Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin

Avatar By

HOMUNCULUS OCTOBER 9, 2016 at 15:33  It appears that Rangers have extended Joey …

Comment on Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin by goosygoosy.

HOMUNCULUS
OCTOBER 9, 2016 at 15:33
 It appears that Rangers have extended Joey Barton’s period of suspension.
I can only assume that they are trying to either sack him, or to come to some sort of arrangement by which the two parties part company. It seems unlikely that he will play for them again, it might even be a “it’s him or me” situation.
Can Rangers really afford something like £1.5m to pay off his contract though. Or can they afford to sack him then deal with being sued. With the adverse publicity which would go with that. If you sack him there is no “gagging” clause.
It would be the height of irony if the thing which pushed them over the edge was a PR exercise designed to sell season tickets.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
IMO
I suspect the top priority  for a club living hand to mouth is to avoid paying him any wages for the next two weeks. By that time it would be close enough to the LC semis for TRFC to ask for an advance on their gate money to help make the October payroll run in the week following the semis
In all probability TRFC have advised (or will advise) JB in writing they are mindful to sack him if found guilty by the SFA of the betting charge and that meanwhile it is in the clubs interest that he continue his suspension without pay. Since Octobers payroll run won`t take place until w/c 23 Oct anyway all JB can do (or be advised to do ) is threaten legal action if he gets no pay in October.
This presents JB with a dilemma
He can launch a series of appeals against any SFA punishment and risk being suspended until his appeal(s) is exhausted. If he does so he will not get paid and be effectively gagged until the end of the process.
 If he accepts the SFA punishment, doesn’t appeal and gets sacked by TRFC he can sue TRFC for unfair dismissal
His chances of successfully suing TRFC may depend on how professional his “fracas” disciplinary process was handled. If it was commenced with the aim of sacking him he will have got a final warning stating that any infringement in the next 2 yrs. carries the sanction of dismissal
Someone as undisciplined as JB has no reputation to lose so he may choose both to sue TRFC for unfair dismissal and concurrently go public with his side of the story. He might even sell his story to some English rag and recoup some living expenses while awaiting the result of an action against TRFC. It would only be  a tempting offer of another job that could compel him to settle
Meanwhile, TRFC with the SMSM in their pocket will no doubt ride out any adverse publicity on social media and the English MSM
The most interesting aspect of this comedy is that if TRFC are intent on not paying JB any more wages full stop then their cash crisis must be dire
Since
They would be giving up the opportunity of getting him off the payroll and possibly even  some money for him in the Jan transfer window

goosygoosy Also Commented

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
1.     JOHN CLARK
OCTOBER 13, 2016 at 10:35
 
I mentioned the other day that I had emailed the Gambling Commission about the leak of the allegations against JB. This is the reply I received this morning.  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Well done JC
A few thoughts
Extract “Whilst we do not have any powers to prevent leaks from other parties that may be involved, we would of course take a dim view of any operators who chose to leak such information. We engage frequently with betting operators, and the other parties involved, and expectations around the confidentiality of information that is exchanged is made clear to all of those we work with.”
Comment
The JB story emanated solely from an anonymous source at the Press Association. This source “understood” (meaning “we could be wrong”) that the Gambling Commission are party to a Joint Investigation with the SFA into an allegation that JB was betting on football matches
Namedropping the phrase “Gambling Commission” clearly adds gravitas to the story. However a brief look at the GC website would confirm that they would only get involved where there is a strong suspicion of match fixing
So
The potential “Lie” is whether the GC and the SFA were conducting a “Joint Investigation” into JBs betting history or whether the SFA alone initiated the investigation by approaching the Operator with some alleged “evidence”
 If it was the SFA alone who initiated this investigation then it suggests a dossier was sent to the SFA by somebody with sufficient credibility to require immediate action without going through the bureaucracy of the GC
Operators would have problems with client confidentiality if they chose to approach the SFA with the JB betting evidence. So it’s unlikely they did so
This points to there being another credible source for the dossier acted on by the SFA
The above GC extract explicitly states that investigations involve the GC, their betting operators and other parties
It makes no reference as to whether the GC and the “other parties” (in this case the SFA) conduct “Joint Investigations”
Instead it starts from the premise that if a leak took place it was unlikely to have come from the GC or one of their operators
Conclusion
It looks to me like the Gambling Commission have provided coded language saying its most unlikely that the GC or one of their betting operators is responsible for the leak If that is true then the reference to the GC has been added to the PA leak to both add gravitas AND divert attention away from the real source of “who told the SFA”
Who could it be?
Level5 have both TRFC and the SPFL as Clients. If they were silly enough to provide the SFA or the SPFL with a dossier from TRFC on JB they would have a serious conflict of interest
Nevertheless if Level5 are the source it ought to provide JB with ammunition which helps his case.
The real issue however is the integrity of the SFA
If they are cooperating with TRFC to lower their wage bill by sacking JB they are opening yet another can of worms


Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
Re Traynors` intervention in todays press conference by Warburton
The behaviour and body language of both parties suggests Warburton is on a tight leash by the Board over the Joey Barton affair
i.e. He was told in advance of today’s Press Conference that Jabba was in charge and he should not depart from the agreed script on JB  
For Warburton to stop the meeting at a wave from Traynor and then go outside for a private 20 mins discussion was humiliating.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Why did MW acquiesce?
There must have been a recent disagreement between MW and his Board which lead to a clear instruction to him that JT was the person responsible for press conferences taken by MW
This is such a serious step it must have stemmed from a serious disagreement
The obvious conclusion is that Warburton is ready to walk and the Board are willing to see him walk
The trigger for MW to walk is likely to be how the Board handle the JB issue
IMO
The Board want JB off the payroll without a payoff and are planning to sack him as soon as the SFA case has concluded. They see any successful claim by JB for unfair dismissal as something they don`t need to worry about until after next seasons ST money has arrived. So their strategy is to get him off the books and out the door ASAP and damn the consequences
JB has requested more time to study the evidence prior to his SFA meeting on 27 Oct He is justified in asking for more time given that 44 bets are involved. If he is getting paid while suspended then the longer this case drags on the more money he receives
Are the SFA in cahoots with TRFC?
The answer is simple
If the SFA do not postpone the 27 Oct date for hearing the case they are in cahoots with TRFC and are cooperating in a plan to sack him ASAP
If the SFA are prepare to delay the 27 Oct date and negotiate a new date then they are behaving fairly. However they must be aware that JB could take legal action to appeal any suspension
Where is MW in all of this?
It is possible the Board negotiated JBs contract and made the decision to hire him without the agreement of MW However it would not be a surprise to learn that MW totally disagrees with the idea of firing a player to save money. He has the moral high ground in this situation as a Manager publicly abused by the player in question
I wouldn`t be a bit surprised if it was common knowledge at Ibrox  that JB had bet on football matches  well before the Barca v Celtic match . If so there is every likelihood that the Board discussed firing Barton to save money and were intent all along on using this offence to get rid of him. . The Board may have made the mistake of telling MW they plan to sack JB over the betting issue
 
Conclusion?
If JB is fired MW will leave shortly afterwards and be replaced “temporarily” by DW thus ensuring no Assistant Mgr. needs to be appointed
If insolvency is avoided then TRFC will drag out the unfair dismissal claim until next seasons ST money arrives
Alternatively if insolvency occurs JB will become a creditor of TRFC


Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
A bit of light relief
…………..from the Gullibillies Forum
  
 
Rangers will play 44 ******* 2
Started by MacBoyd, 49 minutes ago
 Posted 46 minutes ago
That’s 46 players mate. I reckon the papes would make another film about it if we tried that on Friday. 
Posted 44 minutes ago
44 2? If we don’t get a win like that Warburton must go. Posted 44 minutes ago
For ***** sake, you’re allowed to swear on the internet.Posted 43 minutes ago
Turn the computer off, and never turn it on again.   47 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:
Turn the computer off, and never turn it on again. 
Computer? Is it 2005?  43 minutes ago, MacBoyd said:
Computer? Is it 2005?
Ok. Your carer’s iPad.  
 


Recent Comments by goosygoosy

Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
BIG PINK
JULY 28, 2017 at 11:42
 
I really think that the SFSA could – and should – grasp an opportunity like the SPFL statement to assume a moral leadership of fans of Scottish football. I’m not sure what it is they hope to provide in terms of moral authority if they are not fearless enough to address directly the biggest and still evolving scandal the game has seen. I am hoping that like Celtic, they are taking time to respond. The question is, how can they ignore it?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
BP
IMO
Its not all that difficult
.At their next  Board meeting the current SFSA Board should vote on whether they are prepared to make upholding sporting integrity the prime goal of their Mission Statement. All other goals will be subservient to this aim. Key Performance Indicators should then be developed to measure whether the governing bodies are upholding integrity going forward. Regular reports should be emailed to members when, as we expect corruption continues to be manifest in mismanagement of current rules and the law of the land. However The SFSA should avoid public involvement  on any topic until they have a fully functioning  democratically elected Board comprised of Fan Directors.
The focus on integrity should   automatically make resolving corruption the number one goal for the immediate term. It would enable an umbrella coalition to be established  between the SFSA and  other groups solely responsible for pursuing the Judicial Review route. The idea would be that the SFSA address an d measure progress on long term implications of removing the elephant while the rest of the coalition get on with shoving it out the window
Steps should be taken immediately to introduce democracy to SFSA using as a voter roll the names of all those for whom they have email addresses. Groups claiming to represent many unnamed members should be charged with adding them to the email voters roll by a target cut off date. The election of Fan Shadow Directors to overlap with the current Board should proceed on a democratic basis shortly after the cut off date. Whether this is  by direct election or through some temporary representative body should be thought through and voted on by email.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The views of the Celtic Board are no longer relevant
They had the opportunity to stand up and be counted .Instead they cooperated by their silence in a disgraceful, unethical and shameless strategy. Their focus now should be removing Bro Walfrids Statue from Celtic Park before it falls over in shame


Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
AULDHEIDJULY 27, 2017 at 22:11
Goosey GooseyWhen there is 0% chance of opening the door, 20% is worth backing.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Like I said
I`ve yet to meet the person with 80% integrity
Or put another way
I don`t trust people who have proven untrustworthy on an integrity issue on even one occasion 
Sometimes I have no choice but to put my fate in their hands 
Some worked out. Some didn`t work out
But because I had no choice I went along with it unwillingly
However
That wasn`t trust. It was Hobsons choice
When I have the choice not to trust them because there are other options 
I don`t trust them and go for an alternative
Having said that
Its a free country (apart from what we both agree on)
So
People may put their trust in SFAS using whatever criteria they deem most important 
For me when dealing with corruption there is zero room for compromise.
Its  an issue of integrity, right or wrong ,good or evil, black or white
I won`t  trust SFAS
So as I said before
I`m out


Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
AULDHEIDJULY 27, 2017 at 21:32 goosygoosyJuly 27, 2017 at 20:38 (Edit)
Read my post about capacity building. Have you anything better to suggest be done in their place? Are you going to do the work those volunteers do or are you happy just to snoop and snipe?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Auldheid
i have great respect for you and your track record in opposing corruption
I am too long in the tooth now to believe platitudes without checking the facts. I  am happy to contribute to a crowd funding initiative seeking a JR of the corruption associated with the recent past
I`m not snowed either by face to face meetings with people who have proven they lack integrity.
Thats a virtue you either have or you don`t have

I`ve yet to meet the person with 80% integrity
So as far as SFAS are concerned
I`m out


Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
Oh Dear as PMG might say
I fear I may have tripped over a can of worms in my previous post at 14.56
Thinking back to the sterling work done by the combined efforts of talented posters on the RTC Blog
I thought it might be fun to have a look at SFSA in a bit more detail
Current Office address 4 Woodside Pl, Glasgow G3 7QL
Interestingly
 If you Google Earth this address and postcode there`s a man walking along the pavement who looks awfully like a member of the SPFL. Can`t be sure of course  as faces are blurred with Google Earth but the odd way of walking seems familiar.
It was enough to pique my curiosity so I had a look elsewhere on the web
Lo and behold
Up comes the following
SFSA
Official Launch early April 2015
BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/32229672
“The SFSA, which says it has reached 40,000 pledges of support from Scottish fans’ groups at club level, will include a national advisory group.
It will contain experts on football and governance matters, including former First Minister Henry McLeish and Maureen McGonigle, founder of Scottish Women in Sport, and from academia and the business world.
They will work with a football advisory group that so far includes fans from Aberdeen, Ayr United, Celtic, Dumbarton, Hearts and Rangers”
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Question
Does 40,000 pledges of support from a Club Group mean every member of that Club has registered an email address with SFSA?
Or does it mean one person from each supporters group registered on behalf of their members with or without their consent? Does this explain why the SFSA had 40000  members before it was launched ?
Question
“Whereabouts on the current website can you find the names of the fans on the Advisory Group from Aberdeen, Ayr United, Celtic, Dumbarton, Hearts and Rangers”
And
Why are members of the Advisory Group selected by the unelected CEO and Chairman of the SFSA Board and not elected by the members?
 
The Fans’ Manifesto
Fans want change
Scottish football needs and deserves a future. As a movement of some 50,000 fans (and growing) the Scottish Football Supporters Association (SFSA) believes that it really is possible to renew, reform and reclaim the game. But the engine of that transformation has to be those who love and follow the game. That is what this Fans’ Manifesto is all about.
 In 2015 we asked football supporters across Scotland what they wanted to see for the future. We got an amazing 10,000 responses.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
 Among the mass of ideas and comments there were aspirations large and small. In this document we have distilled some of the biggest ones, and combined them with ideas that have now been in circulation – buttressed by a number of other surveys – for some time. This Manifesto contains nine key pointers towards the future of football game in Scotland. It is intended not as an end, but as the beginning of a renewed national conversation that needs to reach out well beyond the established boundaries if it is going to bring credible action
RENEW THE GAME
 01 Bring back the fans through competitive pricing and family facilities at every club
02 Make football in Scotland media-friendly and innovative at every level
03 Re-market the Scottish game, pressing for financial fair shares and transparency REFORM THE GAME
04 Rebuild the game with larger divisions, more variety and improved competition
05 Equip every club to be a ‘community hub’ for wellbeing and entertainment
 06 Re-invest in youth through fresh plans for training and education
 RECLAIM THE GAME
07 A ‘diversity drive’: 25% fan representation on all governing bodies in five years, 50% women, a permanent place for the national fans’ body
08 Regular, independent auditing and review of the performance of governing bodies and clubs
 09 Extend community and collaborative ownership, create a fans’ right to bid or buy when clubs are for sale, create a fans’ bank or fund
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Question
Did any of the 10000 fans who responded to the survey mention that there might be a problem with corruption at the SFA and SPFL?
If so
Were they so few in number that their concerns were excluded from the Fans Manifesto?
Question
Did any of the 10000 fans who responded to the survey mention sectarian singing, intimidation of officials, letter bomb training, assaults in the street as potential issues being ignored by the governing bodies?
Or in a nutshell
Did any of the 10000 fans who responded to the survey mention dissatisfaction at the manner in which the SFA and SPFL were handling the Rangers situation?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Or to summarise the above
Did the SFSA sanitise the 10000 responses of their own volition or did they do so at the request of a 3rd party?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
There are stacks of angles  to the above which could be addressed by many of the fine posters who inhabit this blog
Whats clear so far is that SFSA are not a democratic organisation despite being in existence for well over a year 
Its also clear that despite their “plan” to eventually become democratic they are unfit in the immediate term to represent Fans concerned about the way the Rangers saga has been corruptly managed by the governing bodies 
Indeed their own manifesto specifically ignores the biggest scandal in Scottish football in living memory


Launch of SFSA Fans’ Survey
Early Warning
This post might be unpopular
But
I`ll stand corrected if I`m wrong 
IMO
If there is one thing suspicious  in all of this corrupt saga it`s the  convenient emergence on the public stage  of the SFSA in the last fortnight
 This self-appointed  body with apparently no funds is stuffed with self-appointed  politicians One of them at least  has been found guilty of having dirty hands. It has created a community company appointed its own Board and defined its own remit before its public launch. It doesn`t once use the words morality or integrity or fairness or corruption to justify its existence. It doesn`t even mention  a goal of being transparent to its members  It has  invited German football academics to tell their unelected Board what sort of questions Scottish fans  should be asked  about. It has went on to unilaterally approve  a bland  survey questionnaire that will consume a few months help dissipate the  anger of some  fans and tell us nothing we don`t know already.

The official SFSA top down remit will take years to completion. It smacks strongly of how the English Child Abuse Enquiry was set up years ago by politicians determined to protect politicians and their establishment allies. Its Terms of Reference were deliberately set so wide that many of the accused and their victims passed away before their case got considered. And that`s exactly what could happen here.
Or put more simply
It’s not an organisation claiming the simple  raison d`etre of upholding sporting integrity
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Survey Document
The survey document smacks of long term civil service thinking. It starts from the premise that things might actually be hunky dory, so let’s take the next few months to quantify  the “general level of disquiet”. This top down approach is a recipe for time wasting and switching off the members. It is frankly smacks of the sort of approach you would expect from Soviet era Trade Unions. The festering sore that is the Rangers tax case doesn`t qualify for a mention. SFA and Police management of  sectarian behaviour is ignored, Nothing is asked about how our corrupt governing bodies are paralysed about physical intimidation in football.how keeping the peace outranks morality. This is despite letter bomb training, street assaults and threats to torch a football ground. Most of all is the complete absence of an SFSA declaration of transparency.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Corrupt SPFL Statement

Its early days for the SFSA
So far they have not commented on the SFA and SPFL Statement. Does their Board have no opinion?
Or
Is it because the leadership of the SFSA is well aware it is not a “Fan Elected Body”?
Meaning
It has no mandate to speak for its members. So they are obliged to keep quiet.
However, having no mandate also means they should not respond to any  appeals from our corrupt authorities to engage in private  discussions
It is clear that the governing bodies wish to avoid discussing the corruption crisis in terms of sporting integrity. Their strategy is moving the goal posts from integrity to legal mumbo jumbo. Their aim is to confuse the peasants. Their premise is that  limited knowledge of the judicial system will force the peasants into disgruntled forelock tugging compliance
Meaning
Move along peasant
If its legal and immoral then its ok 
If it’s against integrity  but within the rules its ok
Sometimes rules have to be bent if we think it’s necessary
Trust Us. That`s what happens in business
They forget that we peasants have simple minds. We see issues in terms of good and evil, right and wrong. We expect integrity to be the backbone of organisations who claim to be trustworthy.
Whats more worrying 
I would not be a bit surprised if the SFSA are  the first to be invited by the corrupt SPFL and corrupt SFA to come and talk to them in private about their forthcoming “Independent” meaning corrupt Review. Indeed they might even end up as “Representing the Fans ” on this stitch up.
That would be outrageous
 Unelected politicians one with dirty hands representing you on integrity issues with that lot
Summary
I don`t see the SFSA fulfilling the role of speaking for fans in the specific one off battle against  the corruption witnessed over the past few years.
In particular
The current un-elected SFSA Board may attempt to act in this role by cooperating with the so called SPFL Independent Review or try to subvert the timetable of the  Judicial Review that is currently gathering momentum
If this happens
it will be a sign that they see themselves as budding members of the establishment. People who are in cahoots with the corruption we are trying to root out.
And as for representing fans  to the governing bodies on any other issues.
The acid test  will be whether they replace the SFSA Board with elected fan representatives  BEFORE they have their first formal  meeting with the SG or football governing bodies.


About the author

Avatar