A spectre is haunting Scottish Football


Smugas 10.11 What is the definition of lunacy? Keep doing the same …

Comment on A spectre is haunting Scottish Football by Auldheid.

Smugas 10.11

What is the definition of lunacy?

Keep doing the same thing and expect a different result?

The false economy foundations on which what passed as competition previously seems to have gone unnoticed by those lunatics wanting it’s return.

Auldheid Also Commented

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
Barcabhoy 6.29

I could not give a toss who runs TRFC whether it’s Ashley or King or Bill MacMurdo.

What I would like to see is an honest game honestly governed.

What Rangers have done is irrevocably broken the trust on which all sport, not just football is based.

They cheated -end of – and it does the game no favours to pretend it did not happen.

That leaves us two options in respect of their future

A. To stop them playing in our game.

B. To allow them to play but change the rules to stop the kind of cheating they indulged in.

That basically took the form of not providing the information they were supposed to provide under the rules to allow an honest game to exist.

I can cite examples from 2000 to back up this point.

So left with a club you cannot trust but whose income you want, what do you do but strengthen the policing of the rules so that proof is required that what they say is true actually is true. There has to be a deterrent to telling lies.

That means putting in place a governance system that is up to that job.

You can have A but stronger governance by SFA is essential if B is the choice taken.

So far I see little recognition of the real problem hence no sign of required solution.

What I and I suspect many more of the enlightened will not accept is more of the same.

I think that message has to be got across to the SFA and those on The Professional Game Board

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football

Tom English was one of the recipient’s of the hard copy of evidence kept from LNS. I reminded him of this on Twitter of the need for balance. No response.

Bloody hypocrite .

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
Red Lichtie 1.16pm

I know this is just another chapter in the ongoing saga about RFCS use of ebts and I did wonder what prompted the SPFL to finally try and impose the only sanction placed on RFC for 10 years plus of ebt use (excluding of course the illegal ebts used in 1999, 2000 to 2003 that, like the war, gets no mention in German company, gets no mention by SPFL or SFA. The same ebts of which HMRC declared in this extract in bold


were ” fraudulent”

The SPFL know by now that their Commission investigating ebts was misled and that they were lied to in 2012. They have been lied to by RIFC since, who appear to have no intention of doing anything honourable.

The BIG issue here is not the money, the big issue is how can Scottish football continue to allow a club who have consistently lied to the rest of the game to be part of that game?

There is no possibility of restoring trust in Scottish football as long as RIFC are being pandered to or being seen to be pandered to.

It is high time RFC/ RIFC were called out.

The evidence so far on wtc ebts, BTC ebts and UEFA 2011 licence is that they operate through deception, but like a battered wife refusing to call a halt to her abuse, Scottish football still allows that abuse to continue.

I doubt there is a plan as such for a Third Rangers but don’t discount it could happen by circumstance. However whether it’s Third Rangers or Ashley Rangers they must be made to act honestly by the rest of Scottish football rejecting them until they provide signs that they will.

With more clubs in improved financial circumstances there is not a better time to force the issue. Tell RIFC or Third Rangers “If you want to play in Scottish football, play by the same rules other clubs do or sod off”

Recent Comments by Auldheid

Here we go again
Cluster One
Hirsute Pursuit

Thanks for the clarification.

I can see how the Brechin reason and Romanov reason got conflated back then so we can drop Romanov from the underlying issue to look at which is:

What was the argument in support of the change in SPL rules introducing owner and operator and if it was solely to deal with a potential problem in respect of Brechin having no “owner” of a share, how did that rule change in 2005 transform Rangers from being an incorporated single Public Limited Liability Company (PLC) earning its revenue from football to a Public Limited Liability Company (PLC) that overnight owned a club earning the same income from the same source?

In terms of conforming with UEFA FFP before 2012 was it Rangers FC PLC that applied for a UEFA Licence or Rangers FC as a stand alone club or was it Rangers PLC whom Rangers Football Club had a written contract with to be their operators? The application template suggests it was Rangers Football Club only.


Post 2012 if its not the current club (Rangers FC Ltd) applying for a UEFA licence but the football Company (Rangers International Football Club PLC) they have a written contract with and the football company’s (RIFC) main source of revenue is from the club activities, then how can a Company go bust unless the club ceases to be able to provide that revenue?

Now had UEFA seen the 5 Way Agreement there would be the satisfaction of knowing they were OK with it.

As it stands UEFA did what their rules told them to do, Waited 3 years to allow the club that had undergone a terminal change in its legal structure to satisfy UEFA requirements in respect of historical membership of the SFA before being eligible to apply to play in UEFA competitions in circumstances that were not to the detriment of the integrity of those competitions.

After 3 years, whichever club ie legal entity that applied for a UEFA Licence, it was not the Rangers Football Club (PLC) that last applied in 2012 (which was rejected because they had no audited accounts and the wee tax bill of 2011 was admitted , unlike March 2011 when described as a potential liability, as a payable that as the world and its wean knew in 2012 was outstanding.)

Here we go again
HirsutePursuit 13th March 2021 At 21:31
3 0 Rate This


On the subject of a franchise…

At the very least the possibility that the 5 Way Agreement has turned Scottish Football into a franchise should be explored by UEFA just in case.

On McDonalds I remember reading McDonalds Behind The Arches many years ago and one of the fascinating things to come out is that their wealth was not based on burgers but on the land and buildings owned . Kind of fits your point to your family member.

Here we go again

On exclusions zones because supporters might turn up for invented reasons I think recognition of “knuckleheadessness ” as an all pervading human condition is necessary.


I think it is an American term.

I quite like it, kind of onomatopoeic quality to it. Not so much sounds like but looks like.

Anyhoo it is a denial of reality that the support of Celtic and “Rangers” do not have their share of knuckleheads and they recognise each other.

The knuckle in the head stops the consequences of the emotions reaching the brain.

It’s a condition that most grow out of but it’s also one that we grow into before we grow out of it. A human condition.

So best not deny it and deal with it free from judgment of which support has the most knuckleheads or which kind of knucklehead is worse than the other.

Just say that anyone turning up at CP will be taken as evidence of knuckleheadedness to become huckleheads into a police van.

Set a perimeter around the ground and any one approaching without valid reason to do so will be huckled.

HuckleberryTim or HuckleberryHun.

Here we go again
Upthehoops 13th March 2021 At 18:45
0 0 Rate This

Auldheid 13th March 2021 At 16:15

It is the huge incentive that CL money provides that in my opinion is the creator of an incentive to cheat to get at it, PARTICULARLY if the ability repay the debt depends on getting the CL money.


Absolutely agree with that. Financial Fair Play in Scotland post 2012 would have been a good move, although the new Rangers would have suffered more than anyone because of it in my view.

And there you have it. Canny have rules that hinder Rangers business model .

If the 5 Way created a franchise like McDonalds but selling hateburgers then sectarianism is only the sauce that goes on the otherwise tasteless moneyburger to make it tasty.

Here we go again
Hirsute Pursuit

Thanks for your response useful as ever.

If the intent was to create a franchise is that not questionable of itself?

If it wasnt then SPFL misused it.

Either way the SPL appear het, it’s just from when?

About the author