From the TSFM Manifesto 🙂
A spectre is haunting Scottish Football — the spectre of Sporting Integrity. All the powers of the old firms have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Billy and Dan, Blazer and Cassock, Record and Sun, Balance Sheet and P&L.
Where is the football fan in opposition to these that has not been decried as a “sporting integrity bampot” by his opponents in power?Two things result from this fact:
I. Sporting Integrity is already widely acknowledged to be itself a power for good.
II. It is high time that Lovers of Sport should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, and meet this nursery tale of the Spectre of Sporting Integrity with a manifesto of fair play.
To this end, Lovers of Sport of various partisanship have assembled on TSFM and sketched their manifesto, to be published on tsfm.scot.
Those who love sport though are challenged not just by the taunts of the monosyllabic automatons in the MSM, but by the owners of our football clubs who have displayed an almost total disregard to our wish to have a fair competition played out in the spirit of friendly rivalry. In fact the clubs, who speak those fine words, are not nearly as outraged as we are by the damage done to the integrity of the sport in the past few years .
In fact the term Sporting Integrity has become, since the latter stages of the Rangers era, a term of abuse; a mocking soubriquet attached to those who want sport to be just that – sport.
Sporting integrity now lives in the same media pigeon-hole as words like Islam, left-wing, militant, Muslim – and a host of others; words which are threats to the established order now set up as in-jokes, in order to reduce the effectiveness of the idea.
In fact, a new terminology has evolved in the reporting of football by both club officials and The Succulent Lamb Chapel alike;
“.. Sporting Integrity but …”.
For example
“We all want sporting integrity, but finance is more important”
Says who exactly?
Stated in such a matter of fact way that the obvious question is headed off at the pass, it is sometimes difficult to re-frame the discussion – perhaps because crayon is so hard to erase?
This is the backdrop to The Scottish Football Monitor and the world in which we live. Often the levels of scrutiny employed by our contributors are far in excess of any scrutiny employed by the MSM. Indeed our ideas and theories are regularly plagiarised by those very same lazy journalists who lurk here, and cherry-pick material to suit their own agendas; regularly claiming exclusives for stories that TSFM and RTC before us had placed in the public domain weeks earlier.
This was going to lead into a discourse about the love of money versus the love of sport – of how the sacred cows of acquisitiveness, gate- retention and turnstile spinning is far more important to the heads of our football clubs (the Billys, Dans and Blazers of the intro) than maintaining the traditions of our sport.
However events of Friday 14th November have given me cause to leave that for another day. The biggest squirrel of all in this sorry saga has always been the sleight of hand employed instil a siege mentality in the Rangers fans. The press have time and again assisted people (with no love of football in general or Rangers in particular) to enrich themselves – legally or otherwise – and feed on the loyalty of Rangers fans.
A matter for Rangers fans may also be the identity of some of those who had their trust, but who also assisted the Whytes and Greens by their public statements of support.
Our contention has been that rules have been bent twisted or broken to accommodate those people, the real enemies of the Rangers fans – and fans everywhere.
Through our collective research and group-analysis of events, we have also wondered out loud about the legality of many aspects of the operating style of some of the main players in the affair. That suspicion has been shared most notably by Mark Daly and Alex Thompson, but crucially now appears to be shared by Law Enforcement.
I confess I am fed up with the self-styled “bampot” epithet. For the avoidance of doubt, the “bampots” in this affair are those who have greater resources than us, and access to the truth, but who have lacked either the will or the courage or the imagination to follow it through.
We are anything but bampots. Rather, we have demonstrated that the wisdom of the crowd is more effective by far than any remnants of wisdom in the press.
I have no doubt that the police investigation into this matter is proceeding in spite of great opposition in the MSM and the Scottish Football Authorities – all of whom conspired to expose Rangers to the custodianship of those for whom football is a foreign language.
I have no doubt that the constant exposition of wrong-doing on this blog, in particular the questions we have constantly raised, and anomalies we have pointed out, has assisted and enabled the law enforcement agencies in this process.
If we are to be consistent in this, our enabling of the authorities, we MUST show restraint at all times as this process is followed through. People who are charged with a crime deserve to be given a fair trial in the absence of rumour or innuendo. We must also, if we are to continue as the spectre which haunts the avaricious – and the real bampots – be seen to be better than they, and give them no cause to accuse us of irresponsibility.
This affair has now evolved way beyond one club gaining unfair advantage over others. For all the understandable Schadenfreude of many among us, the real enemy is not Rangers, it is about those who enabled and continue to enable the farce at Ibrox.
This is now about systematic cheating at the heart of the Scottish game (in the name of cash and in spite of lip service to sporting integrity), and how the greed of a bunch of ethically challenged officials allowed another group of ethically challenged businessmen free rein to enrich themselves at the expense of the fans.
Whether laws were broken or not, the players at Rangers have come and gone and are variables, but the malignant constant at the SFA and SPFL are still there. Last night, even after the news that four men had been arrested in connection with the takeover at Ibrox in 2011, they were gathered together at Celtic Park with their Irish counterparts, tucking into succulent lamb (perhaps) and fine wines, doing some back slapping, making jokes about the vulgarities of their fans, bragging about the ST money they have banked.
The revolution won’t be over until they are gone, and if they remain, it is Scottish Football that will be over.
jimlarkin says:
December 16, 2014 at 9:22 am
http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/sports/football/9608277/johnstone-defends-mccoist-move?
20 odd seconds in DJ says that Ally made sure he was looking after himself by ensuring his contract was in order so it would up his ‘wage cut’ to the original level should he hand in his notice.
So his pal is saying Ally does read and takes time to think about contracts after all!!
DJ then reminds us that Ally took no salary for 4 months during admin (£250k) but fails to remind us of the 1 million shares , current value Circ £190k to £200k which could be considered a nice wee compensation package.
Oh and speaking of which who is Ally going to proxy his shares to this AGM if he has not cashed in beforehand??
I imagine that if MA does turn up at Hampden on 27 January, then a deal has already been made that suits him. If no deal is struck that suits him, then in his place will be a letter delivered by his legal team full of threats that will include knowledge his people have unearthed in their sojourn at Ibrox. I expect that whatever happens, the SFA will hit a new low.
I hope I am wrong.
Matty Roth
I believe Peter Lawwell mentioned FFP being introduced to our game at Celtic AGM.
I wrote to him re changes required to reform our game in 2011 one of which was domestic FFP.
Details are here http://celticunderground.net/sfa-reform-one-down-three-to-go/
My suggestion was noted but it has become clear that the delay in taking it forward is that many clubs would not get a licence. With Aberdeen being the latest to declare freedom from debt introducing FFP is less likely to exclude many top tier clubs. It’s introduction will probably be staged to help non compliant clubs to get into line.
So setting conditions on ownership that TRFC supporters will now see make absolute sense rather than an attempt to sanction them makes sense for everyone.
There will probably not be a better opportunity to set our game on a honest path that recognises the sins of the past, but being football in Scotland who can say it will be grasped.
If we assume that Roddy Forsyth’s source of information is the Ashley camp then they are peddling the idea of a Champions’ League assault to promote the Sports Direct brand in Europe. It seems unlikely for the following reasons:
1. At the current standard, it would cost a small fortune to build a team capable of both qualifying, then competing. So far, MA’s men have been attempting to cut costs and it remains to be seen what happens when the window opens.
2. As has been highlighted before, UEFA maintain an iron grip on their lucrative advertising revenue streams and dictate what can be visible in the stadia during games. I suppose Sports Direct Rangers is an option, a la Red Bull Salzburg, but I can’t see that going down too well.
3. UEFA are much less likely to be as malleable as the SFA when it comes to dual ownership.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard MA even speak, and the only official comment I can recall was from a spokesman following one of Dave King’s many tirades. It was that Mike Ashley “would act to protect his commercial interests in Rangers”. That appears to be exactly what he is doing. Feeding journos tales of European glory might be enough to keep the merchandising revenue flowing from a largely distrustful support.
Allyjambo says:
December 16, 2014 at 9:52 am
I expect that whatever happens, the SFA will hit a new low.
==============================================================
My guess is that an assurance from Ashley that The Rangers will get first dibs on European participation ahead of Newcastle will secure the good of Scottish football and everything else will be hunky dory. After all what is the problem with one man owning clubs in entirely differnt leagues when there is near-zero chance of them both qualifying for Europe.
Yes, the SFA held Ashley’s feet to the fire and got the concessions they needed – both sides win – what wonderful admnistration.
Jim Jeffries leaves Dunfermline.
Jim Jefferies stands down at DAFC.
He must have found it difficult to deliver promotion with a mixture of kids and journeymen. I wonder if he will continue to take a salary for 12 months?
y4rmy says:
December 16, 2014 at 10:37 am
1. At the current standard, it would cost a small fortune to build a team capable of both qualifying, then competing. So far, MA’s men have been attempting to cut costs and it remains to be seen what happens when the window opens.
==================================================
y4rmy, it’s the hope that will kill you. Mike doesn’t need to acheive to sell shirts, he just needs to say he will acheive to get the tills ringing. You could read this as a cocaine business model, or you could say it gives Ashley space to build a sustainable busienss and reach Europe through organic growth over maybe ten years. Only time will tell if he has the interest – the money is no object if he doesn’t, the money is not enough to excite him. Much will be clear this time next week.
Re my previous: The introduction of domestic FFP would of course hamper any attempts by TRFC at securing regular CL access by the previous unsustainable means and would remove what Forsyth says is an attraction to Ashley.
Any future IPO if it comes to it, should state that TRFC are committed to being run in a sustainable manner exclusive of CL income as that cannot be guaranteed.
The pursuit of UEFA geld at all costs is what damaged Scottish football, to allow unfettered future pursuit would be an act of extreme folly.
I believe the EPL don’t have any such restrictions. The lower Football League do, however, so NU could not afford to be relegated
Old school is Jim Jeffries. You hand in your resignation and then you leave. Classy and not very difficult.
Thought I would drop a line to AIM Regulation
http://sport.stv.tv/football/302699-fifteen-for-15-meet-dundees-youngest-ever-scorer-craig-wighton/
Let’s not forget, that if Mike Ashley invests in The Rangers he is investing in a football business that does not know how to do football and does not know how to play business. In effect he would be better off just buying the IP and naming rights and starting from scratch without the need to demolish and clear away the current mess. Oh hang on a moment – maybe Mike will leave Hampden after his roasting with an agreement to use Hampden for his new project. That would make perfect sense, especially if anything terrible was to happen to Ibrox and there was no possibility of playing there anymore.
Allyjambo says:
December 16, 2014 at 9:04 am
the obvious inference… is that the SFA have been ignoring obvious breeches of it’s rules! A pretty serious charge, I’d say, for any journalist to publish. So why is Roddy Forsyth not pursuing that with all the vigour he can muster?
——————-
Just as an aside, was not the bold Roddy an RFC(NIL) Club Deck debenture holder? Might make objectivity a little tricky, not to mention being able to distinguish between moonbeams and the lights of an oncoming train.
I keep coming back to it, if Ashley wanted a Scottish Club to promote the SD brand in Europe for around maybe £1.5 to £2.0m a season he could be Celtics shirt sponsor. Mere buttons to Ashley.
With Rangers what is he really getting in terms of Euro coverage being they ain’t going to get there anytime soon without huge injections of cash and I doubt having been in the Euro wilderness they are hardly going to be the first team on out continental cousins lips.
Up to date he clearly sees something worth hanging around for but exactly what it is, who knows.
When I said “That would make perfect sense, especially if anything terrible was to happen to Ibrox and there was no possibility of playing there anymore.” I hope no one supposed I meant burning down the house a la big blue bus or anything like that. No, no, no.What I meant is, Mike might present evidence to the SFA that Ibrox has become toxic, both physically and metaphorically.
The Onerous Contracts focus on Ibrox making it a toxic environment for the establishment club to flourish financially as it should, and the big boys who stole all the money also failed to maintain the fabric of society’s favourite club so it is a H&S nightmare. Under such circumstances it would be impossible to continue without putting Ibrox into quarantine until such time as these factors can be overcome. Failure to do so would guarantee liquidation post haste – unless – unless of course – the SFA could see it’s way to maybe helping out in these extraordinary circumstances outwith anything envisioned by those who so carefully draughted the current rules.
Yes, SFA, you are the only ones who can save us now by declaring Ibrox unfit until further notice and making HAmpden available – or be the ones who decide it is our fate is endure another LIQUIDATIIIOOOONNN !!!
Jake Cantona says:
December 16, 2014 at 11:14 am
Just as an aside, was not the bold Roddy an RFC(NIL) Club Deck debenture holder? Might make objectivity a little tricky, not to mention being able to distinguish between moonbeams and the lights of an oncoming train.
—————–
That works both ways unfortunately, if he was a died in the wool Aberdeen, Celtic or Dundee fan, he would be questioned on anything negative against other teams, especially Rangers. I think most football fans are the same, it is extremely difficult to be completely objective.
I don’t believe it matters which team you support if the piece covers all the angles, if it is just PR Puff then that person deserves all the ridicule that comes his/her way….But NOT because they are a Rangers fan!
Madbhoy24941 says:
December 16, 2014 at 11:45 am
I don’t believe it matters which team you support if the piece covers all the angles, if it is just PR Puff then that person deserves all the ridicule that comes his/her way….But NOT because they are a Rangers fan!
——–
I agree with that, but Roddy Forsyth’s piece yesterday – with its repeated emphasis on European participation and the “Old Firm rivalry renewed” stuff – was Rangers-centric mince.
In a quite hard hitting attack in the Sun on Ally McCoist, Bill Leckie gives us this classic
“Someone within an organisation that’s been liquidated once and is still haemorrhaging money agreed to this deal”
In other Sun news, two page spread by Jim Kerr wanting Rangers back for his own club, Celtics, sake.
Yada, yada, yada. Blah,blah,blah.
Speculate all you want about Ashley’s motives, McCoist’s plan or whatever, but I’m telling you, I’m not believing a word until I’ve heard Neil Patey’s take on it.
Then I’ll believe the opposite of what he says.
Brilliantly perceptive comment in the Press & Journal today :
“Ally McCoist’s Rangers’ future looks precarious after the club yesterday told the Stock Exchange the manager had resigned.”
“Looks precarious”? No shit Sherlock!
Scottish Football needs journalists with at least a couple of brain cells.
upthehoops says:
December 16, 2014 at 6:10 am
82 1 Rate This
Interesting past 24 hours.
….The end game, Roddy informs us, is to have Rangers ‘back’ in the Champions League, and his article suggests the SFA are in on that….
============================================
That my friend is match fixing…
Mr Forsyth should now be called out…and asked to explain his match fixing accusations/operating policy against the SFA…if indeed that is what he is suggesting?
I haven’t read the piece…but if true for a so called journalist to write an article that suggests and presents match fixing as a sort of…run of the mill acceptable practice within Scottish football…that we should just all accept and ignore…shows us how far the influence of corruption extends…
Scottish football is being strangled to death by such people who are so desperate for a club from Ibrox to exist…that corruption is not only ignored but actively and openly discussed as an acceptable means to operate?
mcfc says:
December 16, 2014 at 11:44 am
…
Yes, SFA, you are the only ones who can save us now by declaring Ibrox unfit until further notice and making HAmpden available – or be the ones who decide it is our fate is endure another LIQUIDATIIIOOOONNN!!!
——————————————————————————–
http://www.hampdenpark.co.uk/the-hampden-experience/hampden-history.html
“Queen’s Park, who still own the Stadium, are the only Amateur Club playing in the Scottish Football League and are currently in Division 2.
The Stadium was leased to the Scottish Football Association and has been operated by Hampden Park Limited since April 2000. It is an initial 20-year lease with a further 20-year option.”
I’m wondering about the situation regarding who decides who gets to use Hampden under the current 20 year lease and if it is the same as when Celtic lodged there in the 90s.
Anyone know whether Celtic negotiated with Queen’s Park or the SFA?
If it was the SFA then why, as Queen’s Park are the owners?
Perhaps Rangers can wait til the SFA graciously decline to take up the option to extend the lease in 2020.
Kicker Conspiracy says:
December 16, 2014 at 1:20 pm
………………..
As far as I can remember it was Queen’s Park…as the SFA had informed Celtic they had to play away from CP due to reconstruction…when in fact the rules mentioned no such thing.
As a wee aside I have personal experience of a very similar situation to that which Ally McCoist finds himself in wrt his 12 month notice period.
Although the quantum involved was slightly different the principle was the same wrt the willingness of the employee to serve out the notice period in continued employment. This put the Senior Partner of the firm involved in an untenable position regarding his personal authority.
The employee instructed a top solicitor, fortunately free of charge, who was absolutely superb. He immediately told the employee to speak to no one about the situation other than him under any circumstances, took a couple of minutes to read the contract, hear the background, then he smiled contentedly and said “I will get you everything in the contract. Do you want more or are you happy with that?”
To ensure that the employee leave immediately the firm had to settle the contract in full plus pay an extra 9% to compensate fully for loss of holiday entitlement and educational support.
If there is an £125k expense account which is part of the contract during his notice period then I think you would be looking at a settlement of £875k. The only reason that a lesser figure will be agreed is if Ally wants out immediately or his financial experts believe that Rangers will not be in a position to pay his salary over a 12 month period.
The coming conversation between the SFA and Ashley reminders me of the brilliant story of Winston Churchill and Lady Nancy Astor.
WC: Would you sleep with me for £1,000,000 ? [in the 1930s]
NA: [a millionairess fond of talking about her charity work] Yes, of course, imagine the good I could do with £1,000,000.
WC: Would you sleep with me for £5 ?
NA: Don’t be disgusting! What do you think I am? A common whore?
WC: I think we’ve established that, we’re merely haggling over the price.
Mike has broken enough rules without sanction to know he can get away with anything – or he’ll just let the patient perish once and for all. For the MSM and mug fans there will be fines that are never paid and promises that are never enforced.
Tonev appeal rejected
7 match ban
wottpi says:
December 16, 2014 at 11:44 a
I keep coming back to it, if Ashley wanted a Scottish Club to promote the SD brand in Europe for around maybe £1.5 to £2.0m a season he could be Celtics shirt sponsor. Mere buttons to Ashley.
=========================================================================
Such a good point! The only answer is that Mike has made millions (billions) from buying defunct brands for pennies and reviving them to profitability – but rarely to their former glory. Why change a winning formula?
andygraham.66 says:
December 16, 2014 at 12:33 pm
In other Sun news, two page spread by Jim Kerr wanting Rangers back for his own club, Celtics, sake.
_______________________________
Part of the deal that got his band the opening spot on a nationwide television broadcast, perhaps? Or am I just too cynical? Still, Sunday night, very high profile exposure, Tuesday morning, spouting the TRFC mantra in two page spread! Hard to believe there’s not a link there, even if it’s just the Sun taking advantage of someone in public gaze. Both gigs would have paid well, though!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30491329
Aberdeen’s Milne welcomes swift return of Rangers, Hibs and Hearts
By Jim Spence
BBC Sport
Aberdeen chairman Stewart Milne is looking forward to the return of Rangers, Hearts and Hibernian to Scottish football’s top tier.
But, even in their Premiership absence, he argues measures made by clubs to tackle debt and invest in youth development augur well for the game.
“Without any doubt, none of us want to see three of our biggest clubs not being in the top league,” he said.
“We all want to see them back as quickly as possible.”
———————————————————————————
Jim
Why didn’t you ask Mr Milne which three clubs, currently there on merit, he wants out of the Premiership as quickly as possible?
ecobhoy says:
December 16, 2014 at 11:03 am
‘..Thought I would drop a line to AIM Regulation..’
——–
Super letter, ecobhoy, making an extremely important point as from the shareholder/potential investor point of view in the run-up to a share offer.
People with money make mistakes. That bloke Ashley at Newcastle Utd has alienated the support, introduced the ‘Cockney mafia’, appointed Keegan, alienated Keegan, saw the club relegated (under Shearer), played in the second tier, sacked Hughton and so on. He’s not the Messiah. Even if he could be seriously bothered with The Rangers, there is no guarantee that he and his staff would get it right.
andygraham.66 says:
December 16, 2014 at 12:33 pm
‘.., two page spread by Jim Kerr wanting Rangers back for his own club, Celtics, sake.’
———
What Jim Kerr was that? The wee, simple-minded ,red-heided tyke fae Toryglen? In this matter, he is little more than one of those by the name of which he once called his music group.I question his judgement, and maybe his eyesight is not too good, either.
rabtdog says:
December 16, 2014 at 1:56 pm
That bloke Ashley at Newcastle Utd …….. He’s not the Messiah.
=======================================================
He’s a very naughty boy! At least according to the SFA…
Just had this great image of Neil Patey at the E&Y Xmas party singing “Always look on the bright side of life”.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
What Price Loyalty
I’m touched by the loyalty of many fans to Super in his hour of negotiation. He gave them many happy hours and bragging rights by scoring 251 goals and in return they will forgive him anything – even unforgiveable football. Even though he was very well paid at the time, they’ll even forgive that for every goal he scored, he has since ripped £13,000 out of the club they profess to love, as it teeters on the edge of oblivion – based on PMG’s latest, believable figures. But then again, they do say that love is blind and stupid and beyond-logic and innumerate and gullible – yes mostly gullible – don’t they?
No need to ask which panto poster this one is from – http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/79702000/jpg/_79702815_llambias.jpg
Just hope the spiv produicers remembered to cast a Prince Charming.
So McCoist is due to meet tomorrow to discuss his position.
With the AGM on Monday, I would have thought that the sleekit one is in a very strong negotiating position.
He’s in no rush to agree anything – he’s just given 12 months notice.
The Board however, IMO, are in a rush to come to an agreement as they would look rather incompetent if they convene the AGM without any clarity on arguably the most important role in TRFC.
I would bet on McCoist getting what he wants – with a confidentiality clause agreed / paid for.
Interesting and relevant article about Strachan trying to work his notice period whilst managing at Southampton.
“…Strachan said: “I was in a position at Southampton where I said to the chairman I was leaving in the summer, This was in the September.
“Only he – and somebody else – knew but it leaked about November when Southampton were fourth in the Premiership.
“I had to leave in February because there was a grey area there and that was with such a well-run club. It had become a grey area with the players – who would be the next manager and things like that? Rupert decided enough was enough.
“To me it didn’t make any difference but it seemed it did to everybody round about me when they knew the manager was moving on.
“It became different with the players. I couldn’t put my finger on it. They were still great with me and they kept working as hard as they could but there was a bit of a difference there…”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/scotland-boss-gordon-strachan-rangers-4818001
ecobhoy says:
December 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm
“I have no doubt that that info could be helpful to someone doing a bit of speculation wrt RFC shares.”
——————————
I’m not sure why that observation resonated so clearly with me. Given my inability to analyse permutations, the myriad consequences of current events should have me flatly bamboozled.
I would however caution that such tactics would require that the redoubtable Roddy Forsyth compromise his journalistic integrity for someone’s financial benefit; a thought that is unconscionable. Particularly as the article appears in such a well respected publication as The Pantograph.
StevieBC says:
December 16, 2014 at 3:27 pm
The Board however, IMO, are in a rush to come to an agreement as they would look rather incompetent if they convene the AGM without any clarity on arguably the most important role in TRFC.
===========================================================================
Stevie, I disagree. I wouldn’t mind playing the board’s hand. It may suit them to do things quietly, but they could do a world-class hatchet job on Super over 12 months if they choose – to the point where he could burn in the street without benefit of urine from passers-by. Or perhaps of more importance to Super, ensuring he is unable to work for 12 months – and probably never again – football, TV, personal appearances. By contrast all the naughty spiv stuff can be deflected to former board members – now long gone.
The AGM issue can be dodged by starting an internal enquiry into the legality, ethics and corporate governace aspects of Super’s terms – to be published in maybe 120 days – then delayed (but leaked) due to on-going police enquiries and court proceedings. Mike is the new Messiah – the bears will be split from the word go when the choices are laid before them.
Better Value than Advocaat ?
The BBC’s EBT page makes Dick sound better value than Super – he won two big leagues and some cups for just £74mil.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18148818
“Dick Advocaat Rangers manager from 1998-2002. Spent almost £74m to win five trophies, including two titles.”
Tonev loses his appeal.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30496680
“It was revealed that the original decision had been based on the belief that Logan was a more reliable and convincing witness than Tonev, 24.”
I make no comment on whether (I think) he is guilty or not, however being on trial in a foreign country must be a very difficult experience and makes me wonder about how valid judgement calls about the reliability of witnesses are.
Phil’s latest is claiming that in addition to a GBP 750K salary, McCoist was on a guaranteed ‘unvouched’ expenses of GBP 125K p.a.
But the killer;
McCoist got at least 50% of salary, [or possibly 100% TBC ], as a bonus for winning each league – against part-timers !
Unbelievable.
And he must have a fantastic agent / lawyer… 🙄
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/i-can-vouch-for-this/
What if Llambia appears as the sole remaining board member at the AGM and like Pete Postlethwaite in The Usual Suspects announces in dispassionate, mono tone “My name is Kobayashi. I work for Keyser Soze. My employer has instructed me to inform you that at precisely four, fifty nine pm today the company will be placed into voluntary liquidation. There will be no negotiation. [stunned silence] If there are no questions, this meeting is at an end” [lights dim, uproar, Llambias is gone]
Well. It’s more likely than lots of other scenarios being floated just now 😉
Sensible Mcfc. Not likely, sensible.
Queen of the South ace faces violent conduct charge for Ian Black incident
http://sport.stv.tv/football/303777-queen-of-the-south-ace-faces-violent-conduct-charge-for-ian-black-incident/
Really. From what I remember, Black wrapped himself around Dowie’s legs until Dowie was losing his balance and had nowhere to put his raised foot. He then made contact with Black’s leg as he tried to find the ground. I can’t view the video at the moment – maybe entirely wrong – or maybe just getting paranoid after watching The Rangers for all of 30 minutes in my whole life 🙂
Re:Tonev.
Is it possible that Tonev speaking English as a Second language contributed to the original tribunal assumption of his unreliability. Thus a racism charge is “proven” against a player on his unreliability as a witness because of his ethnicity.
In other words institutonal racist attitudes contributed towards the verdict.
Ironic, perhaps.
I await the thumbs down avalanche with an undisguised glee.
mcfc says:
December 16, 2014 at 5:37 pm
Queen of the South ace faces violent conduct charge for Ian Black incident
http://sport.stv.tv/football/303777-queen-of-the-south-ace-faces-violent-conduct-charge-for-ian-black-incident/
Really. From what I remember, Black wrapped himself around Dowie’s legs until Dowie was losing his balance and had nowhere to put his raised foot. He then made contact with Black’s leg as he tried to find the ground. I can’t view the video at the moment – maybe entirely wrong – or maybe just getting paranoid after watching The Rangers for all of 30 minutes in my whole life.
==============================================================
The view the ref had and the initial camera shot made it look as though things were as you described. But after the indicent was over they showed the incident from the other side.
It was a cynical foul where the QoS guy took his time and and IMO deliberately put all of his weight on Black’s thigh. I don’t like Black because of the nastyness he gets up to but I’ve been waiting for this charge to come.
Yea the guy’s leg was trapped following the tackle but if you see the video it’s a stick-on. It was so callous I reckoned there must be some history between them but I honestly don’t know if there is.
Quelle Surprise
“It is understood however that the SPFL tribunal made no distinction between oldco, newco or Rangers Youth Development Limited and deemed the training club simply to be Rangers in its present form.”
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/303123-rangers-oldco-liquidators-seek-chunk-of-charlie-telfer-tribunal-cash/
ecobhoy says:
December 16, 2014 at 6:02 pm
It was a cynical foul where the QoS guy took his time and and IMO deliberately put all of his weight on Black’s thigh. I don’t like Black because of the nastyness he gets up to but I’ve been waiting for this charge to come.
===================================================================
Eco – thanks – fair enough – but it takes two to tango. Black had no need to wrap himself around Dowie – so he should have been penalised too – although the ref saw that clearly and did nothing – so nothing more can be done now.
SPFL this time.
Surely describing a training company allied to a previous company as being the same entity is not a matter of opinion, but simply wrong in fact. Hence the two Tony Higginses and the upright Mr Doncaster have made a decision based upon a manifest and indisputable untruth.
Scottish football makes guilty verdicts of unsubstantiated claims and awards compensation. Upon untruth.
Governance, it is called, apparently!
Re. ecobhoy @6:02pm
The commentator on BBC Sportscene on Sunday night spotted it as well and was alert enough to recommend a citing to the audience. Nice to see BBC Scotland and the SFA singing from the same hymn book!
Neil Alexander wins an £84K contract claim against Rangers
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/303747-scottish-fa-to-hear-appeal-as-neil-alexander-wins-84000-from-rangers/
Rangers to appeal.
Looking at the Black incident for about the 6th time, it is a stick on for sure, but surely Black should be pulled up for the way he lifts his leg, with studs showing, towards the QOS players groin. In my opinion the ref should have sent off both.
I know he probably has the security of the land assets and could pull the plug at any time but I am convinced the more Mike Ashley is told he can’t do something the more he might just want to dig his heels in and do it.
Hence his henchman doing much more than I thought he ever would have in his recent cost cutting analysis and then programme.
Mike is after all a man who breathes life into previously distressed brands that he picked up for a song.
He and his people know how to add value and reap commercial harvests.
He has experienced ups and downs too and got stronger because of them.
He will never walk away with his tail between his legs and the only outcome will be one where he has got what he is happy with, one way or another.
He still holds all the cards despite the beautifully coordinated PR Blitzkreig we’ve lived through since Friday.
People like those Rangers minded businessmen who coordinated the Blitzkreig and who still want the club for free or their pals, the Rangers minded officials dominating the SFA and running (ruining?) our game, underestimate him at their peril.
He could simply choose to run it into the ground bit by painful bit.
A few years of that and then sell off the land.
By then nobody would care less.
iceman63 says:
December 16, 2014 at 6:20 pm
SPFL this time.
Surely describing a training company allied to a previous company as being the same entity is not a matter of opinion, but simply wrong in fact.
———————————–
One of the complications arising from separating club from company and in this case, interestingly, it looks as though the separation has dragged the newco into the liabilities of the oldco rather than insulating it from them…..i wonder if there might be further consequences down the line ❓ ❓
Berrty,
Wrong. Ref should have ran up, told them he’d no idea what had happened but that he was booking them both for behaving like a couple of f4nnies. Just like it used to be!
Given the desperation and utter dependency upon Ashley of Rangers and given the total lack of capacity, courage and integrity of Scottish football’s governing bodies, it is surely clear that Mike Ashley will get whatever he wants from his sojourn into the murky depths of Ibrox and of Scottish football.
The only problem we all have is that we have absolutely no idea what it is that he actually does want.
On the telfer case. I’d be interested if the enquiry genuinely didn’t differentiate, whether they said something like “for the purposes of the calculation we haven’t differentiated” or whether (as I suspect) they said nothing and that the “no difference” interpretation is STV’s only.
Can’t see an operator like Doncaster falling into a creditor honey trap that easily if I’m honest.
Iceman @ 6.45
Well I’m guessing it isn’t to be considered as a shining beacon of integrity in a sea of corruption, that’s for sure.
That’s a belter @easy. ‘Technically’ is a wonderful word when you want to be newco because it’s financially convenient:
iceman63 says:
December 16, 2014 at 6:02 pm
Re:Tonev.
Is it possible that Tonev speaking English as a Second language contributed to the original tribunal assumption of his unreliability.
———————————————————————
I think there is something to be learnt from this for all football players who don’t speak English as their first language.
Basically that is to give their evidence in their native language and the tribunal can listen to a translator put it into English.
It has to be remembered that it was the first tribunal’s decision on this that actually counts as the appeal tribunal didn’t hear the evidence and basically has to accept the interpretation of the first tribunal on this matter.
The first tribunal thought Logan gave his evidence well and that Tonev – who gave his evidence in English – didn’t and therefore Logan was adjudged more credible.
I have lived and worked abroad and know the difficulty that arises unless you are fluent in the native language. You can look stupid, evasive and disinterested on occasion and definitely hesitant and this can happen even when you have a reasonable working knowledge of the language.
Perhaps one of the strangest cases I came across was my mate’s wife who was a native-born gaelic speaker and learnt English at school but hardly used it in the community and never at home.
She married my mate when she was about 20 (over 40 years ago) and came to the Central Belt and I was fascinated that when people spoke to her you couldn’t almost see the cogs in the brain taking the English and translating it into gaelic and then back back into English to reply.
It was even easier to observe when she read a newspaper. Probably it took about 10 years for her not to need to do the internal translation. So when I worked abroad I knew exactly what was going on as I struggled to understand and respond.
I haven’t a clue about how confident Tonev is speaking English but in the quasi legal environment of the tribual he should have remained in his native language IMO because there was so much at stake.
Will be interesting to see what happens next.
But it’s worth reading the SFA judgement especially surrounding what was allegedly said – according to Logan – by Tonev and the tribunal misreports in its decision what Logan stated.
I look at that and think – three panel memebrs and Logan all speaking English and yet the three wise-men misreport what Logan said in evidence.
I really don’t think Tonev stood much of a chance on that evidence.
With the recent announcement of Thierry Henry’s retirement from the game, it made me think about ‘sporting integrity’ again.
Without a doubt, he was a great player, won virtually everything in the game, and was exciting to watch. He also handled himself extremely well off the pitch, and reaped the benefits via lucrative endorsements.
…but…
Perhaps for fans within a certain age range and nationalities, they will also remember Henry for the infamous handball(s) 5 years ago in the WC play-off in Paris against the Republic of Ireland.
For such a celebrated career, many folks will remember that incident very clearly.
It was a lack of sporting integrity – if only momentarily and perhaps uncharacteristically of Henry – but it brought a lot of negative publicity globally.
The parallel with Scottish football could be that whilst there is still undoubtedly a lot of good things happening in the game – at all levels, and in spite of the SFA – there is an unavoidable focus on the negative aspects of the game, and specifically with the whole ‘sporting integrity’ questions around RFC/TRFC.
As mentioned before, if you imagined that TRFC just didn’t exist at all, then what would the SMSM be reporting on now ? It would have to be significantly more positive, and fairer in its coverage of the game for all Scottish fans. You would think. 🙄
Just a thought. :slamb:
I’m just going to take my tongue out of my cheek long enough to ask the question, I wonder why tonev felt the need to swear/curse/berate in English at all instead of Bulgarian? []
Looks as if BDO want their slice of the Telfer money-
http://t.co/sM2579ZFKq
I am clearly getting more agitated as days go by, might be the weather or work.
Was it a bad foul on Black – yes, but I’m going on the argument that because it wasn’t detected at the time, it can no longer be held against the player i.e. it was an ‘eligible foul’. ‘Eligible fouls’ have intrinsic, temporal and quantum mechanical properties. Consequently they don’t need to be explained to anyone outwith those of us who understand what that means in practice, as opposed to theory.
Richard Wilson tonight – McCoist is getting a bit of a doing from Stewart. Wilson feels the need to step in and repeat what he had said 5mins before, that Ally felt that the had had enough and needed to resign etc……..he worked for nothing during Administration…………[Stewart – did he get his money back for that Richard?] ——–eh, No I haven’t heard that, I don’t know, but he worked for nothing……………………………..
Wilson’s sycophantic generalities about Rangers is getting to me. Basically he reads out a crib sheet from Ally McCoist or his agent. OK, ‘technically’ [in the Rangers sense], he can argue that McCoist worked for zero wage during that period, and ‘technically’ he can argue he is not implying anything other than that – this is nothing more than a rhetorical device to try to protect himself. The foundation of his argument fails because it is obvious he is implying McCoist did not receive any ‘payment’ [as opposed to wage] for working during Administration, whilst admitting he did not know if McCoist had received any payment for such work.
What is up with the BBC sports people – I’m totally perplexed that they would allow this sort of sophistry to continue over such an extended period of time, years now. Baffled.
Telfer cash – doesn’t the ‘Rangers’ defence’ (copyright) mean that they accept the OCNC argument? What am I missing here?
No, the telfer defence says there is no OC/NC arguement to see here now move along. It’s the Alexander defence that completely contradicts that, technically.
Smugas says:
December 16, 2014 at 8:27 pm
Thanks Smugas – getting my various defences mixed up here!
Ok – the ‘Rangers’ Defence’ – McGregor wasn’t transferred so didn’t ‘technically’ leave the clumpany – isn’t this an acceptance of the OCNC scenario? Do I have it vaguely correct now?
Hamerdoon says:
December 16, 2014 at 8:18 pm
1 0 Rate This
…What is up with the BBC sports people – I’m totally perplexed that they would allow this sort of sophistry to continue over such an extended period of time, years now. Baffled.
———–
Not just the BBC’s sports people who leave you baffled and perplexed these days.
Don’t know who the pundits were on SSB tonight but caught 20 minutes just after 7.30. The Ashley involvement was being dissected and the outcome decided between the panel and a caller was that rules should be bent broken or ignored to allow Ashley to do what he wants at TRFC in the hope that he gets them into the CL. Nothing else matters. This would heal all the ailments being suffered by Scottish football at the moment. Never heard so much utter nonsense in this whole debacle. Well maybe I have.
Hamerdoon says:
December 16, 2014 at 8:18 pm
8 0 Rate This
I am clearly getting more agitated as days go by, might be the weather or work.
Was it a bad foul on Black – yes, but I’m going on the argument that because it wasn’t detected at the time, it can no longer be held against the player i.e. it was an ‘eligible foul’. ‘Eligible fouls’ have intrinsic, temporal and quantum mechanical properties. Consequently they don’t need to be explained to anyone outwith those of us who understand what that means in practice, as opposed to theory.
Richard Wilson tonight – McCoist is getting a bit of a doing from Stewart. Wilson feels the need to step in and repeat what he had said 5mins before, that Ally felt that the had had enough and needed to resign etc……..he worked for nothing during Administration…………[Stewart – did he get his money back for that Richard?] ——–eh, No I haven’t heard that, I don’t know, but he worked for nothing……………………………..
Wilson’s sycophantic generalities about Rangers is getting to me. Basically he reads out a crib sheet from Ally McCoist or his agent. OK, ‘technically’ [in the Rangers sense], he can argue that McCoist worked for zero wage during that period, and ‘technically’ he can argue he is not implying anything other than that – this is nothing more than a rhetorical device to try to protect himself. The foundation of his argument fails because it is obvious he is implying McCoist did not receive any ‘payment’ [as opposed to wage] for working during Administration, whilst admitting he did not know if McCoist had received any payment for such work.
What is up with the BBC sports people – I’m totally perplexed that they would allow this sort of sophistry to continue over such an extended period of time, years now. Baffled.
Telfer cash – doesn’t the ‘Rangers’ defence’ (copyright) mean that they accept the OCNC argument? What am I missing here?
==========================
Richard Wilsons output has been a source of annoyance for me for a long time Hamerdoon.
I’ve no idea why but 90% of his BBC output seems Rangers focused but I expect I missed when he was appointed as the BBCs official Rangers correspondant.
I expect its just like the royal family, the BBC feel the need for special reporters dedicated to this important institution.
A thought has obscured wrt BDO/Telfer…will BDO go after a chunk of the fee should Lewis Macleod go in January…and any other player on the books pre-liquidation who is subsequently transferred ❓
parttimearab says:
December 16, 2014 at 9:02 pm
————————–
occurred not obscured…… 😳
Seems to me that TRFC are using the ‘same club, different company’ argument whenever it suits their cause!
In the Telfer case, they were ‘the same club’ (their argument, not mine, and in fact not true)argument, but in the Alexander case they are ‘different companies’ (true)in a bid to win their case.
From what I can fathom the football authorities have gone along with the ‘same club’ idea in both cases. TRFC win one, lose one!
Overall result, TRFC lose out, slightly.
BDO, of course, and the law, aren’t interested in ‘the club’ argument/defence, it is only how the law treats the company that counts.
BDO will, we hope, put in a claim and take it all the way. They will have a better idea than TRFC (can they afford lawyers who will be expert in this specialist area?) of the likely outcome and would be most likely, I think, to win.
The Alexander case could go either way, though, and would depend on how the law would view the TRFC claim that McGregor wasn’t transferred by TRFC, in what would be a, no doubt, legal first. A close one to call, but for TRFC to triumph it would most likely have to be established that the ‘same club’ argument is false as it would probably form a major part of Alexander’s argument!
Greed has opened cans of worms that TRFC would have been better keeping closed!