blog, so I’ll still look in regularly. Cheers.

valentinesclownPosted on4:14 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Maybe some transparency from TSFM on HP post as I thought it was excellent and very relevant.

SquigglePosted on4:15 pm - Jan 18, 2013

HP’s post wasn’t actually conjectural – it only summed up the two midsets for all to. It would have been an ideal line under the whole subject. My own post in response suggests the same.

To delete HP’s post was a mistake. Hopefully this can be recognised and rectified.

ordinaryfanPosted on4:18 pm - Jan 18, 2013

……………

“Babylon” didn’t just one day burst into flames, Celtic fans have been fighting this fire for decades whilst everyone else jeered from the sidelines.

ordinaryfanPosted on4:23 pm - Jan 18, 2013

nawlite says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 16:10
4 0 Rate This
The MSM and authorities (and RFC*, I guess) are hoping that reiteration of the facts becomes so boring for everyone that we stop correcting their statements.

………………

This is the crux of it. I see nothing wrong with correcting a lie. If the MSM or governing bodies persist in lying and stating disinformation, there is almost a duty to correct them every time they do so.

willmacufreePosted on4:53 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I’ve just checked back in. I cannot believe what I’m reading that Hirsute Pursuit’s top quality post has been deleted. I’d been thinking for a week or two that the forum needed some expert legal guidance such as his.

He provides it and bang, it’s gone. You need to tell us why.

SmugasPosted on4:53 pm - Jan 18, 2013

As a suggestion, lets do what TSFM has asked and drop the club subject for now until such time as new info does come up, ie LNS, or BRIEFLY bring it in to support a RELEVANT point, not make the point in itself, again and again.

I would very much hope that HP and others would rejoin the debate on this basis. It is not censorship. It is certainly not giving in.

In the meantime as a diddy follower please drop the we’re all equal but some are even more equal than others crap.

Ta.

rustyploughbhoyPosted on5:02 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Sean Fallon

I will raise a glass to you tonight sir.

May your soul rest in peace
Amen.

bailemeanachPosted on5:02 pm - Jan 18, 2013

finbaraidenmuldoon says

Surely not the finbar muldoon of BBC fans forum fame??

thereekPosted on5:04 pm - Jan 18, 2013

bogsdollox says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:37
5 21 i
Rate This
Danish Pastry says: (Edit)
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 14:30

==========================================================================

The answer is: It doesn’t fit the agenda of many of the Celtic minded posters. It’s a my clubs older than yours mentality and a revelling in the demise of their bitter rivals. Meanwhile Babylon burns.
~~~~~~
Catching up on the blog today it does strike me that we’re floundering a little. Our joint sense of purpose is diminishing and we’re at odds around the scale of moderation.

I’ll do my Wenger impression here and say I didn’t see HP’s post so I don’t know precisely what it said but there seems to be some strength of opinion from reasonable posters that there has been an over-reaction.

At the same time I’m not sure how bogs’ post and Angus’ endorcement @ 15.13 is likely to promote any sense of harmony (I assume it wasn’t !) with Celtic fans. That may be a criticism of either or both sides and I’m trying to remain neutral (while a ‘Tic follower).

While the blog is all about debate and differening views there also has to be an air of acceptance of others’ views and along with that a challenge for us all personally to continually reassess our standpoints based on the value of competing arguments. I suppose what I’m trying to say here is I feel that the way things are going just now is tending to send people away and not bring us together. People who have something of value to offer.

Can we all take a few moments to consider what we can individually do to restore the collective nature of the blog and come back and make it stronger.

Palacio67Posted on5:07 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I think we have came to the ‘sliding doors’ moment of this blog, this is a pivotal time TSFM. The blog has lost many good bloggers in the last month, and again today. I like many others loved the RTC blog and learned a lot from it, this site was a breath of fresh air also at the start. Although I am not a frequent poster I do read every post everyday, and I also flounced off a good few weeks back after having posts deleted, which imo was ott. There were other posters who put great effort and time into lengthy posts only to see them deleted also.
You may delete this post if you like, but a lot of the other bloggers are unhappy .
Time to man up TSFM, the site is losing customers, its sink or swim time.

schottie59Posted on5:11 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Its surely up to us what posts we read and what we skip by ….I would suggest a re-think. HP is a valued poster and I would think no one “skips” his/hers posts..

neepheidPosted on5:17 pm - Jan 18, 2013

TSFM gave everyone fair warning. He said clearly that any posts on that subject would be considered OT and deleted. I rather stupidly strayed onto that subject in a subsequent post, and I expect it has been deleted, although I haven’t checked. If it has been deleted, I can’t complain, I was clearly warned.

So I really don’t understand why people are leaving the room. When I’m in someone else’s house, I try to follow their rules whether I agree with them or not. That’s just good manners. To those who decide to leave, good luck finding a better forum.

bailemeanachPosted on5:23 pm - Jan 18, 2013

finbaraidenmuldoon says:
.

I’m not sure if I’m allowed to say MON THE BARREL HOOPS.

But I’ll say it anyway.

Just in case.

MON THE BARREL HOOPS
____________________________________

Brings back memories, big red and Mr Paul on the Gullane sands

How do you like them apples?!

StevieBCPosted on5:26 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Have TSFM mods retreated with tin hats on, into Ogilvie’s bunker ?! [only joking]

I had a couple of posts deleted recently for fairly tame reasons, and whilst mildly surprised I accepted the reasons communicated by TSFM.

For me, first and foremost the TSFM mods are volunteering their time for free.

And typically, as most of us probably know from our own experiences, when you do something ‘voluntarily’ you seldom get any thanks, and sometimes you even start to regret helping out in the first place !

So I am grateful to have this site to interact and learn from others.

Of course TSFM is not perfect, but it is still an awful lot better than most, IMHO.

bogsdolloxPosted on5:28 pm - Jan 18, 2013

neepheid says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 17:17

In my opinion the “ownership” of this blog lies with the people who contribute and read it not with TSFM and the mods.

Ok -HP was warned off writing about oldco/newco because the subject was becoming repetitive and stale but him posting a very well considered summary of the positions was not a reason to delete it. That option should only be exercised in very few circumstances.

We need to move to a new format where there can be a thread that deals only with oldco/newco issues where people can debate away if that is their interest and other threads that deal with other issues we are interested in.

I’m not disinterested in the oldco/newco debate(and for the record I subscribe to the newco theory) but I’m fed up reading the same points over and over on threads that are supposed to be about another issue.

Danish PastryPosted on5:55 pm - Jan 18, 2013

StevieBC says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 17:26
1 0 Rate This

Thankless task being a mod. Disappointed that people choose to leave because a post is deleted. Seems a bit Charles Green-ish to up sticks just because the authorities don’t accede to our every whim.

Whither respect?

TSFMPosted on6:29 pm - Jan 18, 2013

Not in the bunker yet Steve, just in transit 🙂

We did explain that posts about this stuff were OT.
We did explain that any such posts would be removed.
We have also explained that criticism of the moderation policy should not be include in the current blog.
We have also explained that people who deliberately and repeatedly flout the policy of the site will have posting privileges removed.

In today’s circumstances therefore, I infer that either people cannot or will not abide by those very reasonable rules.

If, after explicit requests, posters decide to disrespect those rules, then I don’t see how they can complain when we take precisely the course of action we said we would.

If there are people who think that the moderation policy is an abuse of their human rights or whatever, then other blogs are available – and so too are other domain names.

There is no need for anyone to restate again, for the umpteenth time, what their opinion is on the provenance of Charles Green’s Rangers. If I were a Rangers fan, I would perhaps take some succour from this – perhaps conclude that people were protesting too much.

This site is without doubt turning into an anti-Rangers message board. There are tons of those out there. We don’t want this to be one of them.

I am no lover of Rangers, but I do value intellect, and it is being choked to death on this topic.

We are happy to entertain and in fact encourage discussion on the paradox of New Club / Old Club, but we need to take it as read that some people insist its new, some people insist its not, and others like myself couldn’t care less.

We agree to disagree and move on – or we just move on.

We have undoubtedly lost posters on here of late. The site has never been as popular as RTC, but without the promise of a sacrificial Rangers, we never doubted that it would be.

If a smaller leaner, TSFM emerges from this then that’s not a bad thing.

Danish PastryPosted on6:37 pm - Jan 18, 2013

troyblain says:
Friday, January 18, 2013 at 18:26
1 0 Rate This

The press and media are using the “oh not again, this is so boring” message to stop any discussion on RFC being a new club. Rather than delete all the posts why not have an article that can be commented on – that way anybody fed up with it does not need to read it.
———-

Exactly troyblain. It is time for a few active threads here, as has already been mentioned. Invite HP, or ?, to prepare a short blog on the offending subject and let comments flow on that blog thread ‘on topic’. It could easily run parallel to this current BRTH blog. That would avoid unneccessary conflicts, walk outs, etc, while maintaining proper respect for the mods, who might just choose to walk out as well.

TommyBPosted on6:42 pm - Jan 18, 2013

I’d just like to dispel this notion being put about by the likes of DJ that any fan buying a season ticket is paying to see their team promoted at the end of a season if they win the league. Any fan buying a season ticket is actually paying up front for the right to attend a set number of games at a particular ground. There is no mention of competition rules or potential prizes, it’s a prepaid ticket for admission and as far as I can make out no-one is now going to be allowed to attend a fewer number of games than before. League reconstruction whether or not it comes in, will have no effect on the number of games to be played this season. All this nonsense about punters being misled or having recourse to a refund is absurd.

A Roman God, a New Year, a Paycheque a Sports Jacket and that thing called football!