A spectre is haunting Scottish Football

From the TSFM Manifesto šŸ™‚

A spectre is haunting Scottish Football ā€” 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 ofĀ 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, butĀ 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 playersĀ 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 orĀ theĀ courage or the imagination to follow it through.

We are anything but bampots. Rather, weĀ 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 businessmenĀ free rein to enrich themselves at the expense of the fans.

Whether laws were broken or not, theĀ 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 someĀ back slapping, makingĀ 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.

 

 

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.
Tom Byrne

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

4,164 thoughts on “A spectre is haunting Scottish Football


  1. jockybhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 11:28 am

    Iā€™ve had my say on the Tonev much earlier and at the end of the day, the football authorities have made their call on this and based on prior examples, we can be fairly sure they will not overturn their own decision.
    ==================================================================
    Yip the decision is made and any further action will be decided further down the line and probably in other places and will probably be dependant on decisions by Tonev, Arsenal or the Bulgarian FA rather than Celtic IMO.

    There is a legit area for discussion between Celtic and the SFA and I would think a lot of other SPFL clubs might well think this is an issue to be looked at away from the emotional public arena.

    Celtic backed their player presumably on the support he received from his fellow players and coaching staff who will know him fairly well. He will do his ban finish his loan period and go back to Arsenal or to another club.

    Effectively the matter is over from the perspective of Scottish Football although it will be interesting to observe what happens if we get another uncorroborated allegation of racism.

    However plenty of other topics to keep us busy and they’re arriving fast and furious šŸ˜†


  2. Stevie in IT has been busy updating info on the AIM required website. The advisers and directors are now correct – but it has been wrong for more time than a stopped clock since the IPO. The directors page comes complete with three of the most unnatural smiles you’ll ever see.

    But, what’s this, there’s a wee bit of a problem with the Audit Committee:

    Audit Committee
    David Somers (Chairman)

    Investment Committee
    James Easdale
    David Somers

    Remuneration and Nominations Committee
    James Easdale (Chairman)
    David Somers

    Updated: 16/12/2014

    http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/board-management/committees


  3. Being pedantic Eco but Tonev is on loan from Aston Villa not Arsenal.


  4. Steff Gelling says: December 17, 2014 at 12:00 pm

    “Has Delia apologised yet or does he still claim to know Tonev is innocent?”

    The only thing we do know for sure is that “He was found guilty of the offence” by a disciplinary panel. Anything else, including any basis for an apology from Celtic FC, its manager or anyone on this message board is pure conjecture.

    Thanks for your interest, now be a good troll and troddle off.


  5. I very rarely post.
    I am legally qualified and,have to say,the Tonev ruling is very,very worrying.I am not interested in who plays for what club or your whataboutery or whatever.People are being jailed for this type of abuse…..IF there is proof,beyond reasonable doubt.There was no proof of this type in this case,no witness(es).This matter should have been handed to the Police and Fiscal’s office to investigate.
    This man has been branded a racist and a liar for the rest of his days on the basis of a balance of probability “ruling” regarding one mans word against another.Wholly unacceptable.The rules of evidence should reflect the subject matter,this is not a civil matter.Whatever the clubs all agreed to accept in these tribunals,it becomes irrelevant,when the charges are of a criminal nature,the whole matter should have been passed on to the authorities.This should be taken up with the Justice sec.
    I must emphasise football allegencies have no place here.The player has been treated very,very poorly.


  6. @mcfc there is a problem with all the committees if the rumours of the executive chairman standing down as a director are correct. My suspicion though is that he’s only giving up the exec role and returning to being a non executive chairman. How will the SFA react if Llambias is announced as CEO?


  7. McCaig’s Tower, I’m no legal expert but below are the Founding Principles of the SFA’s Judicial Panel Protocol, which can be found here: http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/ScottishFAPublications2013-14/Handbook%20-%20JPP2.pdf

    2. Founding Principles
    2.1 The “Founding Principles” in this Section 2 shall underlie the interpretation and application of this Protocol. In the event of a conflict between a particular provision of the Protocol and the Founding Principles, the particular provision of the Protocol will prevail.

    2.2 Principle 1 ā€“ Economic and expeditious justice. The objective of the Protocol is to secure the Determination of disciplinary proceedings arising in respect of Association Football and that decisions are made economically and expeditiously in a fair manner. Tribunals appointed from the Judicial Panel may impose reasonable procedural requirements on Parties to ensure that matters are dealt with economically and expeditiously.

    2.3 Principle 2 ā€“ Decision making in a civil and footballing context. Whilst adhering to the general principles of fairness, and where appropriate, with consideration of underlying principles of law, those submitting to this Protocol acknowledge that these provisions relate to the Determination of matters arising from any breach of the Articles and/or the Disciplinary Rules, which govern the operation of Association Football in Scotland in a civil context, and that Tribunals may make appropriate Determinations in that civil and footballing context.


  8. tykebhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 2:34 pm
    How will the SFA react if Llambias is announced as CEO?
    ======================================================
    Tykebhoy – you mean if there was proof of Mr Ashley having influence at Ibrox – heaven forbid – surely that would not be cricket – a man’s word is his bond and all that – don’t you know ! I’d dare say pistols at dawn are in order – in which case MA better get off the first shot – if you know what I mean.


  9. mcfc says:
    December 17, 2014 at 2:14 pm

    Well what do you know, theyā€™ve changed the article and images at the URL ā€“ they do that sometimes šŸ™‚

    So, hereā€™s an image of Sandy in his favourite tie ā€“ and thereā€™s another wee joke in the background:

    http://i3.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/article4516868.ece/alternates/s615/JS49510504.jpg
    ================================================================
    I remember commenting on the ‘founder member’ invitation a while ago. I could see the value in being a founder member of the club in 2012 as a lot of them would have pay the full adult price.

    But to become a founder member from 1872 wouldn’t raise much money Shirley šŸ˜†

    I mean how many 142 year olds can still make it to football matches and they would all be on pensioner discount and even the world-famous Albion carpark could never accommodate all the wheelchairs.

    Mibbe am jist bein stoopit but how can you be a founder member 140 years after the first foundation. Defo a timewarp over Ibrox methinks šŸ˜

    Still nice to see Easdale showing solidarity with the UoF merchandise and giving the two-fingered salute to Uncle Mike.


  10. Tayred.

    You forget that whataboutery is the lifeblood of football; the point being made is that whilst the disciplinary procedures have improved ; they are (for football matters – who head butted who?) imperfect in terms of which cases get submitted ; punishments metted out; their ability to deal with more serious matters ( e.g. Racism) has to at least be questioned.

    Good to chat


  11. tykebhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 2:30 pm

    Being pedantic Eco but Tonev is on loan from Aston Villa not Arsenal.
    =====================================================================
    No quite correct! But I fear having made the slip I will be doomed to repeat it ad nauseum – one of the burdens of old age šŸ˜†


  12. @mcfc don’t be too hard on Stevie. He’s probably been tasked with scouting a replacement for the football management team. šŸ˜‰


  13. Dear Stevie in IT

    Is this statement to investors legal, decent, honest and truthful ?

    ā€œThe Clubā€™s loyal and sizeable supporter base, both in Scotland and around the world, enables the Club to boast one of the highest percentages of season ticket holders in the UK, with over 38,000 having been sold for the current season.ā€

    And aside from being out of date, 38000 is not a percentage.


  14. tykebhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 2:49 pm
    be too hard on Stevie. Heā€™s probably been tasked with scouting a replacement for the football management team. šŸ˜‰
    ==========================================================
    Have you had a call from Stevie? I’m still waiting. The thing I hate at interviews is when they go down the “you’re over qualified” route šŸ™‚


  15. y4rmy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 2:52 pm
    38000 is not a percentage.
    ===================================================
    y4rmy, well you’ve blown your chance of filling the vacant Finance Director blazer by demonstrating your ignorance of the subtle art of Rangernomics.


  16. MSM: Blind Spot or Total Eclipse ?

    Youā€™ve gotta laugh. Why do the MSM have not a shred of doubt that Rangersness is a prerequisite for Superā€™s replacement. Mr Ashley is trying to re-educate the business, so why would he recruit someone with congenital innumeracy and ā€œthe rangers wayā€ syndrome ?

    They’re not just telling bears what they want to hear in order to sell newspapaers are they. Surely not, the NUJ must have rulews about that sort of thing.


  17. ernie @ 3.11
    As I said,I post very rarely.
    I thought I understood rules of evidence and burden of proof.Accordingly the ruling is beyond belief.It reaffirms that a man can be effectively criminalised on the basis that one guy says he did it.I just think that is a very dangerous precident.
    Anyway I shall disappear again as I seem for some reason to have hit a raw nerve which was not my intention.


  18. @OHenleyAlex
    Ally McCoist still #Rangers manager after meeting with Derek Llambias and Sandy Easdale.


  19. Sky Sports News HQ ā€@SkySportsNewsHQ 44s44 seconds ago
    Sky Sources: Ally McCoist preparing for Rangers’ next game as usual following club meeting in Glasgow


  20. wee lift up from TV, part 256

    ————

    Here’s the list of newly-added fixtures in full:

    Monday January 12 – Hamilton Academical v Dundee United – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Friday January 16 – Rangers v Heart of Midlothian – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Wednesday January 21 – St Mirren v Dundee United – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Friday January 23 – St Johnstone v Aberdeen – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Friday January 30 – Partick Thistle v St Mirren – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Friday February 13 – Rangers v Hibernian – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1

    Friday February 20 – Raith Rovers v Rangers – 7.45pm KO, BT Sport 1


  21. EKBhoy

    Whataboutery is indeed the lifeblood in every pub/staffroom/club fan site whatever, up and down the land. What it can never do is get to the crux of the matter in hand, it just inflames a feeling of anger, almost always in some one-sided, biased way.

    It works great when chatting with like-minded mates, but on a “multi-cultural” forum such as this one it more often than not just clouds the argument. Lets face it, the way the SFA throw about random charges for misconduct etc is confusing enough without us then using the worst of these to beat each other up about.

    With the possible exception of whatever form of Rangers are existing at the time,
    I kinda believe that the SFA are equally incompetent in the way the deal with all clubs! Therefore, the whataboutery just doesn’t work!

    I do agree that it is most def good to chat though šŸ™‚


  22. wottpi says:
    December 17, 2014 at 3:19 pm

    Just a wee reminder of how the process Tonev was subjected to appears far more onerous than a previous example of ā€˜not provenā€™ despite far more evidence apparently being available.

    http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/abject-failure-to-tackle-racism-is-scotland-s-real-secret-shame-1-1415847
    ==============================================================
    I actually find it hard to believe that the SFA in the Spartan case is the same one that dealt with the Tonev case.

    What a stitch-up and proof that the suits make it up as they go along. On the basis of that article I believe the Tonev case should be fought through whatever legal actions are open to him.

    I will certainly draw the Spartan case to the attention of the Celtic supporters rep – it was a gross miscarriage of justice. Two independent witnesses to the racist abuse and the alleged perpetrator taken to the dressing room by his own coaching staff to apologise.

    The Spartan player involved refused the apology because the same player had previously racially abused him he alleged.

    Then the sleight of hand with the non-existant hearing and a Not Proven verdict. Wtf?

    And at the time the SFA stated football racism offences should be dealt with by criminal prosecution. That has been my position since the start of this affair and it used to be that of the SFA as well.

    What happened I wonder? This case should have formed part of the Tonev Appeal and I can’t believe how tawdry it was to apparently manufacture a means whereby the Spartan player abused wasn’t allowed to personally give his evidence.


  23. andygraham.66 says:
    December 17, 2014 at 3:54 pm

    @OHenleyAlex
    Ally McCoist still #Rangers manager after meeting with Derek Llambias and Sandy Easdale.
    ==============================================================
    If true Uncle Mike looks as though he ain’t providing the cash to get rid of him.

    This situation is bizarre and it will be interesting to see what it does to the home crowd at Ibrox.


  24. Eco,

    A bizarre situation indeed.
    Re the crowds at Ibrox, the Den is in meltdown re this news and to a man they are not turning up for the next game against Livi.
    Interesting times all round.


  25. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:09 pm

    If true Uncle Mike looks as though he ainā€™t providing the cash to get rid of him.
    ==================================================
    Eco, I think we’ll have to wait until Monday for some form of clarity.

    But under any circumstances, why would I pay Ā£1.5mil up front to cut him free when I can get away with Ā£80k pcm and keep him on a string.

    My personal approach to Super today would be to step through his contract clause by clause and clarify that any deviations from his duties and responsibilities during his notice period will not go un-actioned – a kind of pre-first verbal warning. Super likes to shoot from the lip and is likely to slip up under the weight of perceived indignities in the coming months ā€“ indignities as in, well short of constructive dismissal in any normal employer/employee relationship.


  26. mcfc says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:21 pm
    ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:09 pm

    If true Uncle Mike looks as though he ainā€™t providing the cash to get rid of him.
    ==================================================
    Eco, I think weā€™ll have to wait until Monday for some form of clarity.

    But under any circumstances, why would I pay Ā£1.5mil up front to cut him free when I can get away with Ā£80k pcm and keep him on a string.

    My personal approach to Super today would be to step through his contract clause by clause and clarify that any deviations from his duties and responsibilities during his notice period will not go un-actioned ā€“ a kind of pre-first verbal warning.
    ============================================================
    I hear what you say. BUT . . . crowds could totally collapse and so too will merchandise sales never mind the pie sales.

    And what about the players? They couldn’t shake a leg for him when he was actually a manager that wasn’t going anywhere. Now he’s going nowhere so what are they going to do?

    OK there will be some pressure to get rid of some in January and a helluva lot of them run out of contract this season which are highly unlikely to be renewed.

    But I’m not so sure about them boxing Ally in a corner – he’s far too clever for them IMO and an industrial tribunal in all the circumstances would be well aware that any claims from the employer might well be tainted.

    So I’m not so sure they’ll get him on any disciplinary grounds. Indeed looking at past longevity if he sits tight he’ll see them all off. I suppose a lot depends on whether Uncle Mike really wants to get involved in a long drawn out bare-knuckle contest over a tiny impoverished football club whose reputation is being further destroyed each passing day.

    I have no doubt Ashley might win in the end but as they say: ‘What Price Victory?’.

    And if things get too much then Ally can just go on the sick for 12 months with stress and I certainly wouldn’t blame him and I’m sure he’ll get a sick line no probs. If I was him I think the trigger of a first verbal warning would see me at the surgery next day šŸ˜†

    Tbh – no kidding aside – many would have crumpled and he has kept going and I think he has a bit left in his tank and probably more than Rangers has.


  27. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    I agree that the process was different in the Spartan case but that is probably why the whole system was changed so that the SFA could avoid such an embarrassment from happening again.

    While I appreciate the issues surrounding the Tonev case (whose word do you take, no corroboration etc) I am more confident that, while perhaps not perfect in some folks eyes, a fuller investigation and consideration of the evidence will have been given than in the Spartans case.


  28. I know the contributions to the LSE share site was poo pooed (and rightly so on some occasions) but one guy may have got it right this morning when Sitonfence said
    ======================================================================

    If you are looking for spin, do not despair, as it’s on its way.

    1. “Having received assurances from the board , Mr McCoist has withdrawn his letter of resignation and continues in his role as Rangers first team manager.”

    2. ” The dialogue between Mr McCoist and the board has been very positive. Both parties have agreed to have more dialogue in the future. Mr McCoist will continue in his role of first team manager.”


  29. Perceived Indignity One

    Trim squad size and costs down to double that of any other Championship club in the January transfer window, in line with the clubā€™s recently announced strategic plan.

    Perceived Indignity Two

    Prepare new training, coaching and squad rotation plans in support of the clubā€™s stated aim of developing the value of young players.

    Perceived Indignity Three

    Conduct press conferences and all media interaction in a manner designed to promote the reputation of the club and to show active support for the board and all its works.

    Can’t see any tribunal finding these too egregious.


  30. mungoboy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:20 pm

    Eco,

    A bizarre situation indeed.
    Re the crowds at Ibrox, the Den is in meltdown re this news and to a man they are not turning up for the next game against Livi.
    Interesting times all round.
    ==============================================
    A lot of the most vocal and productive pro-Board posters on the Den seldom appear to attend games as they are too busy carrying out their PR duties involving smoke and mirrors. So their absence won’t affect the crowd that much šŸ˜†

    I wonder if the crowds do plummet whether TV will swap to cover other games as a ghostly deserted stadium doesn’t make for good viewing. How are the SPFL going to get their money then? Those boycotters are destroying Scottish Football.

    Of course perhaps Ally will carry the can for the next rebirth – The cynic in me wonders how many shares he’ll get this time.


  31. Guessing anyone setting up an fresh egg stall in the vicinity of Ibrox for the AGM will make a packet!


  32. wottpi says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:51 pm

    I know the contributions to the LSE share site was poo pooed (and rightly so on some occasions) but one guy may have got it right this morning when Sitonfence said
    ======================================================================

    If you are looking for spin, do not despair, as itā€™s on its way.

    1. ā€œHaving received assurances from the board , Mr McCoist has withdrawn his letter of resignation and continues in his role as Rangers first team manager.ā€

    2. ā€ The dialogue between Mr McCoist and the board has been very positive. Both parties have agreed to have more dialogue in the future. Mr McCoist will continue in his role of first team manager.ā€
    ===============================================================
    Well if 1 is correct then there would have to be an AIM announcement in the morning to that effect.

    As to 2 that actually doesn’t mean anything. They talked today and have agreed to talks in the future which means they didn’t reach an agreement which means the Board offered Ā£400K and Ally nearly choked laughing.

    He has to continue as first team manager because if they replace or demote him or even hint that’s what they intend to do then that’s constructive dismissal pure and simple and he scoops the lot . . . erm sorry pot šŸ˜†

    I honestly can’t remember a single specific non-generalised LSE RFC prediction that has come true – but it’s a good laugh watching the combatants at work šŸ‘æ


  33. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:44 pm

    Tbh ā€“ no kidding aside ā€“ many would have crumpled and he has kept going and I think he has a bit left in his tank and probably more than Rangers has.
    ============================================================================
    Eco, fully understand your view, but if Ashley is to stay he needs to invest mega bucks, at least of OPM, and his only viable plan can be to rip down the old club and build a new one. I still have no idea which way heā€™ll go – beyond picking daisies – he loves them, he loves them not, he loves them, he ā€¦.

    If he decides to stay heā€™ll know he needs to disinfect the place of Rangersness and heā€™ll have budgeted sitting out any fan boycott ā€“ the fans he probably doesnā€™t want ā€“ and wait of the Brigadoon reasonable fans to take their place. The very first step is to remove any impurity around which opposition can crystalize. To me the greatest danger is Superā€™s standing.

    If Ashley stays, he will be declaring a battle of wills, egos and reputations. Super must be either be brought to heel or neutralized by undermining his standing. The next few months will be a test of which is most likely.

    In either case, my money would be on Ashley every time, he has too many high cards.


  34. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:13 pm

    Surely a bit early to say.

    Lets see what T’Rangers have to say in an an official statement about today’s proceedings be that on the web site or to the AIM

    As you know Friday at 6pm is the usual time for AIM announcements šŸ˜›


  35. Yet more linguistic gymnastics from Chris McLaughlin šŸ˜Æ

    ‘Administration and subsequent liquidation of the former company that ran the club resulted in Rangers playing in the fourth tier of Scottish football’


  36. wottpi says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:46 pm
    ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    I agree that the process was different in the Spartan case but that is probably why the whole system was changed so that the SFA could avoid such an embarrassment from happening again.

    While I appreciate the issues surrounding the Tonev case (whose word do you take, no corroboration etc) I am more confident that, while perhaps not perfect in some folks eyes, a fuller investigation and consideration of the evidence will have been given than in the Spartans case.
    ————————————————-
    []
    There was no independent evidence in the Tonev case and it seems there was bucket-loads in the Spartan case.

    The accused decided not to attend the hearing so none was held unbeknown to the complainer who didn’t get to give his evidence in person.

    Witnesses from the offenders coaching staff who took their player to the other dressing room to apologise and two independent witnesses from Spartans that their team mate was called a ‘black b*stard’ and we end-up with a Not Proven verdict.

    And at the time the SFA were officially stating that racism should be dealt on a criminal basis. So why didn the new rules decide to reverse that position – quite simply to be able to sweep sweep when necessary IMO.

    I’m developing a real distrust of what happened here – not with Logan and not with the appeal tribunal but with the first hearing tribunal. Their findings look like a pun a mince IMO.

    Re-read them and tell me that yopu would be happy being labelled on the evidence advanced and their credibility test.

    I have watched totally honest witnesses with no axe to grind – never mind an accused – stumble and stutter through giving evidence or being cross-examined and look totally shifty.

    On the other hand I have watched villains with a record longer than their arm give a polished performance in the box and look like a pargon of virtue.

    It is always a mistake to go on face value and the odd time in my life that I have I have luckily lived to regret it and learn the lesson and also the value of independent corroboration.


  37. alternatively, Ashley saw an opportunity to make a few quid on replica shirt sales off the back of one of the UK’s biggest football supports then he suffered a debilitating case of mission creep


  38. 40 minutes ?

    They couldn’t have discussed much in that time.

    Maybe the chat was:
    Llambias: “Ally leave now, without a payoff for the good of the club.”
    Ally: “Absolutely…naw!”.
    Llambias: “OK then, work your notice until told otherwise.”

    But the uncertainty around the manager’s position could make the AGM a farce.

    And the longer McCoist stays, the riskier, IMO, it is to achieve promotion.

    The players didn’t raise their game against QoS, so there is a real risk that they could just ‘shut down’ for their lame-duck manager…and dressing room strife must be imminent.

    It’s going to get much more uncomfortable for McCoist.

    Karma for the sleekit one… šŸ™„


  39. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm
    ==================================

    Good points Echo.

    On another note media reporting of this case is already preventing any sensible debate. Witness the attack on Celtic today by Tom English on the BBC website. Celtic are now a ‘law unto themselves’ according to Tom. I’d be most interested if Tom could list just how many laws Celtic have broken in this case and for that matter any time previously.


  40. wottpi says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:01 pm
    3 0 Rate This

    Guessing anyone setting up an fresh egg stall in the vicinity of Ibrox for the AGM will make a packet!
    ===============

    I confidently forecast that the profits from my rotten egg stall will easily beat those from your fresh egg stall. Apart from anything else, my rotten eggs will cost me a lot less to buy than your fresh ones, and may well command a premium price at the AGM.


  41. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm

    Think you are missing my point

    In the Spartans case there was plenty evidence but it seemed to be easily dismissed and the process was flawed.

    In the Tonev case there was little evidence but the process was far more robust in terms of considering what evidence was available. Now you may say it was still flawed but IMHO the SFA have made a better stab of it than in the past. They have looked into the eyes of those involved, asked questions reviewed the evidence available and reached a decision.

    The appeals panel is pretty clear

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    In making its findings public, the appeals tribunal pointed out that there were “two inconsistent accounts” and that the original panel had to decide who they considered to be right on “the balance of probabilities”.
    “They stated that they believed Logan, found him to be a reliable witness and gave cogent reasons for doing so,” the report said of the original panel.
    It added that the Englishman “impressed them by the careful and measured manner in which he gave his evidence” and that his testimony was consistent with that of other witnesses and with video evidence.
    It was pointed out that Tonev, who had rejected the opportunity to use an interpreter, had not been as convincing.
    “Having made allowance for the impact of anxiety upon him, the tribunal were unable to accept him as either credible or reliable,” read the report.
    “They have explained that he gave his evidence in a guarded and hesitant manner and that his evidence on the understanding of the language that had been used was particularly unsatisfactory.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    If Tonev has an issue with it then like anyone else who truly believes he is innocent then he (perhaps with the aid of his club and I note Villa are not champing at the bit to get involved) should pursue down all the avenues available to him and with all the resources he can afford.

    PS I have also seen people in the witness box perform with great confidence but have known they were ‘at it’ from the off and in such cases they are usually found out pretty quickly.


  42. wottpi says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:51 pm
    ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm
    ============================================================
    I would refer you back to my post at December 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm as that makes my position clear.


  43. upthehoops says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:46 pm
    ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 5:34 pm
    ==================================
    Witness the attack on Celtic today by Tom English on the BBC website. Celtic are now a ā€˜law unto themselvesā€™ according to Tom. Iā€™d be most interested if Tom could list just how many laws Celtic have broken in this case and for that matter any time previously.
    ——————————————————————
    English and the rest of the windbags make-up what suits their career prospects without a shred of evidence actually presented.

    That’s bad enough when it’s the failing print media but a total disgrace when it’s the BBC where certain standards are meant to be observed by the journos not least because of its Charter and public broadcaster position funded by taxpayers.

    They all desperately need Rangers back in their Rightful Place to keep them in a job and in reality they are just more parasites feeding-off the Ibrox Club as if it didn’t already have enough low-lifes clinging on.


  44. http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/ibrox-confidential/#more-5480

    According to Phil, McCoist was willing to take a Ā£400k payoff in staged payments, but was unwilling to sign a confidentiality clause as part of the deal.

    Looks like Ally might be looking to cash in (yet again) by publishing a “kiss and tell” best seller. I wonder how much he actually knows? We might find out soon.


  45. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30509080

    2 videos on this bbc page

    1 – a female supporter having a go at Sandy Easdale – saying he was only in it for the money money money !!!!
    2 – craig Houston – saying he wants Mike Ashley to “invest” rather than “loan” money into “the Club” !!!!

    Exactly the iQ level that Charles Green was aiming at when he and his “investors” decided to sell “the journey” to in 2012.


  46. Ecobhoy

    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 .


  47. Auldheid says:
    December 17, 2014 at 7:16 pm

    I also saw your Twitter exchange Auldheid & took the view that English is just another on the payroll of the state broadcaster who has taken the “Queen’s shilling” to tow the pro Sevco line demanded by the BBC……..& yet they have Jim Spence & Stuart Cosgrove, 2 of the very few independent thinkers & commentators around at the moment.

    And listening to BBC Sportsound tonight, it honestly got me counting the amount of pro Sevco pundits that I’m subjected to on a nightly basis.

    From the top: Kenny McIntyre, Richard Wilson, Tom English, Derek Ferguson, Chick Young, Billy Dodds, Craig Paterson,Chris McLaughlin, Alistair Lamont

    For balance: Richard Gordon, Willie Miller, Jim Spence, Stuart Cosgrove, Tam Cowan, Murdo McLeod, John Robertson

    Not quite sure what this says other than perhaps, it does seem rather weighted disproportionately in favour of one particular team, when there is clearly & rightly a fair greater desire for balance, especially from a non commercial broadcaster?


  48. ecobhoy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:54 pm
    mungoboy says:
    December 17, 2014 at 4:20 pm
    A bizarre situation indeed.
    Re the crowds at Ibrox, the Den is in meltdown re this news and to a man they are not turning up for the next game against Livi.
    Interesting times all round.
    ==============================================
    A lot of the most vocal and productive pro-Board posters on the Den seldom appear to attend games as they are too busy carrying out their PR duties involving smoke and mirrors. So their absence wonā€™t affect the crowd that much šŸ˜†

    I wonder if the crowds do plummet whether TV will swap to cover other games as a ghostly deserted stadium doesnā€™t make for good viewing. How are the SPFL going to get their money then? Those boycotters are destroying Scottish Football.
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Well done ecoboy
    You have inadvertently explained the real meaning of Reagan`s forecast of Armageddon resulting in the financial meltdown of Scottish football
    Its got nothing to do with the other 41 clubs
    We`ve all misunderstood the message
    Scottish football = TRFC
    Armageddon = Bears deserting Ibrox in droves
    Financial meltdown = TRFC being liquidated


  49. I’ve been avoiding the Tonev/Logan stuff and I have to say that I have some sympathy with Tonev in that a finding of this sort on “the balance of probability” is damning without proof.

    Looking ahead Paul Paton has been cited for spitting at/on Jonny Hayes…Hayes has publicly stated that this did not happen….but could the panel decide that “on the balance of probability” it did ā“

    On the other hand is the only other option is to go for the higher burden of proof “beyond reasonable doubt” (normally reserved for criminal cases)…would this result in footballing miscreants getting away with some very obvious stuff (maybe they could call it Goodwin’s Law šŸ˜ˆ ).

    Would it be practicable (and indeed fair) to use different standards of proof in different circumstances and offences ā“ …suspect that would become a real mess.


  50. ecobhoy 6:38 pm

    We don’t always see eye to eye, but I don’t think I have ever wanted to give 2 TUs as much as I did after reading that post. Could not agree even a fraction more. Spot on.


  51. SSB šŸ˜‰ couldn’t resist listening…… HK actually told a caller to shut up near the end of the ‘show’ they ( the panel ) tried soooo hard to defend mr mccoist but to no avail as d.ream once said things can only get better šŸ˜†


  52. neepheid says:
    December 17, 2014 at 7:02 pm

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/ibrox-confidential/#more-5480
    ———————————————————-
    Noticed that Phil is suggesting that MA might be prepared to underight an issue to existing shareholders to the tune of Ā£6m…dependent on their shy offshore friends saying goodbye to some/all of their onerous earners.

    Looks do-able depending on what might be achievable in the January sales (presumably Mike’s wee club might come in handy here ā“ ).

    It does occur though that all this then comes to hinge on promotion at season’s end…this to be achieved with a reduced squad…many of whom will be coming out of contract and know that they won’t be getting a new one…and with a manager working his notice…tricky..


  53. The defence of the Tribunal verdict and its being upheld by the appeal is patently farcical in purely procedural terms. Precedent has been established in two previous cases which directly contradict the reasoning given for the verdict.
    Firstly the Boyd ” Not Proven” verdict. Such a verdict runs contrary to the supposed Scottish Civil Law basis of the system. On a ” Balance of Probabilities” based system according to the apologists for the system a decision must be made on one side or the other. At no point is the Not Proven possibility allowed for, yet it has previously been used, and would appear the obvious verdict in this case.
    Secondly the previous case of the Spartans player stated, correctly , that a charge of racism was better dealt with by legal authorities rather than footballing ones.
    There are two absolutely clear and unassailable flaws with the injustice clearly meted out in this case.
    1.There is no actual system in place that is consistent in the tribunal system operated by the SFA, thus it is, almost by definition, arbitrary.
    2. The individuals involved in the decision making process have no capacity, nor jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters of guilt or innocence of what are criminal offences.
    A disgrace and a shambles! Kangaroo justice and pathetic self protection are , once again, de rigeur at Hampden.


  54. Brenda says:
    December 17, 2014 at 8:58 pm
    =================================

    I’ve given up on any sustained period of listening to Radio Clyde. The odd ten minutes I do hear are an insult to most people’s intelligence.

    Mind you, the supposedly higher standard Sportsound hasn’t been much better. Yet again tonight the place was packed with ex-Rangers people along with a Rangers supporting host, and a Rangers supporting journalist. Tom English was the only one with no connection to Rangers. It was the good old ‘coisty show, save for a few minutes to be negative about Celtic and a few minutes to be positive about Hearts. It’s not justifiable and it’s certainly in my opinion an abuse of the licence fee everyone has to pay, whether they support Rangers or not.


  55. iceman63 says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:05 pm

    2. The individuals involved in the decision making process have no capacity, nor jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters of guilt or innocence of what are criminal offences.
    ———
    Iceman, I agree with your post re inconsistencies in respect of previous decisions but have a problem with the section I’ve copied above.

    If this were correct internal disciplinary procedures in organisations and the employment tribunal system would cease to function.

    Moreover if they had no jurisdiction then presumably a quick visit to the COS would have resulted in the panel being adjudged to have acted “Ultra Vires”…one would imagine that this option would not have been out with Mr Tonev’s financial means.


  56. Can anyone provide an opinion on the new newspaper ‘The National’ ?

    Does it provide decent footy coverage ?

    Does it cover the TRFC shambles honestly, or is it just the same as the other rags ? :slamb:


  57. Phil implying that Mike Ashley may take his shareholding to 29%.

    Where does this leave the agreement with the SFA and indeed the Five Way Agreement as I would believe that this is part of it?

    In the last few days we seem to have seen a hardening of the governing body’s stance on the new club. Indeed a rumour doing the rounds suggests that Ogilvie attempted to support them at a recent meeting and was interrupted and abruptly halted. If this is true then it would also appear that he is now being side lined within the Hampden bunker or even isolated.

    It could be that the recent arrests have shaken a few cages and, along with Craig Whyte’s weekend interview where he stated more explosive details would come out, perhaps the cracks are beginning to appear.

    We have seen verdicts recently where clubs have been fined and docked points for misdemeanours however what is now being proposed is a breaking of a main plank of an already secret agreement. Indeed this is the breaking of a fundamental rule within Scottish football. No dual ownership/influence is a rule that has survived the creation of the SPL and the SPFL because we valued the internal, as well as external, independence of our clubs.

    So the question remains if Mike Ashley ignores the SFA, and ups his stake, what will they do?

    Will they fine the club?
    The problem with that is the club do not have any money and that is why Ashley is at the table in the first place. So a fine will simply drive the club further into his influence as they will have to turn to him for the cash.

    Will they dock the club points?
    Livingstone have already been docked points so I suppose they could.

    Will they revoke their membership to halt Ashley?
    This is the bombshell that may halt this in it’s tracks. It may involve a EGM of all clubs with a case presented, and FULL disclosure of the details of the Five Way Agreement, of where this club is going.
    Ashley can own a club but he can’t play anyone so that is the only way he can be stopped.

    This time bomb has been ticking from day one and the fuse is now running extremely short.


  58. parttimearab says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:00 pm
    4 0 Rate This

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/ibrox-confidential/#more-5480

    Noticed that Phil is suggesting that MA might be prepared to underight an issue to existing shareholders to the tune of Ā£6mā€¦dependent on their shy offshore friends saying goodbye to some/all of their onerous earners.

    Looks do-able depending on what might be achievable in the January sales (presumably Mikeā€™s wee club might come in handy here ā“ ).

    It does occur though that all this then comes to hinge on promotion at seasonā€™s endā€¦this to be achieved with a reduced squadā€¦many of whom will be coming out of contract and know that they wonā€™t be getting a new oneā€¦and with a manager working his noticeā€¦tricky..
    ————-

    A very odd game being played out. You wonder why MA is willing to risk so much on this project. Perhaps it’s just a challenge? Never know, he might finally sort out the lunatic elements by alienating them, or alternatively, go for the all-white strip with the orange sash, or the orange strip, white sash and UJ leggings. Welcome to the world of ‘Full kit w*****s’ courtesy of Sports Direct šŸ˜®

    Know your target group.


  59. neepheid says: December 17, 2014 at 7:02 pm

    http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/ibrox-confidential/#more-5480
    ==============================
    If Phil and Roddy Forsyth are correct about Ashley’s intention to get to a 29.9% shareholding, then Ashley will require to take up 24,385,000 new shares, in the absence of any other party taking up shares.

    The 24.385M new shares would only raise Ā£4.4M at today’s 18p mid price, i.e. little more than half of what is required to get through to the end of the season.

    If another party took up some shares then Ashley would need to buy more shares to reach that figure, which would increase the amount of money raised. e.g. If another party bought 6.5M, Ashley would have to buy just over 27M to get to 29.9%. However, that would raise around Ā£6M at 18p a share with the other party contributing Ā£1.17M.

    The number of shares to be issued and cash needing to be raised is not an easy equation to reconcile.


  60. justshatered says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:42 pm

    Will they revoke their membership to halt Ashley?..
    ====================================================
    That is the implied ‘big stick’ that the SFA has behind its back.

    But, IMO, they must also have a credible back-up plan if they want to ensure a Govan club still plays in a league.

    I wonder if anyone from the SFA or SPFL has been in contact with the Blue Knights, or King ?


  61. Roddy world and a wee difference of detail….

    from 15th December…. “Telegraph Sport can reveal that Ashley plans to increase his stake at Ibrox to 29.9%”

    and from the 17th…..”The tone of Rangersā€™ response to the SFAā€™s complaints is striking in view of Telegraph Sport’s disclosure that Ashleyā€™s lawyers have asked the governing body to allow him to raise his stake in the club to 29.9 per cent”

    So in the space of two days it’s gone from planning to ask the SFA to the ‘disclosure’ that his lawyers have been in touch….maybe Roddy should look back at his previous article before posting his new one….

    …or am I being too harsh.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11295462/Mike-Ashley-could-control-Rangers-and-Newcastle-United-within-weeks.html

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/11300434/Rangers-to-contest-Scottish-FA-charges-as-Ally-McCoist-remains-manager-after-summit-meeting.html


  62. easyJambo says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:56 pm

    The 24.385M new shares would only raise Ā£4.4M at todayā€™s 18p mid price, i.e. little more than half of what is required to get through to the end of the season.

    If another party took up some shares then Ashley would need to buy more shares to reach that figure, which would increase the amount of money raised.
    ————————————-
    And if the offer is to existing shareholders who would have the inclination/money to pitch in ā“

    Anyone wanna buy some slightly used buses…. šŸ˜ˆ


  63. More reading between the lines….this time the SPFL statement…

    “and on one occasion the clubā€™s then Chief Executive Graham Wallace, engaged in individual discussions with the majority of current SPFL Board members”

    leaving aside how one man can engage with individual discussions (plural) on one occasion (…did he go round the table during a tea break ā“ ) I take it that having engaged with the “majority” of members it follows that a minority must have been left out…

    So which SPFL board members didn’t get approached..why some and not others… ā“

    http://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spfl-statement-62/?


  64. scarecrow666 says:
    December 17, 2014 at 10:38 pm

    On the Tonev thing, Iā€™m not a lawyer but could he not then sue the SFA for potential loss of future earnings for finding him guilty of racist remarks without evidence?
    ——————————————————-
    I’m not a lawyer either but I guess not.

    Firstly there was evidence (Logan) although not corroboration.

    Secondly, as I posted earlier, the SFA appear to have acted within their rules.

    There might be some mileage wrt their inconsistencies as per Iceman’s earlier post but I’m not clear that that could be used to overturn the Tonev verdict and appeal, let alone to sue for damages.

    On my (limited) understanding of these matters the SFA panel (upheld under appeal) have not suggested that Mr Tonev is a racist but that, on the balance of probability, made a racist remark.


  65. StevieBC says:
    December 17, 2014 at 9:40 pm
    ‘.Can anyone provide an opinion on the new newspaper ā€˜The Nationalā€™ ?’
    ———
    I haven’t bought a copy since the first issue- simply because in that issue reference was made by Peter Geoghegan to the ‘Old Firm’.
    That puts him firmly in the same stable as the other SMSM editors and hacks.
    In my opinion.


  66. I hate to be an arithmetic pedant but surely Ā£6 m from the cashley one plus Ā£2m from player sales equals dec 2015 at a push. What happens then? Does the forgetful city suddenly follow a light that comes down to a shed?


  67. McCoist handed in his notice – allegedly – because he didn’t agree with the Board decisions re: staff redundancies.

    So McCoist wouldn’t sit alongside the Board at the AGM, would he?
    But to show his Rangersness he should still attend – courtesy of his freebie shares.
    Maybe he could ask a question…? šŸ™„

    And I haven’t seen any SMSM reporting on Phil’s revelations of McCoist’s expenses and bonuses which are incredible, IMO.

    Sleekit still has friends in the media then…


  68. scarecrow666 says:
    December 17, 2014 at 10:38 pm

    On the Tonev thing, Iā€™m not a lawyer but could he not then sue the SFA for potential loss of future earnings for finding him guilty of racist remarks without evidence?

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

    Given the precedent of Luis Suarez still coining it in despite being found guilty of racial abuse (where the incident appears to be similar to Tonev/Logan) and then the recent biting incident I’d suggest the level of performance and the number of goals scored are the main factors in what money Tonev will take home in his pocket.

Comments are closed.